Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 77 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)

[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 77 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H4716-H4782]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2015

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Florida). Pursuant to House
Resolution 590 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further
consideration of the bill, H.R. 4435.
Will the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hultgren) kindly take the
chair.

{time} 1811

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 4435) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015
for military activities of the Department of Defense and for military
construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes, with Mr. Hultgren (Acting Chair) in the
chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today,
amendment No. 6 printed in House Report 113-455 pursuant to House
Resolution 585 offered by the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Daines) had
been disposed of.
Pursuant to House Resolution 590, no further amendment to the bill,
as amended, shall be in order except those printed in part A of House
Report 113-460 and amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House
Resolution 590.
Each further amendment printed in part A of the report shall be
considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only
by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read,
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject
to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question.
It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on
Armed Services or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting
of amendments printed in part A of the report not earlier disposed of.
Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for
20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Armed Services or their designees,
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand
for division of the question.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. McKinley

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle B of title III, insert the
following:

SEC. 318. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT CERTAIN
CLIMATE CHANGE ASSESSMENTS AND REPORTS.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act may be used to implement
the U.S. Global Change Research Program National Climate
Assessment, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's
Fifth Assessment Report, the United Nation's Agenda 21
sustainable development plan, or the May 2013 Technical
Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact
Analysis Under Executive Order 12866.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit the
Department of Defense from spending money on climate change policies
forced upon them by the Obama administration.
We shouldn't be diverting our financial resources away from the
primary missions of our military and our national security in pursuit
of an ideology.
For example, earlier this year, the President diverted crucial
funding on rural sewer and water line grants to promote his climate
change initiatives.

{time} 1815

Let's make it clear. I acknowledge that climate change is occurring.
The climate has always been changing. The question is whether or not,
given the global unrest from these rogue nations and our war on
terrorism, whether we

[[Page H4717]]

should be diverting our funds to support an ideology instead of
maximizing our investments in national security.
Now, climate change alarmists contend that man-made CO2 is
the cause of climate change. Most people may not realize that 96
percent of all the CO2 emissions occur naturally, and
America's CO2 emissions' contribution to the global
community is actually less than 1 percent, Mr. Chairman. But even with
these facts, decarbonizing America's economy is still a long-term goal
of the climate alarmists. But to what end?
If America totally stopped burning coal--I mean this, Mr. Chairman.
If every coal-fired powerhouse, factory, school, institution, if every
institution in America stopped burning coal today, we would reduce the
emissions of CO2 in the globe around the world by 0.2
percent. Think about that, Mr. Chair, 0.2 percent. Within 5 years, the
rest of the world's CO2 emissions would make up the
difference while our entire economy would have been turned upside down.
We would have gained nothing in America at considerable cost to our
country's economy.
Yesterday, Secretary of State John Kerry was quoted saying: ``If we
make the necessary efforts to address climate change, and supposing we
are wrong, what's the worst that can happen?''
``What's the worst that can happen?'' What about spending trillions
of dollars, the loss of millions of jobs, more expensive electric
bills, and making our economy less competitive?
People like this talk about these issues as if there is no downside
or cost to what they are advocating. Mr. Chairman, you and I know that
is not the case.
Germany is switching back to coal-fired power, and China and India
are building coal-fired power plants every week. America is the only
industrialized nation discouraging the use of coal and other fossil
fuels.
Leadership expert John Maxwell once said: ``He who thinks he leads
but has no followers is only taking a walk.''
The President should look around. He is alone on this issue. We
shouldn't be putting our funds for the military and our defense at risk
by diverting funds for an ideologically motivated agenda.
If this administration truly wishes to address the problem of
CO2 emissions, they should help the rest of the world tackle
the deforestation of our tropical rain forests.
Al Gore and the Sierra Club acknowledge that deforestation in Africa
and the Amazon is five to six times more of a polluter than the
combination of every coal-fired powerhouse in America--five to six
times worse. These tropical forests are being destroyed because
developing nations don't have access to affordable electricity for
heating and cooking and clean water.
Unfortunately, the debate on this issue has turned to name-calling.
One of my colleagues today has called those of us who disagree with the
President over this issue ``irresponsible,'' ``Republican science
deniers,'' and ``members of the Flat Earth Society.'' Al Gore called
people who question climate change policies ``immoral, unethical, and
despicable.''
Mr. Chairman, you and I are old enough to know that bullying and
name-calling are just childish tactics and don't have a place in this
debate. Let's stop the name-calling. It is time for an adult
conversation.
We should not sacrifice our economy and our national security by
diverting funds in pursuit of an ideological crusade. This is not the
time to divert our financial resources from our military for climate
change purposes when we are confronting Syria, Iran, Russia, Libya, and
other rogue nations around the world. In addition, we have Boko Haram,
Hamas, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups promoting instability and
threatening liberty and freedom around the world.
Consequently, this amendment will ensure we maximize our military
might without diverting funds for a politically motivated agenda. I
urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WAXMAN. I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, the McKinley amendment provides that the Department of
Defense may not make decisions based on science. Imagine, the
Department of Defense should not make decisions based on science. They
should ignore that there may be a cost from climate change. This
amendment waves a magic wand and decrees that climate change imposes no
costs at all. Therefore, they would block the Defense Department from
recognizing the damage caused by climate change.
This is incredible, because the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review
called climate change ``an accelerant of instability or conflict'' that
``could have significant geopolitical impacts around the world,
contributing to poverty, environmental degradation, and the further
weakening of fragile governments.'' But the McKinley amendment tells
the DOD to ignore these impacts.
Numerous national security experts with unimpeachable credentials--
Democrats and Republicans alike--have warned that climate change
threatens our national security. Just this month, a panel of retired
three- and four-star generals and admirals released a report calling
for action to address this problem.
It will be too late for action when they see some of their facilities
being overwhelmed by the increase in rising seas or by storms that may
destroy some of our defense installations. But according to this
amendment, they can't look at that. They can't make decisions based on
the science that may come from these governmental and other scientific
agencies.
Well, I think that is science denial at its worst to say that the
Defense Department cannot recognize damage caused by climate change. It
looks like it is trying to overturn the laws of nature.
So we would tie the hands of the Defense Department and tell them
that even though we might have exacerbated heat waves, droughts,
wildfires, floods, water- and vector-borne diseases, diseases which
will pose greater risk to human health and lives around the world, and
wheat and corn yields are already experiencing the negative impact and
we have a larger risk of food security globally and regionally, if
scientists tell us that, we are not allowed to have our Defense
Department pay any heed to it.
Well, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to call anybody names, but I think
this is a seriously flawed amendment, and I urge my colleagues to
oppose it.
And I now yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Moran).
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, the Catholic Church is still trying to live
down condemning Galileo for suggesting that the Sun, instead of the
Earth, was the center of the universe. But fortunately, our military
and our President is on the right side of history and science.
Our military is listening to the facts and acting on the fact of
climate change by ensuring that its assets are capable of withstanding
more frequent and severe weather conditions, building resiliency in
their command and control structures, planning military response
contingencies that recognize the effects climate change is having on
people, countries, and organizations around the world that may wish us
harm. That is what this amendment would prevent the military from
doing, because they are now reacting to the facts from these studies.
Climate change is a national security concern. It is a new form of
stress on military readiness. The Navy, for example, just last week
identified 128 naval installations that are going to be underwater in
the near future if we don't take steps now to deal with it. It is a
catalyst for instability and conflict around the world.
As my friend from California mentioned, the military's Quadrennial
Defense Review states that ``the pressures caused by climate change
will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on
economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world.''
The results will be a higher demand for American troops abroad, even
as we struggle to deal with the devastating impacts caused by flooding
and extreme weather events at home. We have volatile regions around the
world that are going to be driven to desperation and resort to
terrorist activity in

[[Page H4718]]

response to the impacts of climate change and the resulting resource
competition.
This is what the military is telling us. Climate change's ``effects
are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad, such as
poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social
tensions.'' It is a catalyst for conflict.
For the sake of our military, for the sake of our national security,
we have got to oppose this amendment.
Mr. WAXMAN. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West
Virginia will be postponed.

Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 590, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 2, 3, 5, 12,
16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 32, 33, 60, 72, 82, 86, 100, 113, and 147
printed in part A of House Report No. 113-460, offered by Mr. McKeon of
California:

amendment no. 2 offered by mr. gosar of arizona

At the end of subtitle B of title III, add the following
new section:

SEC. 3__. OFF-INSTALLATION DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE NATURAL
RESOURCES PROJECTS COMPLIANCE WITH INTEGRATED
NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS.

Section 103A of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670c-1) is amended
by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Compliance With Integrated Natural Resource
Management Plan.--In the case of a cooperative agreement or
interagency agreement under subsection (a) for the
maintenance and improvement of natural resources located off
of a military installation or State-owned National Guard
installation, funds referred to in subsection (b) may be used
only pursuant to an approved integrated natural resources
management plan.''.

amendment no. 3 offered by mr. welch of vermont

At the end of subtitle B of title III of division A, add
the following:

SEC. 3__. RECOMMENDATION ON AIR FORCE ENERGY CONSERVATION
MEASURES.

Congress recommends that the Secretary of the Air Force
take action on identified energy conservation measures in a
comprehensive and timely manner using an array of available
funding mechanisms.

amendment no. 5 offered by Mr. Lamborn of Colorado

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

SEC. 5__. REVISED REGULATIONS FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.

(a) Revision of Department of Defense Instruction
1300.17.--
(1) Revision required.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall issue a revised instruction to replace Department of
Defense Instruction 1300.17.
(2) Purpose.--The revision of Department of Defense
Instruction 1300.17 shall address the Congressional intent
and content of section 533 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239;
126 Stat. 1727; 10 U.S.C. prec. 1030 note), as amended by
section 532 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 127 Stat. 759), to
ensure that verbal and written expressions of an individual's
religious beliefs are protected by the Department of Defense
as an essential part of a the free exercise of religion by a
member of the Armed Forces.
(b) Revision of Air Force Instruction 1-1.--
(1) Revision required.--Not later than 120 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air
Force shall issue a revised instruction to replace Air Force
Instruction 1-1.
(2) Purpose.--The revision of Air Force Instruction 1-1
shall reflect the protections for religious expressions
contained in--
(A) section 533 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239; 126 Stat. 1727; 10
U.S.C. prec. 1030 note), as amended by section 532 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014
(Public Law 113-66; 127 Stat. 759); and
(B) the revised Department of Defense instruction
referenced in subsection (a) if revision of that instruction
is completed before the revision of Air Force Instruction 1-
1.
(3) Termination.--If, before the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force issues a revised
instruction to replace Air Force Instruction 1-1 and such
revision is consistent with the purpose specified in
paragraph (2), the requirement imposed by paragraph (1) shall
no longer apply.

amendment no. 12 offered by Mr. Cleaver of missouri

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

Subtitle H--World War I Memorials

SEC. 1091. SHORT TITLE.

This subtitle may be cited as the ``World War I Memorial
Act of 2014''.

SEC. 1092. DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL WORLD WAR I MUSEUM AND
MEMORIAL IN KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI.

(a) Designation.--The Liberty Memorial of Kansas City at
America's National World War I Museum in Kansas City,
Missouri, is hereby designated as the ``National World War I
Museum and Memorial''.
(b) Ceremonies.--The World War I Centennial Commission (in
this subtitle referred to as the ``Commission'') may plan,
develop, and execute ceremonies to recognize the designation
of the Liberty Memorial of Kansas City as the National World
War I Museum and Memorial.

SEC. 1093. REDESIGNATION OF PERSHING PARK IN THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA AS THE NATIONAL WORLD WAR I MEMORIAL
AND ENHANCEMENT OF COMMEMORATIVE WORK.

(a) Redesignation.--Pershing Park in the District of
Columbia is hereby redesignated as the ``National World War I
Memorial''.
(b) Ceremonies.--The Commission may plan, develop, and
execute ceremonies for the rededication of Pershing Park, as
it approaches its 50th anniversary, as the National World War
I Memorial and for the enhancement of the General Pershing
Commemorative Work as authorized by subsection (c).
(c) Authority To Enhance Commemorative Work.--
(1) In general.--The Commission may enhance the General
Pershing Commemorative Work by constructing on the land
designated by subsection (a) as the National World War I
Memorial appropriate sculptural and other commemorative
elements, including landscaping, to further honor the service
of members of the United States Armed Forces in World War I.
(2) General pershing commemorative work defined.--The term
``General Pershing Commemorative Work'' means the memorial to
the late John J. Pershing, General of the Armies of the
United States, who commanded the American Expeditionary
Forces in World War I, and to the officers and men under his
command, as authorized by Public Law 89-786 (80 Stat. 1377).
(d) Compliance With Standards for Commemorative Works.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
chapter 89 of title 40, United States Code, applies to the
enhancement of the General Pershing Commemorative Work under
subsection (c).
(2) Waiver of certain requirements.--
(A) Site selection for memorial.--Section 8905 of such
title does not apply with respect to the selection of the
site for the National World War I Memorial.
(B) Certain conditions.--Section 8908(b) of such title does
not apply to this subtitle.
(e) No Infringement Upon Existing Memorial.--The National
World War I Memorial may not interfere with or encroach on
the District of Columbia War Memorial.
(f) Deposit of Excess Funds.--
(1) Use for other world war i commemorative activities.--
If, upon payment of all expenses for the enhancement of the
General Pershing Commemorative Work under subsection (c)
(including the maintenance and preservation amount required
by section 8906(b)(1) of title 40, United States Code), there
remains a balance of funds received for such purpose, the
Commission may use the amount of the balance for other
commemorative activities authorized under the World War I
Centennial Commission Act (Public Law 112-272; 126 Stat.
2448).
(2) Use for other commemorative works.--If the authority
for enhancement of the General Pershing Commemorative Work
and the authority of the Commission to plan and conduct
commemorative activities under the World War I Centennial
Commission Act have expired and there remains a balance of
funds received for the enhancement of the General Pershing
Commemorative Work, the Commission shall transmit the amount
of the balance to a separate account with the National Park
Foundation, to be available to the Secretary of the Interior
following the process provided in section 8906(b)(4) of title
40, United States Code, for accounts established under
section 8906(b)(3) of such title, except that funds in such
account may only be obligated subject to appropriation.
(g) Authorization To Complete Construction After
Termination of Commission.--Section 8 of the World War I
Centennial Commission Act (Public Law 112-272) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``The Centennial
Commission'' and inserting ``Except as provided in subsection
(c), the Centennial Commission''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Exception for Completion of National World War I
Memorial.--The Centennial Commission may perform such work as
is necessary to complete the rededication of the National
World War I Memorial and enhancement of the General Pershing
Commemorative Work under section 1093 of the

[[Page H4719]]

World War I Memorial Act of 2014, subject to section 8903 of
title 40, United States Code.''.

SEC. 1094. ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TO WORLD WAR I CENTENNIAL
COMMISSION ACT.

(a) Ex Officio and Other Advisory Members.--Section 4 of
the World War I Centennial Commission Act (Public Law 112-
272; 126 Stat. 2449) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(e) Ex Officio and Other Advisory Members.--
``(1) Powers.--The individuals listed in paragraphs (2) and
(3), or their designated representative, shall serve on the
Centennial Commission solely to provide advice and
information to the members of the Centennial Commission
appointed pursuant to subsection (b)(1), and shall not be
considered members for purposes of any other provision of
this Act.
``(2) Ex officio members.--The following individuals shall
serve as ex officio members:
``(A) The Archivist of the United States.
``(B) The Librarian of Congress.
``(C) The Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution.
``(D) The Secretary of Education.
``(E) The Secretary of State.
``(F) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
``(G) The Administrator of General Services.
``(3) Other advisory members.--The following individuals
shall serve as other advisory members:
``(A) Four members appointed by the Secretary of Defense in
the following manner: One from the Navy, one from the Marine
Corps, one from the Army, and one from the Air Force.
``(B) Two members appointed by the Secretary of Homeland
Security in the following manner: One from the Coast Guard
and one from the United States Secret Service.
``(C) Two members appointed by the Secretary of the
Interior, including one from the National Parks Service.
``(4) Vacancies.--A vacancy in a member position under
paragraph (3) shall be filled in the same manner in which the
original appointment was made.''.
(b) Payable Rate of Staff.--Section 7(c)(2) of such Act
(Public Law 112-272; 126 Stat. 2451) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``, without regard to the provisions of chapter
51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United States
Code, relating to classification and General Schedule pay
rates.''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``level IV'' and
inserting ``level II''.
(c) Limitation on Obligation of Federal Funds.--
(1) Limitation.--Section 9 of such Act (Public Law 112-272;
126 Stat. 2453) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 9. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF FEDERAL FUNDS.

``No Federal funds may be obligated or expended for the
designation, establishment, or enhancement of a memorial or
commemorative work by the World War I Centennial
Commission.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 7(f) of such Act (Public
Law 112-272; 126 Stat. 2452) is repealed.
(3) Clerical amendment.--The item relating to section 9 in
the table of contents of such Act (Public Law 112-272; 126
Stat. 2448) is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 9. Limitation on obligation of Federal funds.''.

amendment no. 16 offered by Mr. runyan of New Jersey

At the end of title XI, add the following:

SEC. 1107. PAY PARITY FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYED AT JOINT BASES.

(a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
(1) the term ``joint military installation'' means 2 or
more military installations reorganized or otherwise
associated and operated as a single military installation;
(2) the term ``locality'' or ``pay locality'' has the
meaning given that term by section 5302(5) of title 5, United
States Code; and
(3) the term ``locality pay'' refers to any amount payable
under section 5304 or 5304a of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Pay Parity at Joint Bases.--Whenever 2 or more military
installations are reorganized or otherwise associated as a
single joint military installation, but the constituent
installations are not all located within the same pay
locality, all Department of Defense employees of the
respective installations constituting the joint installation
(who are otherwise entitled to locality pay) shall receive
locality pay at a uniform percentage equal to the percentage
which is payable with respect to the locality which includes
the constituent installation then receiving the highest
locality pay (expressed as a percentage).
(c) Regulations.--The Office of Personnel Management shall
prescribe regulations to carry out this section.
(d) Effective Date; Applicability.--
(1) Effective date.--This section shall be effective with
respect to pay periods beginning on or after such date (not
later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
section) as the Secretary of Defense shall determine in
consultation with the Office of Personnel Management.
(2) Applicability.--This section shall apply to any joint
military installation created as a result of the
recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment
Commission in the 2005 base closure round.

amendment no. 18 offered by mr. turner of ohio

At the appropriate place in subtitle D of title XII, insert
the following:

SEC. _. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON FUTURE OF NATO AND ENLARGEMENT
INITIATIVES.

(a) Statement of Policy.--Congress declares that--
(1) the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has been
the cornerstone of transatlantic security cooperation and an
enduring instrument for promoting stability in Europe and
around the world for over 65 years;
(2) the incorporation of the Czech Republic, Poland,
Hungary, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, and Croatia has been essential
to the success of NATO in this modern era;
(3) these countries have over time added to and
strengthened the list of key European allies of the United
States;
(4) since joining NATO, these member states have remained
committed to the collective defense of the Alliance and have
demonstrated their will and ability to contribute to
transatlantic solidarity and assume increasingly more
responsibility for international peace and security;
(5) since joining the alliance, these NATO members states
have contributed to numerous NATO-led peace, security, and
stability operations, including participation in the
International Security Assistance Force's (ISAF) mission in
Afghanistan;
(6) these NATO member states have become reliable partners
and supporters of aspiring members and the United States
recognizes their continued efforts to aid in further
enlargement initiatives; and
(7) the commitment by these NATO member states to Alliance
principles and active participation in Alliance initiatives
shows the success of NATO's Open-Door Policy.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) at the September 2014 NATO Summit in Wales and beyond,
the United States should--
(A) continue to work with aspirant countries to prepare
such countries for entry into NATO;
(B) seek NATO membership for Montenegro;
(C) continue supporting a Membership Action Plan (MAP) for
Georgia;
(D) encourage the leaders of Macedonia and Greece to find a
mutually agreeable solution to the name dispute between the
two countries;
(E) seek a Dayton II agreement to resolve the
constitutional issues of Bosnia and Herzegovina;
(F) work with the Republic of Kosovo to prepare the country
for entrance into the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program;
(G) take a leading role in working with NATO member states
to identify, through consensus, the current and future
security threats facing the Alliance; and
(H) take a leading role to work with NATO allies to ensure
the alliance maintains the required capabilities, including
the gains in interoperability from combat in Afghanistan,
necessary to meet the security threats to the Alliance.
(2) NATO member states should review defense spending to
ensure sufficient funding is obligated to meet NATO
responsibilities; and
(3) the United States should remain committed to
maintaining a military presence in Europe as a means of
promoting allied interoperability and providing visible
assurance to NATO allies in the region.

amendment no. 19 offered by mr. hunter of california

At the end of subtitle E of title XII of division A, insert
the following:

SEC. _. REPORT, DETERMINATION, AND STRATEGY REGARDING THE
TERRORISTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ATTACK AGAINST
UNITED STATES PERSONNEL IN BENGHAZI, LIBYA, AND
OTHER REGIONAL THREATS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On September 11, 2012, United States facilities in
Benghazi, Libya were attacked by an organized group of armed
terrorists, killing United States Ambassador Chris Stevens,
Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods.
(2) On September 14, 2012, President Obama stated that:
``We will bring to justice those who took them from us. .
.making it clear that justice will come to those who harm
Americans.''.
(3) On May 1, 2014, White House spokesman Jay Carney stated
that: ``I can assure you that the President's direction is
that those who killed four Americans will be pursued by the
United States until they are brought to justice. And if
anyone doubts that, they should ask...friends and family
members of Osama bin Laden.''.
(4) In testimony before Congress in October 2013, the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin
Dempsey, asserted that the President lacks the authority to
use military force to find and kill the Benghazi attackers.
(5) Since the Benghazi attacks, the President has not
requested authority from Congress to use military force
against the Benghazi attackers.
(6) No terrorist responsible for the Benghazi attacks has
been brought to justice.

[[Page H4720]]

(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that--
(1) the persons and organizations who carried out the
attacks on United States personnel in Benghazi, Libya on
September 11 and 12, 2012, pose a continuing threat to the
national security of the United States;
(2) the failure to hold any individual responsible for
these terrorist attacks is a travesty of justice, and
undermines the national security of the United States; and
(3) the uncertainty surrounding the authority of the
President to use force against the terrorists responsible for
the attack against United States personnel in Benghazi,
Libya, undermines the President as Commander-in-Chief of the
Armed Forces of the United States.
(c) Report and Determination.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to
Congress--
(A) a report that contains--
(i) the identity and location of those persons and
organizations that planned, authorized, or committed the
attacks against the United States facilities in Benghazi,
Libya that occurred on September 11 and 12, 2012; and
(ii) a detailed and specific description of all actions
that have been taken to kill or capture any of the persons
described in clause (i); and
(B) a determination regarding whether the President
currently possesses the authority to use the Armed Forces of
the United States against all persons and organizations
described in subparagraph (A)(i).
(2) Form.--The report and determination described in this
subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form to the
maximum extent possible, and may contain a classified annex.
(d) Strategy to Combat Regional Terrorist Threats.--
(1) Timing and content.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit
to the appropriate congressional committees a comprehensive
strategy to counter the growing threat posed by radical
Islamist terrorist groups in North Africa, West Africa, and
the Sahel, which shall include, among other things--
(A) a strategy to bring to justice those persons who
planned, authorized, or committed the terrorist attacks
against the United States facilities in Benghazi, Libya that
occurred on September 11 and 12, 2012;
(B) a description of the radical Islamist terrorist groups
active in North Africa, West Africa, and the Sahel, including
an assessment of their origins, strategic aims, tactical
methods, funding sources, leadership, and relationships with
other terrorist groups or state actors;
(C) a description of the key military, diplomatic,
intelligence, and public diplomacy resources available to
address these growing regional terrorist threats; and
(D) a strategy to maximize the coordination between, and
the effectiveness of, United States military, diplomatic,
intelligence, and public diplomacy resources to counter these
growing regional terrorist threats.
(2) Form.--The strategy described in this subsection shall
be submitted in unclassified form to the maximum extent
possible, and may contain a classified annex.
(3) Definition of appropriate congressional committees.--In
this subsection, the term ``appropriate congressional
committees'' means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Relations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence
of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, and the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

amendment no. 20 offered by mr. rigell of virginia

At the end of subtitle E of title XII of division A, add
the following new section:

SEC. 12_. WAR POWERS OF CONGRESS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) In 1793, George Washington said, ``The constitution
vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no
offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until
after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and
authorized such a measure.''.
(2) In a letter to Thomas Jefferson in 1798, James Madison
wrote: ``The constitution supposes, what the History of all
Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of
power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has
accordingly with studied care vested the question of war to
the Legislature.''
(3) In 1973, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution
which states in section 2: ``The constitutional powers of the
President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States
Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where
imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by
the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a
declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or
(3) national emergency created by attack upon the United
States, its territories or possessions, or its armed
forces.''.
(4) With respect to United States military intervention in
Syria, President Obama said, ``But having made my decision as
Commander-in-Chief based on what I am convinced is our
national security interests, I'm also mindful that I'm the
President of the world's oldest constitutional democracy.
I've long believed that our power is rooted not just in our
military might, but in our example as a government of the
people, by the people, and for the people. And that's why
I've made a second decision: I will seek authorization for
the use of force from the American people's representatives
in Congress.''.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall be
construed to authorize any use of military force.

amendment no. 22 offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of texas

At the end of subtitle F of title XII insert the following
new section:

SEC. 1266. REPORT ON ACCOUNTABILITY FOR CRIMES AGAINST
HUMANITY IN NIGERIA.

(a) Sense of Congress.--Congress--
(1) strongly condemns the ongoing violence and the
systematic gross human rights violations against the people
of Nigeria carried out by the jihadist organization Boko
Haram;
(2) expresses its support for the people of Nigeria who
wish to live in a peaceful, economically prosperous, and
democratic Nigeria; and
(3) calls on the President to support Nigerian and
International Community efforts to ensure accountability for
crimes against humanity committed by Boko Haram against the
people of Nigeria, particularly young girls kidnapped from
educational institutions by Boko Haram.
(b) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to Congress a report on crimes against humanity
committed by Boko Haram in Nigeria.
(2) Elements.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include the following elements:
(A) A description of initiatives undertaken by the
Department of Defense to assist the Government of Nigeria to
develop its own capacity to deploy specialized police and
army units rapidly to bring Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau
to justice and to prevent and combat sectarian violence in
cities and areas in Nigeria where there has been a history of
sectarian violence.
(B) A description of violations of internationally
recognized human rights and crimes against humanity
perpetrated by Boko Haram in Nigeria, including a description
of the conventional and unconventional weapons used for such
crimes and, where possible, the origins of the weapons.
(C) A description of efforts by the Department of Defense
to ensure accountability for violations of internationally
recognized human rights and crimes against humanity
perpetrated against the people of Nigeria by Boko Haram and
al-Qaeda affiliates and other jihadists in Nigeria,
including--
(i) a description of initiatives that the United States has
undertaken to train Nigerian investigators on how to
document, investigate, and develop findings of crimes against
humanity; and
(ii) an assessment of the impact of those initiatives.

amendment no. 23 offered by Mr. Daines of Montana

At the end of subtitle D of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1636. FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF POLICY ON THE NUCLEAR
TRIAD.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The April 2010 Nuclear Posture Review stated--
(A) ``After considering a wide range of possible options
for the U.S. strategic nuclear posture, including some that
involved eliminating a leg of the Triad, the NPR concluded
that for planned reductions under New START, the United
States should retain a smaller Triad of SLBMs [submarine
launched ballistic missiles], ICBMs [intercontinental
ballistic missiles], and heavy bombers. Retaining all three
Triad legs will best maintain strategic stability at
reasonable cost, while hedging against potential technical
problems or vulnerabilities.'';
(B) ``ICBMs provide significant advantages to the U.S.
nuclear force posture, including extremely secure command and
control, high readiness rates, and relatively low operating
costs.'';
(C) ``a survivable U.S. response force requires continuous
at-sea deployments of SSBNs [ballistic missile submarines] in
both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, as well as the ability
to surge additional submarines in crisis.''; and
(D) nuclear-capable bombers--
(i) ``[provide] a rapid and effective hedge against
technical challenges with another leg of the Triad, as well
as geopolitical uncertainties''; and
(ii) ``are important to extended deterrence of potential
attacks on U.S. allies and partners.''.
(2) In a letter to the Senate on February 2, 2011,
regarding the New START Treaty, President Obama stated that
``I intend to modernize or replace the triad of strategic
nuclear delivery systems: a heavy bomber and air- launched
cruise missile, an ICBM, and a nuclear-powered ballistic
missile submarine (SSBN) and SLBM.''.
(3) In the Resolution Of Advice And Consent To Ratification
of the New START Treaty, the Senate stated that ``it is the
sense of the Senate that United States deterrence and
flexibility is assured by a robust

[[Page H4721]]

triad of strategic delivery vehicles. To this end, the United
States is committed to accomplishing the modernization and
replacement of its strategic nuclear delivery vehicles, and
to ensuring the continued flexibility of United States
conventional and nuclear delivery systems.''.
(4) On June 19, 2013, the Secretary of Defense, Chuck
Hagel, stated, ``First, the U.S. will maintain a ready and
credible deterrent. Second, we will retain a triad of
bombers, ICBMs, and ballistic missile submarines. Third, we
will make sure that our nuclear weapons remain safe, secure,
ready and effective.''.
(5) Section 1062 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 10 U.S.C. 495 note)
states that--
(A) ``It is the policy of the United States to modernize or
replace the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems'';
and
(B) ``Congress supports the modernization or replacement of
the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems consisting of
a heavy bomber and air-launched cruise missile, an
intercontinental ballistic missile, and a ballistic missile
submarine and submarine launched ballistic missile''.
(6) On March 6, 2014, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, General Martin Dempsey, testified to the Committee on
Armed Services of the House of Representatives that the Joint
Chiefs of Staff have determined that ``our recommendation is
to remain firmly committed to the triad, the three legs of
the nuclear capability, and that any further reduction should
be done only through negotiations, not unilaterally, and that
we should commit to modernizing the stockpile while we have
it.''.
(7) On April 2, 2014, the Commander of United States
Strategic Command, Admiral Cecil Haney, testified to the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives
that ``First and foremost, I think it is important that we as
a country realize just how important and foundational our
strategic deterrent is today for us and well into the future.
As you have mentioned, there is a need for modernization in a
variety of areas. When you look at the credible strategic
deterrent we have today, that includes everything from the
indications and warning, to the command and control and
communication structure that goes all the way from the
President down to the units, and to what frequently we talk
about as the triad involving the intercontinental ballistic
missiles, the submarines, and the bombers--each providing its
unique aspect of deterrence.''.
(8) In the June 2013 Report on Nuclear Employment Strategy
of the United States required by section 491 of title 10,
United States Code, the Secretary of Defense, on behalf of
the President, stated that ``the United States will maintain
a nuclear Triad, consisting of ICBMs, SLBMs, and nuclear-
capable heavy bombers. Retaining all three Triad legs will
best maintain strategic stability at reasonable cost, while
hedging against potential technical problems or
vulnerabilities. These forces should be operated on a day-to-
day basis in a manner that maintains strategic stability with
Russia and China, deters potential regional adversaries, and
assures U.S. Allies and partners.''.
(b) Statement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United
States--
(1) to operate, sustain, and modernize or replace the triad
of strategic nuclear delivery systems consisting of--
(A) heavy bombers equipped with nuclear gravity bombs and
air-launched nuclear cruise missiles;
(B) land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles equipped
with nuclear warheads that are capable of carrying multiple
independently targetable reentry vehicles; and
(C) ballistic missile submarines equipped with submarine
launched ballistic missiles and multiple nuclear warheads.
(2) to operate, sustain, and modernize or replace a
capability to forward-deploy nuclear weapons and dual-capable
fighter-bomber aircraft;
(3) to deter potential adversaries and assure allies and
partners of the United States through strong and long-term
commitment to the nuclear deterrent of the United States and
the personnel, systems, and infrastructure that comprise such
deterrent; and
(4) to ensure the members of the Armed Forces that operate
the nuclear deterrent of the United States have the training,
resources, and national support required to execute the
critical national security mission of the members.

amendment no. 32 offered by Mr. rigell of virginia

Page 53, after line 9, insert the following:

SEC. 318. ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AT FORMER NAVAL AIR
STATION, CHINCOTEAGUE, VIRGINIA.

(a) Environmental Restoration Project.--Notwithstanding the
administrative jurisdiction of the Administrator of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration over the
Wallops Flight Facility, Virginia, the Secretary of Defense
may undertake an environmental restoration project in a
manner consistent with chapter 160 of title 10, United States
Code, at the property constituting that facility in order to
provide necessary response actions for contamination from a
release of a hazardous substance or a pollutant or
contaminant that is attributable to the activities of the
Department of Defense at the time the property was under the
administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Navy or
used by the Navy pursuant to a permit or license issued by
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in the area
formerly known as the Naval Air Station Chincoteague,
Virginia. Any such project may be undertaken jointly or in
conjunction with an environmental restoration project of the
Administrator.
(b) Interagency Agreement.--The Secretary and the
Administrator may enter into an agreement or agreements to
provide for the effective and efficient performance of
environmental restoration projects for purposes of subsection
(a). Notwithstanding section 2215 of title 10, United States
Code, any such agreement may provide for environmental
restoration projects conducted jointly or by one agency on
behalf of the other or both agencies and for reimbursement of
the agency conducting the project by the other agency for
that portion of the project for which the reimbursing agency
has authority to respond.
(c) Source of Department of Defense Funds.--Pursuant to
section 2703(c) of title 10, United States Code , the
Secretary may use funds available in the Environmental
Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites, account of the
Department of Defense for environmental restoration projects
conducted for or by the Secretary under subsection (a) and
for reimbursable agreements entered into under subsection
(b).

amendment no. 33 offered by mr. kilmer of washington

Page 66, after line 11, insert the following:

SEC. 342. LIMITATION ON FURLOUGH OF CERTAIN WORKING-CAPITAL
FUND EMPLOYEES.

Section 2208 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(s) The Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary of the
military department concerned, as appropriate, may not carry
out a non-disciplinary furlough (as defined in section
7511(a)(5) of title 5) of a civilian employee of the
Department of Defense whose performance is charged to a
working-capital fund unless the Secretary--
``(1) determines that failure to furlough the employee will
result in a violation of subsection (f); and
``(2) submits to Congress, by not later than 45 days before
initiating a furlough, notice of the furlough that includes a
certification that, as a result of the proposed furlough,
none of the work performed by any employee of the Government
will be shifted to any Department of Defense civilian
employee, contractor, or member of the Armed Forces.''.

amendment no. 60 offered by mr. smith of washington

Add at the end of title V the following new section:

SEC. 5__. AUTHORITY FOR REMOVAL FROM NATIONAL CEMETERIES OF
REMAINS OF DECEASED MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES
WHO HAVE NO KNOWN NEXT OF KIN.

(a) Removal Authority.--Section 1488 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(c) Removal When No Known Next of Kin.--(1) The Secretary
of the Army may authorize the removal of the remains of a
member of the armed forces who has no known next of kin and
is buried in an Army National Military Cemetery from the Army
National Military Cemetery for transfer to any other
cemetery.
``(2) The Secretary of the Army, with the concurrence of
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, may authorize the removal
of the remains of a member of the armed forces who has no
known next of kin and is buried in a cemetery of the National
Cemetery System from that cemetery for transfer to any Army
National Military Cemetery.
``(3) In this section, the term `Army National Military
Cemetery' means a cemetery specified in section 4721(b) of
this title.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further
amended--
(1) by inserting before ``If a cemetery'' the following:
``(a) Removal Upon Discontinuance of Installation
Cemetery.--'';
(2) by striking ``his jurisdiction'' and inserting ``the
jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned''; and
(3) by inserting before ``With respect to'' the following:
``(b) Removal From Temporary Interment or Abandoned Grave
or Cemetery.--''.

amendment no. 72 offered by ms. speier of california

At the appropriate place in title VII, insert the
following:

SEC. 7__. RESEARCH REGARDING BREAST CANCER.

In carrying out research, development, test, and evaluation
activities with respect to breast cancer, the Secretary of
Defense shall implement the recommendations of the
Interagency Breast Cancer and Environmental Research
Coordinating Committee to prioritize prevention and increase
the study of chemical and physical factors in breast cancer.

amendment no. 82 offered by ms. speier of california

At the appropriate place in title VIII, insert the
following new section:

SEC. 8___. SOLE SOURCE CONTRACTS FOR SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS
OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY WOMEN.

(a) In General.--Subsection (m) of section 8 of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(m))

[[Page H4722]]

is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(7) Authority for sole source contracts for economically
disadvantaged small business concerns owned and controlled by
women.--A contracting officer may award a sole source
contract under this subsection to any small business concern
owned and controlled by women meeting the requirements of
paragraph (2)(A) if--
``(A) such concern is determined to be a responsible
contractor with respect to performance of the contract
opportunity;
``(B) the anticipated award price of the contract
(including options) will not exceed--
``(i) $6,500,000, in the case of a contract opportunity
assigned a standard industrial code for manufacturing; or
``(ii) $4,000,000, in the case of any other contract
opportunity; and
``(C) in the estimation of the contracting officer, the
contract award can be made at a fair and reasonable price.
``(8) Authority for sole source contracts for small
business concerns owned and controlled by women in
substantially underrepresented industries.--A contracting
officer may award a sole source contract under this
subsection to any small business concern owned and controlled
by women that meets the requirements of paragraph (2)(E) and
is in an industry in which small business concerns owned and
controlled by women are substantially underrepresented (as
determined by the Administrator) if--
``(A) such concern is determined to be a responsible
contractor with respect to performance of the contract
opportunity;
``(B) the anticipated award price of the contract
(including options) will not exceed--
``(i) $6,500,000, in the case of a contract opportunity
assigned a standard industrial code for manufacturing; or
``(ii) $4,000,000, in the case of any other contract
opportunity; and
``(C) in the estimation of the contracting officer, the
contract award can be made at a fair and reasonable price.''.
(b) Reporting on Goals for Sole Source Contracts for Small
Business Concerns Owned and Controlled by Women.--Clause
(viii) of subsection 15(h)(2)(E) of such Act is amended--
(1) in subclause (IV), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) by redesignating subclause (V) as subclause (VIII); and
(3) by inserting after subclause (IV) the following new
subclauses:

``(V) through sole source contracts awarded using the
authority under subsection 8(m)(7);
``(VI) through sole source contracts awarded using the
authority under section 8(m)(8);
``(VII) by industry for contracts described in subclause
(III), (IV), (V), or (VI); and''.

(c) Deadline for Report on Substantially Underrepresented
Industries Accelerated.--Paragraph (2) of section 29(o) of
such Act is amended by striking ``5 years after the date of
enactment'' and inserting ``2 years after the date of
enactment''.

amendment no. 86 offered by ms. speier of california

At the end of title IX, insert the following new section:

SEC. 924. PUBLIC RELEASE BY INSPECTORS GENERAL OF REPORTS OF
MISCONDUCT.

(a) Release of Inspector General of the Department of
Defense Administrative Misconduct Reports.--Section 141 of
title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(c)(1) Within 60 days after issuing a final report, the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall publicly
release any reports of administrative investigations that
confirm misconduct, including violations of Federal law and
violations of policies of the Department of Defense, of any
member of the Senior Executive Service, political appointee,
or commissioned officer in the Armed Forces in pay grades O-6
or above. In releasing the reports, the Inspector General
shall ensure that information that would be protected under
section 552 of title 5 (commonly known as the `Freedom of
Information Act'), section 552a of title 5 (commonly known as
the `Privacy Act of 1974'), or section 6103 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is not disclosed.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `political appointee'
means any individual who is--
``(A) employed in a position described under sections 5312
through 5316 of title 5, United States Code, (relating to the
Executive Schedule);
``(B) a limited term appointee, limited emergency
appointee, or noncareer appointee in the Senior Executive
Service, as defined under paragraphs (5), (6), and (7),
respectively, of section 3132(a) of title 5, United States
Code; or
``(C) employed in a position of a confidential or policy-
determining character under schedule C of subpart C of part
213 of title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations.''.
(b) Release of Inspector General of the Army Administrative
Misconduct Reports.--Section 3020 of such title is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f)(1) Within 60 days after issuing a final report, the
Inspector General of the Army shall publicly release any
reports of administrative investigations that confirm
misconduct, including violations of Federal law and
violations of policies of the Department of Defense, of any
member of the Senior Executive Service, political appointee,
or commissioned officer in the Armed Forces in pay grades O-6
or above. In releasing the reports, the Inspector General
shall ensure that information that would be protected under
section 552 of title 5 (commonly known as the `Freedom of
Information Act'), section 552a of title 5 (commonly known as
the `Privacy Act of 1974'), or section 6103 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is not disclosed.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `political appointee'
means any individual who is--
``(A) employed in a position described under sections 5312
through 5316 of title 5, United States Code, (relating to the
Executive Schedule);
``(B) a limited term appointee, limited emergency
appointee, or noncareer appointee in the Senior Executive
Service, as defined under paragraphs (5), (6), and (7),
respectively, of section 3132(a) of title 5, United States
Code; or
``(C) employed in a position of a confidential or policy-
determining character under schedule C of subpart C of part
213 of title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations.''.
(c) Release of Naval Inspector General Administrative
Misconduct Reports.--Section 5020 of such title is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e)(1) Within 60 days after issuing a final report, the
Naval Inspector General shall publicly release any reports of
administrative investigations that confirm misconduct,
including violations of Federal law and violations of
policies of the Department of Defense, of any member of the
Senior Executive Service, political appointee, or
commissioned officer in the Armed Forces in pay grades O-6 or
above. In releasing the reports, the Naval Inspector General
shall ensure that information that would be protected under
section 552 of title 5 (commonly known as the `Freedom of
Information Act'), section 552a of title 5 (commonly known as
the `Privacy Act of 1974'), or section 6103 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is not disclosed.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `political appointee'
means any individual who is--
``(A) employed in a position described under sections 5312
through 5316 of title 5, United States Code, (relating to the
Executive Schedule);
``(B) a limited term appointee, limited emergency
appointee, or noncareer appointee in the Senior Executive
Service, as defined under paragraphs (5), (6), and (7),
respectively, of section 3132(a) of title 5, United States
Code; or
``(C) employed in a position of a confidential or policy-
determining character under schedule C of subpart C of part
213 of title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations.''.
(d) Release of Inspector General of the Air Force
Administrative Misconduct Reports.--Section 8020 of such
title is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(f)(1) Within 60 days after issuing a final report, the
Inspector General of the Air Force shall publicly release any
reports of administrative investigations that confirm
misconduct, including violations of Federal law and
violations of policies of the Department of Defense, of any
member of the Senior Executive Service, political appointee,
or commissioned officer in the Armed Forces in pay grades O-6
or above. In releasing the reports, the Inspector General
shall ensure that information that would be protected under
section 552 of title 5 (commonly known as the `Freedom of
Information Act'), section 552a of title 5 (commonly known as
the `Privacy Act of 1974'), or section 6103 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is not disclosed.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `political appointee'
means any individual who is--
``(A) employed in a position described under sections 5312
through 5316 of title 5, United States Code, (relating to the
Executive Schedule);
``(B) a limited term appointee, limited emergency
appointee, or noncareer appointee in the Senior Executive
Service, as defined under paragraphs (5), (6), and (7),
respectively, of section 3132(a) of title 5, United States
Code; or
``(C) employed in a position of a confidential or policy-
determining character under schedule C of subpart C of part
213 of title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations.''.

amendment no. 100 offered by mr. turner of ohio

Section 1075 is amended by adding at the end the following:
(d) UAS Test Range Clarification.--For purposes of this
section, the test range program authorized under section
332(c) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49
U.S.C. 40101 note) shall include test ranges selected by the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration and any
additional test range not initially selected by the
Administration if such range enters into a partnership or
agreement with a selected test range.

amendment no. 113 offered by mr. kilmer of washington

At the end of title XI, add the following:

SEC. 11__. RATE OF OVERTIME PAY FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
EMPLOYEES PERFORMING WORK ABOARD OR DOCKSIDE IN
SUPPORT OF THE NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER FORWARD
DEPLOYED IN JAPAN.

Section 5542(a)(6)(B) of title 5, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``2014'' and inserting ``2015''.

Amendment no. 147 offered by mr. polis of colorado

Page 519, line 23, insert ``operationally realistic''
before ``intercept flight test''.

[[Page H4723]]

{time} 1830

I am honored to have worked with Representative Forbes on this
provision, but I would also like to thank Chairman Issa for his
cooperation.
Mr. Chairman, this package also includes a provision that is aimed at
saving taxpayer money, improving military readiness, and preventing
needless delays and cost overruns that could harm our servicemen and -
women.
Simply put, working capital fund employees should not be furloughed
due to a lack of appropriated funds. They are not dependent on direct
appropriations from Congress. As a result, furloughing working capital
fund employees would save no money. Furloughing working capital fund
employees would delay critical maintenance, drive up costs, and delay
the availability of ships, planes, and other necessary tools that are
critical to our national defense.
I am honored to have worked with Representative Cole on this
provision.
Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues' support for this package and the
underlying bill.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Lamborn), my friend and colleague and a member of the
Armed Services Committee.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, religious freedom and defending freedom
should not be mutually exclusive. America was founded on religious
liberty, and it is part of what makes our country so great. The men and
women in uniform who have volunteered to keep our country safe and to
protect our Constitution should not see their own liberties violated.
My amendment ensures that all servicemembers--no matter their
religion or rank or leadership--are afforded their constitutional right
to free exercise of religion.
One of the driving factors behind recent violations of religious
freedom in the military is simply bad rules. My amendment requires the
Pentagon to rewrite their rules on free exercise of religion, both for
the whole Department of Defense, and particularly for the Air Force.
I would like to thank Chairman McKeon for supporting this amendment,
as well as Mr. Forbes and Mr. Fleming, who are cosponsors.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver).
Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Speaker, before you is a picture, a contemporary
picture of the World War I monument in Kansas City, Missouri, the
tallest and most majestic of the World War I monuments. Today, we are
here in an unprecedented show of bipartisanship on this amendment, the
World War I Memorial Act. This is the product of both sides of the
aisle working together to do what is right to honor the memory of
veterans who served long ago.
I especially want to thank Congressman Ted Poe, Representative
Eleanor Holmes Norton, the National Park Service, and the entire
Missouri delegation for their work on this amendment.
As you know, this summer marks the 100th anniversary of the start of
World War I. The United States formally joined the war in April of
1917. During that time, more than 4.7 million Americans served, and of
those brave men and women, more than 116,000 soldiers made the ultimate
sacrifice. It is our job as Members of Congress to honor their memory
and show our appreciation to the veterans of that Great War.
This amendment would honor that service by redesignating Pershing
Park here in Washington, D.C., as the National World War I Memorial and
will designate the Liberty Memorial as America's National World War I
Museum in Kansas City, Missouri.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) for the purpose of a colloquy.
Mr. MICA. I want to thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith,
and the Armed Services Committee staff for your fine efforts in
bringing this important measure to the floor for our military.
I also want to take a moment, and this opportunity, to highlight the
importance of modeling and simulation and the role it plays in
maintaining our military readiness while being, of course, most cost
effective.
Last year, in fact, in the National Defense Authorization Act, we put
in language, report language, that highlighted modeling and simulation
as a cost-effective tool in maintaining a high level of readiness for
our military. In response, our armed services have followed suit in
utilizing modeling and simulation effectively and continue to do so in
current and future programs.
While that report language does not appear in this bill, it is
important that our military continue utilizing this most cost-effective
tool for manpower training.
As our Nation faces future threats, it is also critical that we are
able to meet those threats with a force that is more capable and more
ready for the challenge. Modeling and simulation enables our Nation's
fighting men and women to do so, while decreasing costs during a time
of budget uncertainty.
Mr. Chairman, finally, I would just like to ask that you join me in
support of utilizing this vital tool that saves taxpayer dollars and
assists our Nation's heroes in training for our defense.
Mr. McKEON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MICA. I yield to the gentleman from California.

[[Page H4724]]

Mr. McKEON. I want to assure my good friend from Florida that I look
forward to working with you to ensure that modeling and simulation
remains an essential part in maintaining our military readiness.
Mr. MICA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Smith, and staff. I look
forward to working with the committee and you and others ensuring that
modeling and simulation remains being utilized as a cost-effective tool
for our military readiness.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlelady from California (Ms. Speier).
Ms. SPEIER. Thank you to the ranking member and to Chairman McKeon
for this opportunity.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to highlight three amendments that have
been accepted en bloc. One is the public release of substantiated
reports of misconduct. These reports that show substantiated misconduct
by the highest-ranking officials in the Department of Defense are only
released when there is a leak or there are tips to reporters. It is
incumbent upon us to make sure that the public knows when the
Department's highest level officials commit misconduct and shouldn't
depend on leaks for accountability.
The second amendment is a significant amendment for women-owned
businesses in this country. For 20 years now, we have set a
governmentwide goal of 5 percent. For 20 years, we have not met that 5
percent. This particular amendment takes away the extra obstacle that
is imposed on women-owned businesses and not on others when sole-source
contracting is provided.
The third amendment provides for breast cancer research. The
Interagency Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Coordinating
Committee has recommended prioritizing prevention and intensifying the
study of chemical and physical factors. This amendment urges that
implementation.
A 2009 study at Walter Reed Medical Center found that breast cancer
rates among military women are significantly higher--in fact, 20 to 40
percent higher--than they are in women in similar age groups. This is
also a problem at Camp Lejeune, where we found that 85 men also were
impacted by breast cancer because of contaminated drinking water.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from North Carolina for the purpose of a colloquy.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time
as well.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman McKeon for allowing me to come
before you today to speak on the necessity of preserving Pope
Airfield's 440th Airlift Wing.
I introduced this amendment because of the incredible support the
440th Airlift Wing provides to our military and the necessity of its
mission in maintaining readiness. The Department of Defense repeatedly
says that they need flexibility, certainty, and time to complete their
missions and maintain readiness. The 440th provides all of these, yet
the Pentagon is attempting to deactivate the very unit that provides
these three crucial elements.
Fort Bragg is home to the airborne and special operation forces. The
proposal to remove every C-130 from this base contradicts its important
mission. And even our President, Mr. Chairman, noted that we will be
shifting more of our focus to special operations.
I thank the chairman for his continued support to address this
ongoing issue and look forward to working with the committee to address
this very important issue.
Mr. McKEON. I thank the gentlelady for her passionate and well
articulated arguments supporting the 440th Airlift Wing which provides
airlift to our Nation's paratroopers, including the storied 82nd
Airborne. The 1,200 men and women who comprise the 440th Airlift Wing
do an incredible job each and every day providing the airlift necessary
to do their complex and challenging missions.
This provision highlights the difficulty we face as the top line
budget has decreased and sequestration remains the law of the land.
We have been forced to make choices as we consider the defense bill
that were far from ideal, but attempted to balance competing interests
and minimize risk to the greatest extent possible.
That being said, the budget simply doesn't provide sufficient funding
to meet the requirements identified in our Nation's defense strategy. I
will continue to work with Representative Ellmers and others to
preserve assets like the 440th Airlift Wing, and most critically, on
the true cost of our problem, sequestration.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I now yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) to talk about her very important amendment
dealing with Boko Haram, as we all know, a significant problem that
needs to be addressed.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank both the distinguished ranking member and
the distinguished chairman for their courtesies and as well my fellow
cosponsors of this amendment, Congresswoman Barbara Lee from California
and Congresswoman Frederica Wilson from Florida.
This is a crisis. A couple of weeks ago, as you well know, across
America we were stating these words, to find the girls, bring the girls
back, #bringthegirlsback. Now we come some weeks later and we recognize
that Boko Haram has to be a priority for the world.
This amendment causes this issue to be a priority listed in the
Defense Department to determine the extent of the crimes against
humanity committed by Boko Haram in Nigeria. But as you can see, this
is a larger issue, and now we face the idea of where these girls might
be. So, in essence, this amendment expands the opportunity for the
United States to work with clean battalions and Rangers that we know
are established in Nigeria but also other resources around to rescue
the girls but to also deal with the emerging terrorism of Boko Haram.
This is a crucial issue. And if anyone knows many of the stories, one
that I know of is where a little girl was placed between two dead
bodies.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the gentlelady an additional 30
seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. A little girl that I met today tells her story all
the way from Nigeria, where her father was killed refusing to deny his
faith, the brother was killed because they thought he might become a
pastor, and the little girl was placed between the two bodies.
The killing is going on, 300, 118--this amendment will focus our
Nation and allow and continue the resources to collaborate with Nigeria
and these other nations to bring the girls back to their families.
It is a crisis. It is a crisis for the United States as it is for
this entire region because Boko Haram is a terrorist group, and they
must be brought to justice. The girls must be found. My amendment
establishes that priority today, and I ask my colleagues to support it.
I thank Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for their work on
this bill and their devotion to the men and women of the Armed Forces.
I also thank them for including in En Bloc Amendment No. 1 the
Jackson Lee-Wilson-Lee Amendment, which makes three important
contributions to the bill:
1. First, it strongly condemns the ongoing violence and the
systematic gross human rights violations against the people of Nigeria
carried out by the militant organization Boko Haram, especially the
kidnapping of the more than 200 young schoolgirls kidnapped from the
Chibok School by Boko Haram;
2. Second, it expresses support for the people of Nigeria who wish to
live in a peaceful, economically prosperous, and democratic Nigeria;
and
3. Third, it requires that not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment, the Secretary of Defense shall report to Congress on the
nature and extent of the crimes against humanity committed by Boko
Haram in Nigeria.
This is about religious oppression and killing innocent women, men
and children.
Since 2013, more than 4,400 men, women, and children have been
slaughtered by Boko Haram. Boko Haram kills because of religion and
holds little girls as slaves.
The victims include Christians, Muslims, journalists, health care
providers, relief workers. And schoolchildren.
I am confident that the international community working with the
African Union will assist

[[Page H4725]]

the Government of Nigeria in bringing and end to Boko Haram's reign of
terror and ensuring that its crimes against humanity are documented so
its leaders can be held accountable.
The Jackson Lee-Wilson-Lee Amendment affirms that the United States
stands with the civilized world in solidarity with the people of
Nigeria.
The Jackson Lee-Wilson-Lee Amendment affirms that the United States
is fully committed to the fundamental principle that women everywhere
have a right to be free, to live without fear, and should not be forced
to risk their lives to get the education they want and deserve.
The violent modern day slavery and killing must end.
I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for including this amendment
in En Bloc Amendment #1 and all Members to support it.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, May 8, 2014.
President Barack Obama,
The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC.
Dear Mr. President: We are writing to commend your decision
to deploy American security experts and equipment in Nigeria
to help locate and rescue the more than 200 Nigerian
schoolgirls kidnapped by the terrorist group, Boko Haram. We
support your action and we strongly urge you to work in
concert with the Government of Nigeria and the African Union
to achieve this objective and to bring Abubakar Shekau and
other leaders of Boko Haram to justice.
Boko Haram, a militant group designated by the State
Department in November 2013 as a Foreign Terrorist
Organization, has been conducting a reign of terror against
innocent Nigerian women, children, and men since 2009, when
it killed hundreds of persons during a raid of a police
station in Maiduguri. In the last four years, Boko Haram has
carried out more than 480 violent attacks against a broad
array of targets: Christian and Muslim communities,
government installations, schools, hospitals and medical
facilities, aid workers and journalists. Since the beginning
of 2013, more than 4,400 innocent persons have been killed
and thousands more left homeless.
According to media reports, the leader of Boko Haram has
threatened to ransom or sell the girls into the human
trafficking market for about twelve dollars each ($12.00
USD). This outrageous conduct cannot be tolerated or
overlooked. Not only is it a violation of the girls' human
rights, it is also contrary to United States policy
supporting and promoting equal access to education and
economic opportunity for women and girls.
We know that terrorist groups cannot operate effectively
without reliable and steady funding to support its criminal
acts. Therefore, we urge you to work with the international
community to detect, disrupt, and dismantle the funding
networks financing Boko Haram, which published reports
indicate has received as much as $70 million from other
Islamist groups, including Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb
(AQIM) and Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsular (AQAP), the Al
Muntada Trust Fund, and the Islamic World Society.
Additionally, we urge you to consider working with the
Government of Nigeria to develop its own capacity to deploy
specialized police and army units rapidly to rescue the
schoolgirls and bring Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau to
justice. Such units also can be deployed to prevent and
combat sectarian violence in cities and around the country
where there has been a history of sectarian violence. The
creation of an elite highly-trained rapid response unit would
appear to be a sound short-term strategy that the Government
of Nigeria should employ in dealing with violent groups like
Boko Haram. This approach was used to successful effect by
the Indonesia Government in 2004 to neutralize the Laskar
Jihad terrorist organization.
Finally, we call upon you to take appropriate action to
help the Government of Nigeria establish a Victim's Fund to
provide humanitarian relief and economic assistance to the
victims of attacks by Boko Haram so that they can rebuild
their lives and communities.
``People are the great issue of the 20th century,''
declared, then-Senator Hubert Humphrey in 1948. The well-
being of people remains the great issue of the 21st century.
And there is no better measure of any society than the way
its treats its women and girls. Boko Haram understands that
when Nigerian girls are educated, Nigerian women can succeed;
and when Nigerian women succeed, Nigeria succeeds. And that
is why it is so important that the United States help Nigeria
ensure that Boko Haram fails.
Thank you for your leadership and your consideration of our
recommendations. We stand ready to work with you to bring
about the safe rescue of the kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls
and to reunite them with their families and loved ones.
Sincerely,
Sheila Jackson Lee.

LIST OF SIGNATORIES

Marcia L. Fudge, Karen E. Bass, Donald Payne, Jr., John
Lewis, Yvette D. Clarke, Robin Kelly, Janice Hahn, Sheila
Jackson Lee, Terri A. Sewell, Corrine Brown, Frederica
Wilson, Gregory W. Meeks, Barbara Lee, Marc Veasey, Members
of Congress.

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Montana (Mr. Daines), my friend and colleague.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, ``If America is going to approach
adversaries with a dove of peace in one hand, we must have a sword in
the other.''
That is what President Reagan wrote when he used U.S. military
strength to hasten the demise of the Soviet Union.
The nuclear triad is our country's most lethal sword. It makes the
world safer by deterring our rivals and reassuring our allies.
The commander coin of Montana's Malmstrom Air Force Base expresses
why nuclear deterrence works. It says:

Scaring the hell out of America's enemies since 1962.

My amendment reaffirms support for the nuclear triad, the airmen, and
the sailors who work this mission because there is no greater asset for
peace than an unrivaled U.S. military.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 1 minute to the
gentlelady from California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE of California. I want to thank the chairman and ranking
member for including such an important amendment from Congresswoman
Sheila Jackson Lee, Congresswoman Wilson, and myself. I want to thank
Congresswoman Jackson Lee for her relentless effort--her relentless
effort--to make sure that we put the United States on record expressing
very strong support for the people of Nigeria, especially the parents
and families of the girls abducted by Boko Haram, and also in
condemning these despicable--mind you, despicable--crimes against
humanity in the strongest way.
Since 2013, more than 4,400 men, women and children have been
slaughtered by Boko Haram, and we join with the international community
in saying bring our girls back.
Earlier this month, Congresswomen Jackson Lee and Wilson, along with
Congressman Honda, I, and 150 Members--bipartisan, both sides of the
aisle--wrote a letter calling for the United States to work with the
U.N., the African Union, and the Government of Nigeria to find these
girls and bring the perpetrators to justice.
This amendment would give Congress a clear understanding of the
nature and extent of the crimes committed by this terrorist
organization and help us bring an end to Boko Haram's reign of terror.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the gentlelady an additional 30
seconds.

{time} 1845

Ms. LEE of California. Let me conclude by saying that the girls
should be able to pursue their education and live free from the threats
of slavery, kidnapping, and violence. This resolution, in no uncertain
terms, says enough is enough.
So thank you, Congresswoman Jackson Lee and Congresswoman Wilson, for
making sure that, once again, we come together in a bipartisan way to
insist that this terrorist organization is brought to justice and
insist that we do everything we can do to bring our girls home.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I encourage our colleagues to support the
amendments en bloc.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Westmoreland

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Strike section 341 of subtitle E of title III of the bill.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman

[[Page H4726]]

from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer my amendment to
ensure that the C-17 aircraft stays in flight and provides our troops
with the same reliability it has provided for the last 20 years.
Tonight, I join my friend, Mr. Courtney from Connecticut, in offering
this amendment. We want to ensure that this program is sustained and
will continue in the best possible way, and right now, I seek a
colloquy with the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, the
gentleman from California.
Mr. Chairman, the F-117 engine has a history of successful
performance through a performance-based contract, and I believe that it
is important that we keep these successful tenets available as we move
forward in the next phase of a sustainment contract.
While I support cost visibility in this performance-based contract, I
believe it is important that we do no harm to the success of the
program.
Mr. McKEON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I yield to the chairman of the Armed Services
Committee.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, and I appreciate the
gentleman's concern. We agree that we must ensure the successful
sustainment of this critical engine.
I look forward to working with the gentleman as we move forward to
conference with the Senate on this bill to ensure that we achieve both
improved visibility and cost-efficiency for the government, as well as
keeping a successful model for engine sustainment.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I thank the chairman for that.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the
Westmoreland amendment to the fiscal year 2015 National Defense
Authorization Act. It strikes section 341 which would negatively impact
the venerable and highly effective F117 engine that powers the Air
Force workhorse personnel and cargo transport, the C-17 aircraft. The
existing language requires disclosure of proprietary information which
would hamper contract negotiations, having the potential of posing a
detrimental impact to the readiness of the fleet.
Today, F117 engines are sustained through an award-winning
performance-based logistics contract that minimizes life cycle costs
with fixed fees based on flight cycles. This contract type requires
comprehensive understanding and investment by the service provider
along with the engineering design expertise to develop and implement
improvements in response to actual mission experience. It is vital that
we use every practical means of providing for the defense of this
country and the protection of our warfighters, including the
appropriate use of competition and any other contracting method.
In fact, the Air Force has already taken steps to ensure these
outcomes are achieved on the C-17 sustainment contract. Just last year,
the Air Force held an open and transparent bidding process for the F117
and there was only one bidder. Under the current structure, the F117
service provider is incentivized to reduce total maintenance cost by
improving reliability, increasing time on wing, and controlling shop
visit cost. All of these factors have been good for the Air Force by
minimizing operational disruption and reducing maintenance crew
requirements and logistics infrastructure.
Section 341 of this bill jeopardizes the efficiencies and success the
F117 performance-based logistics contract has achieved. This language
could be interpreted as requiring the Air Force to significantly change
contract structure for maintenance instead of requesting a robust price
reasonableness assessment as is already required by procurement
regulations. Changes in the F117 maintenance structure could be less
effective in supporting the C-17 and may result in higher sustainment
costs and lower readiness. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to
support this amendment.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chair, I now ask unanimous consent to withdraw
my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Georgia?
There was no objection.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Shimkus

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 370, after line 23, insert the following:

SEC. 1082. NTIA RETENTION OF DNS RESPONSIBILITIES PENDING GAO
REPORT.

(a) Retention of Responsibilities.--Until the Comptroller
General of the United States submits the report required by
subsection (b), the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Communications and Information may not relinquish or agree to
any proposal relating to the relinquishment of the
responsibility of the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (in this section referred to as
the ``NTIA'') over Internet domain name system functions,
including responsibility with respect to the authoritative
root zone file, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
functions, and related root zone management functions.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date on which
the NTIA receives a proposal relating to the relinquishment
of the responsibility of the NTIA over Internet domain name
system functions that was developed in a process convened by
the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers at
the request of the NTIA, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall submit to Congress a report on the role
of the NTIA with respect to the Internet domain name system.
Such report shall include--
(1) a discussion and analysis of--
(A) the advantages and disadvantages of relinquishment of
the responsibility of the NTIA over Internet domain name
system functions, including responsibility with respect to
the authoritative root zone file, the Internet Assigned
Numbers Authority functions, and related root zone management
functions;
(B) any principles or criteria that the NTIA sets for
proposals for such relinquishment;
(C) each proposal received by the NTIA for such
relinquishment;
(D) the processes used by the NTIA and any other Federal
agencies for evaluating such proposals; and
(E) any national security concerns raised by such
relinquishment; and
(2) a definition of the term ``multistakeholder model'', as
used by the NTIA with respect to Internet policymaking and
governance, and definitions of any other terms necessary to
understand the matters covered by the report.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, for over two decades, U.S. oversight of
the Internet's domain name system has kept the global Internet free and
open.
Though dismissed by NTIA as merely a clerical role of assigning and
matching domain names with IP addresses, U.S. stewardship of these
basic functions has prevented authoritarian governments from censoring
content or restricting access to Web sites beyond their borders.
That all could change, Mr. Chairman, if the administration's
announced intention to relinquish our oversight role to an undefined
multistakeholder community is not carefully considered.
This isn't a hypothetical concern. Russia and China have already
tried to put domain name authority in the hands of the United Nations'
International Telecommunication Union, the ITU; and while the
administration says it won't accept a proposal that puts the Internet
in the hands of another government or government-led entity, there is
no guarantee that won't happen after the initial transfers takes place.
One thing is for sure: once our authority is gone, it is gone for good.
Now, some of my friends across the aisle will tell you, in a few
minutes, that this Chamber voted in support of a transition to a
multistakeholder model in the past. I voted for that resolution because
I didn't--and I still don't--have an objection to the concept of a
multistakeholder Internet governance, but that structure must be
insulated from government influence.
We know bad actors will certainly try to interfere with whatever
overseer takes our place, so that is why I am offering this trust but
verify amendment today.
My amendment will simply require the GAO to review the proposals NTIA
receives to replace our oversight. What

[[Page H4727]]

is the harm, Mr. Chairman, in taking this slow, deliberate process and
making sure that we get this right? I urge my colleagues to support
this amendment.
I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita).
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois and the
gentlelady from Tennessee for allowing me to help write this important
amendment.
The President's unilateral handoff of key Internet functions to a
multistakeholder community, without the consent of Congress, lacks a
clear plan for how and what that community would look like and what
authority it would have.
Now, we can debate later about whether Congress would actually ever
give such consent, but for now, we are offering this amendment because
Americans deserve to know that due diligence has occurred and that a
clear plan exists for such matters.
America has proven, throughout history, that we are the vanguards of
freedom, and we have an obligation to protect the Internet. The
Internet is an unsurpassed vehicle for the free exchange of ideas; but
it is more than just freedom. It is also about American interests.
The Internet is the single greatest economic machine created in the
last 50 years--and perhaps ever--and its full potential is yet to be
realized. America's role in its success is a shining example of our
American exceptionalism.
It is not in our national interest to relinquish control of such a
resource, especially without a clear path that will protect Internet
freedom and American interests, but against the interest of individuals
in the world who can't appreciate such freedom and the blessing,
really, that this technology is.
So pass this amendment, I urge my colleagues, so we can give this
issue the due diligence it deserves. The self-professed ``most
transparent administration ever'' should want nothing less when it
comes to this important issue.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Vermont is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Shimkus
amendment. The amendment is identical to H.R. 4342, the DOTCOM Act of
2014. It would arbitrarily delay the transition of the United States'
role in the management of the global Internet domain name system to the
multistakeholder community.
It really does represent a very drastic departure from the support
Members of this body have expressed for the multistakeholder model of
Internet governance. In fact, despite the House of Representatives
already voting unanimously three times in the past 2 years calling on
the Obama administration to commit to a global Internet free from
government control, the Shimkus amendment sends the exact opposite
message by raising doubts about the strength and credibility of the
multistakeholder approach.
NTIA's recent transition announcement will complete our 16-year-long
effort to move management of the domain name system away from
governments and into the private sector.
This objective has been the linchpin of U.S. policy, bipartisan
through the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations, and the entire
rationale for having ICANN, a private U.S.-based nonprofit organization
created in 1998 to assume key responsibilities for Internet functions
on behalf of the Internet's multistakeholder community.
Some of my colleagues raise the specter of Russia or China taking
over the Internet as a reason for supporting this amendment. These
threats against Internet openness are real, but claiming this amendment
does anything to address them is false.
In fact, by creating an artificial delay in the implementation of the
consensus transition plan produced by ICANN, the Shimkus amendment
suggests governmental meddling in the multistakeholder process is
entirely appropriate.
The reverse is true. Authoritarian regimes are already using the U.S.
Government's stewardship of technical Internet functions as evidence
for a need to move these functions to another governmental or
intergovernmental entity like the United Nations.

This amendment further plays into the hands of these antidemocratic
nations by emboldening their efforts to seize control of the Internet.
So I would say to my colleagues to support this amendment or the
DOTCOM Act, they either show a lack of understanding of what our
government's role actually is or a lack of confidence in the
multistakeholder model and its ability to resist governmental control.
Both serve to weaken our role in the global stage, not strengthen it.
The best defense we have against a governmental takeover of the
domain system is to empower our allies in the multistakeholder
community. Our diplomats, who have fought hard to preserve an Internet
free from governmental control in global forums, tell us that having
this transition is a critical continuation of our efforts to build upon
the success of the multistakeholder model.
Now is the time to continue our unwavering support of that model. I
strongly urge my colleagues to oppose the Shimkus amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just say, as I try to wait for a few more colleagues, I would
ask my colleague to define multistakeholder. They can't. The Internet
community says it is us. The international community, the Russias and
the Chinas say it is us.
So all we are asking is for a Government Accountability Office, the
IG, nonpartisan, to whatever the agreement comes from NTIA, to say look
at it. Do some due diligence. Make sure that this is in our national
interest.
This is the most curious debate I have ever seen. Go slow. ICANN and
NTIA say they want to go slow. What is the harm of having additional
eyes on this process?
So the real debate is define multistakeholder. No one can do that
because they don't know what that is. The Internet community says it is
us, and we are going to have control, and all our net folks are going
to drive this, and it is going to be okay. While our friends--or not
friends--Vladimir Putin and China say: this is a way in.
I would rather make sure that, when we relinquish this, we know what
the agreement actually is.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois.
You know, we are pretty proud of the Internet. We want to keep it
free and nongovernmental control. Multistakeholder basically means all
of the stakeholders who have a stake in the Internet are going to be at
the table having a discussion about how we are going to resolve this
situation.
There is an apprehension that I don't think is well-founded that is
reflected in this amendment. It is really, essentially, about delaying
the process of these ongoing negotiations that have to occur in a very
complicated global system which is called the Internet.
So the House has voted on this three times before. It has indicated
its support through the Clinton, the Bush, and the Obama
administrations. Every one of those Presidents, I think, shares the
concern that every one of us in this House have about maintaining a
free and open Internet. We have got to get on with the job.
Our view is that the Shimkus amendment would create confusion and
delay and impede our ability to get to an end result that will make the
Internet more secure, more free, and more open.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, the Shimkus amendment would require the
Government Accountability Office to look at this agreement, to make
sure it is in our national interest.
The Shimkus amendment would ask the Government Accountability Office
to look at this agreement to ensure that it is in our national
interest. That is what this amendment does.
The world has significantly changed since our vote of last year, and
for anyone to say it has not is not reading the paper. You have got
Russia, you have got China, you have got Iran, you have got Turkey--all
meddling and trying to usurp and get involved in the World Wide Web. We
should not relinquish this unless it is in our national interest.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus).

[[Page H4728]]

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois
will be postponed.

{time} 1900

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in part A of
House Report 113-460.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 printed in part A of
House Report 113-460.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Smith of Washington

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I offer the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Strike sections 1032 and 1033 and insert the following:

SEC. 1032. GUANTANAMO BAY DETENTION FACILITY CLOSURE ACT OF
2014.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the
``Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility Closure Act of 2014''.
(b) Use of Funds.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act or
otherwise made available to the Department of Defense may be
used to--
(1) construct or modify any facility in the United States,
its territories, or possessions to house any individual
detained at Guantanamo for the purposes of detention or
imprisonment; and
(2) transfer, or assist in the transfer, to or within the
United States, its territories, or possessions of any
individual detained at Guantanamo;
(c) Notice to Congress.--Not later than 30 days before
transferring any individual detained at Guantanamo to the
United States, its territories, or possessions, the President
shall submit to Congress a report about such individual that
includes--
(1) notice of the proposed transfer; and
(2) the assessment of the Secretary of Defense and the
intelligence community (under the meaning given such term
section 3(4) of the National Security 18 Act of 1947 (50
U.S.C. 3003(4)) of any risks to public safety that could
arise in connection with the proposed transfer of the
individual and a description of any steps taken to address
such risks.
(d) Prohibition on Use of Funds.--No amounts authorized to
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available to
the Department of Defense may be used after December 31,
2016, for the detention facility or detention operations at
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(e) Periodic Review Boards.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that each periodic review board established pursuant
to Executive Order No. 13567 or section 1023 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law
112-81; 125 Stat. 1564; 10 U.S.C. 801 note) is completed by
not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(f) Presidential Plan.--Not later than 60 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a plan describing
each of the following:
(1) The locations to which the President seeks to transfer
individuals detained at Guantanamo who have been identified
for continued detention or prosecution.
(2) The individuals detained at Guantanamo whom the
President seeks to transfer to overseas locations, the
overseas locations to which the President seeks to transfer
such individuals, and the conditions under which the
President would transfer such individuals to such locations.
(3) The proposal of the President for the detention and
treatment of individuals captured overseas in the future who
are suspected of being terrorists.
(4) The proposal of the President regarding the disposition
of the individuals detained at the detention facility at
Parwan, Afghanistan, who have been identified as enduring
security threats to the United States.
(5) For any location in the United States to which the
President seeks to transfer such an individual or an
individual detained at Guantanamo, estimates of each of the
following costs:
(A) The costs of constructing infrastructure to support
detention operations or prosecution at such location.
(B) The costs of facility repair, sustainment, maintenance,
and operation of all infrastructure supporting detention
operations or prosecution at such location.
(C) The costs of military personnel, civilian personnel,
and contractors associated with the detention operations or
prosecution at such location, including any costs likely to
be incurred by other Federal departments or agencies or State
or local governments.
(D) Any other costs associated with supporting the
detention operations or prosecution at such location.
(6) The estimated security costs associated with trying
such individuals in courts established under Article III of
the Constitution or in military commissions conducted in the
United States, including the costs of military personnel,
civilian personnel, and contractors associated with the
prosecution at such location, including any costs likely to
be incurred by other Federal departments or agencies, or
State or local governments.
(7) A plan developed by the Attorney General, in
consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the heads
of other relevant departments and agencies, identifying a
disposition, other than continued detention at United States
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for each individual
detained at Guantanamo as of the date of the enactment of
this Act, who is designated for continued detention or
prosecution. Such a disposition may include transfer to the
United States for trial or detention pursuant to the law of
war, transfer to a foreign country, or release.
(g) Individual Detained at Guantanamo.--In this section,
the term ``individual detained at Guantanamo'' means any
individual located at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, as of October 1, 2009, who--
(1) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of
the Armed Forces of the United States; and
(2) is--
(A) in the custody or under the control of the Department
of Defense; or
(B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(h) Funding.--
(1) Reduction.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in
the funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 4601 for military construction, Army,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4601, for a high value detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay is
hereby reduced by $69,000,000.
(2) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 4601 for military construction,
Defense-wide, as specified in the corresponding funding table
in section 4601, for planning and design for the Missile
Defense Agency is hereby increased by $20,000,000.
(3) Reduction of general reductions.--Notwithstanding the
amounts set forth in the funding tables in division D, the
amount specified in section 4601 for General Reductions, as
specified in the corresponding funding table in section 4601,
is hereby reduced by $49,000,000.
(4) Reduction in amount for guantanamo bay.--In the item
relating to Guantanamo Bay in the table in section 2101(b),
strike ``$92,800,000'' and insert ``$23,800,000''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, this is the amendment that will
enable us to eventually close the Guantanamo Bay prison. There are
several compelling reasons to do this.
First of all, we have reached a point where we are now spending $2.7
million per inmate at Guantanamo Bay. To contrast that, an inmate at a
supermax Federal prison facility here in the U.S. costs roughly $78,000
a year. This is only going to become more expensive as the temporary
facility at Guantanamo Bay is forced to last longer and longer. So the
cost alone is reason, I believe, to close it.
Also, we have the larger issue. President George W. Bush wanted to
close Guantanamo Bay, as did Secretary Gates, as did Senator McCain.
Many very conservative Republicans came out in favor of closing
Guantanamo back in 2008. Why? Because the military told them that it
was harming our ability to effectively fight al Qaeda and affiliated
forces, that the presence of Guantanamo Bay was recognized as an
international eyesore that undermined U.S. credibility with our allies
abroad as we tried to prosecute that fight. There is no need for
Guantanamo. So argument number one is all of the problems with it.
Argument number two is that there is no need for it, because what we
could do would be--154 inmates who are in Guantanamo Bay, first of all,
some number of them, I think it is roughly half, have been deemed not
to be a threat to the United States. We just don't have anyplace to
send them. So we can do foreign transfers, which we are beginning to
work on. The rest of them that are a threat can be housed in supermax
facilities in the United States of America.

[[Page H4729]]

Now, we constantly hear the argument that we can't bring terrorists
to the United States. The way that argument is stated, it is like we
are bringing them here and setting them free. We are not. We are going
to lock them up and hold them. In fact, there was a recent ruling of
the courts that made it clear those inmates would not be freed in the
United States under any set of circumstances.
In addition to that, we have the ability in the United States of
America to hold dangerous people. I will submit to you that if we
didn't have that ability, we would be in a whole lot of trouble
regardless of the people at Guantanamo Bay.
We currently house over 300 terrorists here in the U.S., including
Ramzi Yousef, The Blind Sheikh, and a number of others. We have been
able to successfully hold terrorists in the United States. We also hold
mass murderers and gang leaders and mobsters. We have the ability to
safely hold these people in the United States of America. So there is
no downside to doing this.
The upside is to finally do what President George W. Bush recognized
back in 2007 and 2008 that we needed to do, to close down Guantanamo
Bay because of the international perception that it goes against our
values and because of the very fact that it does go against our values
to have people locked away in a prison that was originally set up under
the hopes that somehow we would be able to avoid habeas corpus. Well,
the Supreme Court said no, Guantanamo Bay is effectively under U.S.
control, so habeas corpus applies anyway, so same amount of rights,
same everything. It is simply an international eyesore that we keep
open for no good reason.
This bill has prohibitions on closing it. My amendment would put in
place a plan to close Guantanamo Bay by the end of 2016 and enable the
steps necessary to accomplish that.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WENSTRUP. I yield myself 2 minutes at this time.
Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. The
Guantanamo facility is safe and the most appropriate location for
detainees to be held. Detainees at Guantanamo are held there because
they were engaged in dangerous acts threatening the United States of
America and its allies. Some orchestrated and celebrated the murders of
thousands of innocent Americans.
As in previous conflicts, it is entirely appropriate to hold
detainees until enemy forces are defeated. In this case, it is al Qaeda
and their associates.
The Guantanamo facility is ideal for this purpose. It is secure. It
is relatively distant from the United States. It is difficult to
attack. I can promise you that the Cubans have no interest in freeing
the prisoners there, but there are people in this world that want to do
that. We saw it at Abu Ghraib prison last year where many members of al
Qaeda were freed. That prison was attacked, and they were freed.
So the Guantanamo facility is ideal for this purpose. It is secure
and it is safe. It also provides humane conditions for the detainees.
They have access to health care, recreational activities, cultural and
religious materials. Also, Members of the House of Representatives
routinely visit Guantanamo, and they have seen the humane conditions in
which dangerous detainees are held.
Based upon these facts and the nature of the character of those held
at Guantanamo, the cost already incurred in accommodating them, there
is no reason to move the Guantanamo detainees to facilities in the
United States.
At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time
is remaining on each side?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Ohio, and I want to
also thank the chairman, the gentleman from California, for his
leadership in bringing the NDAA bill to the floor. Again, I want to
salute Chairman McKeon on the tremendous work that he has displayed
here and all that he has done in support of the men and women in
uniform of our country. So I do rise today, Mr. Chairman, in support of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015.
Mr. Chairman, regrettably, events of the past year have demonstrated
that the forces that threaten America's national security, the
stability of our allies, and seek to subject millions to a tyranny that
violates the most basic of human rights are on the rise.
A desperate dictator in Syria has used chemical weapons, a strong man
in Venezuela is consolidating power, and Iran is inching closer to
nuclear weapons and funding terrorism. North Korea continues to
threaten America and our Pacific allies, and Russia recently invaded
Ukraine. Now is not the time for the United States to recede from the
global arena. Now is the time to lead and to project the strength that
has protected America's interests for over half a century.
An America that leads is an America with military power that cannot
be matched, because at all times we must be prepared to meet and
confront challenges so that our homeland is protected, our allies are
defended, and our enemies are defeated.
On a congressional delegation I led to Asia last month, I saw
firsthand just how important it is for America to be engaged on the
world stage. While in Japan, we toured the aircraft carrier the USS
George Washington. While aboard the ship, we met with its crew and
heard directly from its Naval commanders that the U.S. needs to have a
constant carrier presence in the region.
America provides our allies with much-needed security and stability
to a region that is threatened by a madman in North Korea and has seen
China become more provocative and aggressive with its neighbors,
particularly in the South China Sea.
The presence of our aircraft carrier is a vital part of guaranteeing
that security which, in turn, guarantees America's security. One of the
admirals even stated: ``In the world we are going to be operating in,
we simply must have the USS George Washington.'' That is why I am so
pleased that this bill begins to fund the refuel of the USS George
Washington. Failing to do so would leave our allies in the region and
throughout the world feeling vulnerable and embolden our enemies.
In hundreds of other ways, today's bill will provide our military
with the resources it needs to remain the greatest fighting force in
the world and keep America as a leader on the world stage.
Since the time of the revolution, my home State of Virginia has been
a leader in contributing to our Nation's security. In addition to the
thousands of Virginians who wear the uniform and those members of the
military stationed in Virginia, tens of thousands of Virginians work in
industries directly tied to supporting our Armed Forces and our
national defense. I am pleased that this bill recognizes their efforts.
So today, let us stand together, pass this bill in a bipartisan
fashion, and show the world that we are committed to being an America
that leads.
Again, I want to thank the gentleman from California, Chairman Buck
McKeon, for all of his hard work on this issue, along with his members
of the Armed Services Committee.
I urge my colleagues in the House to support this important bill.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Nadler).
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, we are told in opposition to this amendment
that terrorists have no constitutional rights. That is like saying
rapists or murderers have no constitutional rights. But accused rapists
and accused murders do have rights until it is proven that they are
guilty, and then their rights are taken away from them. The same must
be true of accused terrorists.
Ever since Magna Carta, we have denied the government the power to
imprison and punish people on mere accusation. That is tyranny. The
government's labeling someone a terrorist

[[Page H4730]]

doesn't make him one. The government must prove the accusation in
court. That was always a bedrock American value until we opened
Guantanamo. Now we imprison people indefinitely without trial. This
must stop.
Guantanamo should be closed, and its inmates should be tried or
released. Our Federal courts work. They have repeatedly tried,
convicted, and sentenced terrorists to long prison terms. Prosecuting
and imprisoning terrorists on U.S. soil has proven to be safer, less
expensive, and less harmful to our national security.
I urge my colleagues to support our amendment to close the detention
facility at Guantanamo Bay, end indefinite detention, and restore our
national honor.
Mr. WENSTRUP. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs.
Walorski).
Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment as well.
Transferring detainees to our homeland would require expensive new
construction or renovation of existing facilities in the U.S. Current
facilities at Gitmo already accommodate the detainees, their guards,
all associated medical, recreational, and legal needs. Estimates for
constructing or renovating similar facilities in the U.S. have ranged
from $300 million to $500 million.
Meanwhile, the dangers are also clear. Moving detainees to the U.S.
would make the facility housing them a terrorist target. For example,
in 2010, New York City estimated it would cost $200 million a year to
provide security when it was proposed some Gitmo detainees be moved to
New York for trial.
In conclusion, there are no advantages of moving detainees to the
U.S.; there are clear disadvantages.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, how much time is left in the
debate on both sides?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington has 30 seconds
remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining. The
gentleman from Ohio has the right to close.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

{time} 1915

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, Guantanamo is a rallying cry for extremists
around the world. Until we transfer and try these detainees, it is
hurting our national security, and Gitmo is expensive. We are spending
about $2.7 million per detainee per year at Guantanamo compared to
$34,000 per inmate at a high security prison in the United States. In
fact, the Pentagon is going to spend $435 million this year in
operations and personnel costs for this facility.
The reality is we have 300 individuals convicted of crimes related to
international terrorism that are currently incarcerated in 98 Federal
prisons with no escapes or attacks in attempts to free them.
When the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Afghanistan
expires, we have no plans. What are we going to do with these prisoners
of war?
The Smith amendment should be passed.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman's amendment merely
required the President to come up with a plan that Congress and the
American people could look at on exactly what he would do and how he
would do it to close Guantanamo, including what the costs would be,
where he would move them, what the cost of security wherever he would
move them would be, I might support that.
The truth of the matter is in all the time since the President has
been in office, he has not come up with a specific plan that has gotten
the support of the American people or this Congress. Even when
Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress, they were not able to
pass any legislation to close Guantanamo.
So if he can put a plan together that gets the support of the
Congress, support of the American people, I think that may be a step
forward. But to say we are going to close it and, oh, by the way, along
the way you can tell us what you are doing and how you are doing it,
that is putting the cart before the horse.
The President needs to get the support of the American people. So far
he has not done that. The American people have been clear: they are
uncomfortable with those detainees coming here. Therefore, it is
premature to close it, and this amendment should be rejected.
Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chairman, I have heard Members from both sides of
the aisle speak out against this very notion that they do not want
these types of detainees coming to their State or territory.
I will remind them that, as in previous conflicts, it is entirely
appropriate and lawful to hold detainees until our enemy forces are
defeated. I have not seen that. If al Qaeda is on the run, I think it
is toward us, as we have seen so many actions taken by them in recent
times.
I ask for your support in defeating this amendment, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Smith of Washington

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 294, after line 21, insert the following:

SEC. 1034. DISPOSITION OF COVERED PERSONS DETAINED IN THE
UNITED STATES PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR
USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Due
Process and Military Detention Amendments Act''.
(b) Disposition.--Section 1021 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81;
125 Stat. 1562; 10 U.S.C. 801 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking ``The disposition'' and
inserting ``Except as provided in subsection (g), the
disposition''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
``(g) Disposition of Persons Detained in the United
States.--
``(1) Persons detained pursuant to the authorization for
use of military force or the fiscal year 2012 national
defense authorization act.--In the case of a covered person
who is detained in the United States, or a territory or
possession of the United States, pursuant to the
Authorization for Use of Military Force or this Act,
disposition under the law of war shall occur immediately upon
the person coming into custody of the Federal Government and
shall only mean the immediate transfer of the person for
trial and proceedings by a court established under Article
III of the Constitution of the United States or by an
appropriate State court. Such trial and proceedings shall
have all the due process as provided for under the
Constitution of the United States.
``(2) Prohibition on transfer to military custody.--No
person detained, captured, or arrested in the United States,
or a territory or possession of the United States, may be
transferred to the custody of the Armed Forces for detention
under the Authorization for Use of Military Force or this
Act.
``(h) Rule of Construction.--This section shall not be
construed to authorize the detention of a person within the
United States, or a territory or possession of the United
States, under the Authorization for Use of Military Force or
this Act.''.
(c) Repeal of Requirement for Military Custody.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 1022 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 is hereby repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 1029(b) of such Act is
amended by striking ``applies to'' and all that follows
through ``any other person'' and inserting ``applies to any
person''.

[[Page H4731]]

This amendment would eliminate indefinite detention in the United
States and its territories. So basically anybody who we captured who we
suspected of terrorist activity would no longer be subject to
indefinite detention, as is now currently the law.
The basic reason for this is our Constitution works, and we ought to
value it and we ought to let the Constitution work. We have gone
through article III courts to try, convict, and incarcerate terrorists
successfully for decades. Yet, because of the 2001 AUMF, we still have
on the books a law that would allow the President, any President now or
in the future, to indefinitely detain any person in the United States
if they determine that that person is affiliated with al Qaeda or
affiliated forces. If they are acting in support of those
organizations, they would be subject to indefinite detention and would
not be allowed to due process rights that are in our Constitution.
That is an enormous amount of power to give the Executive: to take
someone and lock them up without due process. It is not necessary. This
President has not used the authority. President George W. Bush did not
use it after about 2002 and then only in a couple of instances. It is
not necessary. It is an enormous amount of power to grant the
Executive, and I believe places liberty and freedom at risk in this
country.
We need to eliminate indefinite detention in the United States. This
amendment would do that clearly and unequivocally, and I urge support.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. McKeon), the distinguished chairman of the committee.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I have a great amount of respect for my colleague and friend, the
ranking member, but I strongly oppose this amendment.
My friend talks a lot about how we shouldn't limit the President's
options with regard to Guantanamo. I don't think that we should be
limiting our options in dealing with terrorists, and I can't imagine
anything more fundamental than taking away the option to question al
Qaeda terrorists bent on killing American citizens in whatever is the
most effective way possible, and consistent with the law, to stop
future attacks.
In the fiscal year 2013 NDAA, we addressed any misconceptions about
the detention authority provided by the Authorization for Use of
Military Force. We included the following language in the conference
report:

Nothing in the Authorization for Use of Military Force or
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of
habeas corpus or to deny any constitutional rights in a court
ordained or established by or under article III of the
Constitution to any person inside the United States who would
be entitled to the availability of such writ or to such
rights in the absence of such laws.

The NDAA has changed nothing with regard to the laws of war, our
values, or our traditions. Our Supreme Court has agreed that
appropriate detention and interrogation of al Qaeda terrorists is
entirely lawful. It is false to imply that this is not the case or to
something not in line with our values.
In fact, our courts have gone well beyond the traditional attachment
of rights to our enemies and has extended the constitutional right of
habeas corpus to foreign detainees held at Guantanamo Bay.
This amendment would be the first time we self-imposed such a
sweeping change to the conduct of war and our ability to gather
intelligence.
Despite what any of us may want, al Qaeda has not surrendered. Far
from it. The threat is evolving, but unfortunately for all of us, it
continues.
We must oppose this amendment and preserve every lawful option in our
arsenal.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
The language within the NDAA about preserving rights is very
confusing. I think it is very clear that the President does have the
power right now to indefinitely detain people. So arguing that rights
are protected, they are not. Indefinite detention is the law of the
land. The President has the power to do that. Habeas corpus is one
right. It is not due process. This law currently allows for due process
to be ignored and for the Executive to indefinitely detain people.
The other big problem with this is it goes on forever. We have at
different points in our Nation's history suspended habeas corpus--
during the Civil War and other times of extreme danger. But in this
case, al Qaeda and terrorism have been with us for a while. They are
going to be with us for a long time to come in some form or another.
So to grant the President the power to indefinitely detain people is
a long, long-term issue. Again, it is not necessary. Our article III
courts have arrested, tried, convicted, and incarcerated hundreds of
terrorists. It works. We don't need to give the President the power to
throw out portions of the Constitution.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment has previously been defeated in the
House. Members have voted on it before, and I think it should be
defeated again.
This is the underwear bomber case. A foreign terrorist flies into the
U.S. in order to kill as many Americans as possible. The bomb
malfunctions, the terrorist is captured, he is immediately given under
the amendment American constitutional rights, including the right to
remain silent.

Now, in fact, the underwear bomber was questioned for about 50
minutes before the FBI gave him his Miranda rights and he quit talking.
But meanwhile, when he knows he has the right to remain silent, he
quits talking, we have no idea how many more bombers there are, where
they may be, or how we may be attacked again.
Actually, this amendment goes further than the Obama administration
even wants to, because the administration has admitted that there are
several dozen terrorists in Guantanamo that cannot be tried in article
III courts and are too dangerous to release. So what happens to them
under this amendment? If they can't be tried, they are released.
Especially if you put this amendment with the previous amendment,
they come here to the United States, they can't be tried in article III
courts because it reveals too much information, so what do you do with
them? That is part of the problem. We need this flexibility for
indefinite detention.
Secondly, the Supreme Court has held that this right of detention
goes hand-in-hand with an authorization for the use of force. I believe
probably constitutionally the President has that authority when he has
the authority to use military force. So trying to take it away not only
limits the options, it is impractical in this case.
It is, of course, true that everybody detained has that right of
habeas corpus to contest their detention in front of an article III
court, as the gentleman said, even those foreigners held in Guantanamo.
But to say that everybody immediately goes into the court system I
think would be compromising our security.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of
our time.
First of all, Guantanamo Bay would not apply in this case. None of
the people being held at Guantanamo Bay were captured in the United
States, so this would have nothing to do with that. That is a vexing
and difficult question. This applies to people captured from this point
forward in the United States. It would not apply to Guantanamo Bay
inmates.
Second, I want to deal with this argument about intelligence. It is
an argument that has been made repeatedly that does not make any sense.
This notion that somehow under the normal judicial process, under the
normal law enforcement model you cannot collect any intelligence. Well,
that would be a surprise to the FBI. It would be a surprise to every
law enforcement agency in the United States of America that has been
giving suspects Miranda rights, investigating crimes, and gathering
intelligence for decades. Just because you tell someone they have the
right to remain silent doesn't mean that they will, first of all.
Second of all, even if you don't tell them, everybody is aware of the
fact

[[Page H4732]]

that they don't have to talk. We have used Miranda successfully to
gather intelligence in a variety of different ways repeatedly. You will
not lose that ability if you go through article III courts using
Miranda rights.
Again, I want to emphasize, the idea that when you capture a
terrorist, it never occurs to them that they don't have to give up
information until you give them Miranda rights makes no sense
whatsoever, number one.
Number two, over and over and over again domestic law enforcement
officials have been able to give Miranda rights and gather an enormous
amount of intelligence. That is a red herring in this argument.
Again, we come back to what the law does. The law gives the President
of the United States the power to indefinitely detain people without
due process. The Republican Party is always talking about freedom from
government intrusion. They are concerned about the health care law,
they are concerned about all manner of different things. This is a law
that gives the President the power to lock you up and take away your
basic freedom without due process. It strikes me that nothing could be
more fundamental to those basic freedoms from government intrusion that
we always hear about from the other side of the aisle than this issue.
I urge Republicans and Democrats alike to support this amendment.
Take away the President's ability to lock people up indefinitely
without due process. That is a gross, gross violation and an individual
right that none of us in this country should stand for any longer.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.
Mr. Chairman, admittedly, there are some difficult issues involved in
detention, particularly with this war against terrorists that we are
involved in.
But you have got to look at the bigger picture, and part of what one
needs to look at is how one is going to deal with these situations. We
just debated an amendment where the argument was close Guantanamo. Now
we have an amendment on the other hand that says everybody that is
here, including the people presumably that we would bring back from
Guantanamo when it was closed, automatically and immediately goes to
article III courts.
It is not my argument that some of the people in Guantanamo cannot be
tried in article III courts. That is what the administration tells us.

{time} 1930

So how does this fit together?
It doesn't, not without releasing very dangerous people out into
society or into the world.
Secondly, when it is clear that you have greater rights when you come
to the United States, rather than if you attack us from some other
place, the incentive is to come to the United States because that is
where you are given the greater rights. That is the perverse incentive
under this amendment. It would be a mistake.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Heck of Washington

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of title X, add the following:

SEC. 1011. MILITARY COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM.

(a) Infrastructure Program.--
(1) Establishment.--Not later than 6 months after the date
of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish a
Military Community Infrastructure Program under which the
Secretary may provide grants to eligible entities for
transportation infrastructure improvement projects in
military communities.
(2) Application.--To be eligible for a grant under the
Program, an eligible entity shall submit to the Secretary an
application at such time, in such form, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require.
(3) Eligible projects.--
(A) In general.--Grants awarded under the Program may be
used for transportation infrastructure improvement projects,
including--
(i) the construction of roads;
(ii) the construction of mass transit;
(iii) the construction of, or upgrades to, pedestrian
access and bicycle access; and
(iv) upgrades to public transportation systems.
(B) Location.--To be eligible for a grant under the
Program, a project described in subparagraph (A) shall be--
(i) related to improving access to a military installation,
as determined by the Secretary; and
(ii) in a location that is--

(I) within or abutting an urbanized area (as designated by
the Bureau of the Census); and
(II) designated as a growth community by the Office of
Economic Adjustment.

(4) Considerations.--In awarding grants under the Program,
the Secretary shall give consideration to--
(A) the magnitude of the problem addressed by the project;
(B) the proportion of the problem addressed by the project
that is caused by military installation growth since the year
2000;
(C) the number of service members affected by the problem
addressed by the project;
(D) the size of the community affected by the problem
addressed by the project;
(E) the ability of the relevant eligible entity to execute
the project; and
(F) the extent to which the project resolves the
transportation problem addressed.
(5) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of a
project carried out using grant amounts made available under
the Program may not exceed 80 percent.
(b) Traffic Impact Study.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this section, the Secretary shall conduct a
traffic impact study for any urbanized area (as designated by
the Bureau of the Census) that expects a significant increase
in traffic related to a military installation within or
abutting the urbanized area.
(2) Contents.--A traffic impact study under paragraph (1)
shall determine any transportation improvements needed
because of an increase in the number of military personnel,
including study of commute sheds affected by installation-
related traffic.
(3) Consultation.--In developing a traffic impact study
under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with--
(A) the metropolitan planning organization or regional
transportation planning organization with jurisdiction over
the urbanized area; and
(B) the commander of the appropriate military installation.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means--
(A) a State or political subdivision thereof;
(B) an owner or operator of public transportation;
(C) a local governmental authority (as such term is defined
in section 5302 of title 49, United States Code);
(D) a metropolitan planning organization; or
(E) a regional transportation planning organization.
(2) Metropolitan planning organization and regional
transportation planning organization.--The terms
``metropolitan planning organization'' and ``regional
transportation planning organization'' have the meanings
given those terms in section 134(b) of title 23, United
States Code.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Defense, acting through the Director of the Office of
Economic Adjustment.
(4) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States, the District of Columbia, and any territory or
possession of the United States.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated, to carry out this section, $200,000,000
for fiscal year 2015.
(e) Funding.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, to carry out this section
during fiscal year 2015--
(1) the amount authorized to be appropriated in section 301
for operation and maintenance, as specified in the
corresponding funding table in division D, is hereby
increased by $200,000,000, with the amount of the increase
allocated to administrative and servicewide activities, as
set forth in the table under section 4301, to carry out this
section; and
(2) the amount authorized to be appropriated in section 301
for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, as specified in
the corresponding funding table in section 4301, is hereby
reduced by $200,000,000.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Heck) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Chairman, as a Member of Congress for the

[[Page H4733]]

brandnew 10th Congressional District in Washington State, I have the
privilege to represent Joint Base Lewis-McChord, which is the largest
joint operating base in America.
In the vicinity of Joint Base Lewis-McChord is Interstate 5, which is
the most heavily traveled north-south freight corridor in our State.
Nearly 80 percent of the traffic to and from JBLM relies on that
interstate freeway.
Local travelers in neighboring cities have absolutely no other option
except to use I-5 as an arterial, and when incidents occur, trust me,
it can take hours to recover.
Around the country, military installations like JBLM are still
adapting to base realignment and short-term growth caused by troops
passing through before being deployed. Installation growth has had a
significant effect on regional transportation, particularly when an
installation is located in or near an urban area.
Even acknowledging the potential for drawdowns on military bases,
those reductions would not nearly come close to alleviating the
problem--not nearly.
Surrounding roads play an important role in preserving military
readiness. Our Armed Forces need to instantly deploy, and we need
functional roads in order to do that. If military personnel are caught
in a jam and if nobody moves, efficiency goes out the window.
The domino effect of delays due to congestion, therefore, literally
impairs our national security. This leaves not only military activities
on base stranded, but also commerce in the congested area, and when we
don't have a reliable roadway, economic activity halts. Goods don't
move, and companies can't make money.
It is a cascading inaction, which affects our productivity and
balance sheets, and it puts a strain on businessowners.
To be clear, the military is not to blame for this. Bases have come
up with innovative approaches to ease the pain, but the problem remains
severe and unavoidable without more investment. It is a Band-Aid over a
wound that needs stitches.
The only existing DOD program that provides funding for public
highway improvements is the Defense Access Roads Program. However, the
DAR Program is limited by outdated and restrictive eligibility criteria
and was designed when bases were only expected to be located in
relatively undeveloped areas, which is clearly no longer the case.
DAR needs to be replaced with a separate DOD program to fund the
transit services necessary to meet military needs.
I know being stuck in traffic is not something unknown to most
Americans. We are all too familiar with the horrible feeling of
approaching an unexpected slow crawl on the road, but when this affects
our military's ability to get to base, to do the job, and to be ready
for anything, that is when we can't just sit and wait for it to get
better. We can and should do more.
Mr. Chairman, I plan to withdraw my amendment, but I will soon
introduce a bill that embodies its concept, entitled the ``COMMUTE
Act,'' and it will address these issues.
I hope, beyond hope, that I can look forward to working with the
members and my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee on this plan
to meet this very important need.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HECK of Washington. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I just want to quickly agree
with Congressman Heck.
I used to represent Joint Base Lewis-McChord. It is the worst traffic
in the State of Washington. The base more than doubled over the course
of 7 to 8 years. It is a significant quality of life issue for our men
and women and their families who are serving on Joint Base Lewis-
McChord, and I am sure this is a situation that is repeated around many
bases across the country.
So I strongly support his efforts to try and deal with this. This is
something that directly impacts our troops and their families. I thank
him for his effort.
Mr. McKEON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HECK of Washington. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. McKEON. I, likewise, would be interested in working with you on
this.
In southern California, I know a major highway runs right through
Camp Pendleton, and there is a lot of traffic. With Congressman Smith,
I was able to visit Lewis-McChord, and I think you would find that a
lot of people on both sides of the aisle would be willing to work with
you on this bill, and I hope to be able to.
Mr. HECK of Washington. Thank you, sir.
As is characteristic to both of you, thank you for your graciousness
and for your positive remarks.
Mr. Chairman, let me just conclude by saying that there are some
estimates that the Interstate 5 corridor around Joint Base Lewis-
McChord--remember, I-5 extends from Canada to Tijuana--is the most
congested chokepoint.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.

Amendment No. 15 Offered by Ms. Jenkins

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of title XI, add the following:

SEC. 1107. PROHIBITION ON CONVERTING THE PERFORMANCE OF
CERTAIN FUNCTIONS FROM CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE
TO PERFORMANCE BY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

(a) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, except as provided under subsection (b), no Federal
department or agency may implement or carry out a guideline,
regulation, circular, policy, or other instrument to enable a
Federal department or agency to convert to performance by
Federal employees any function that, before the date of the
enactment of this Act, was performed by contractor employees.
(b) Exceptions.-- The prohibition in this section shall not
apply to a function that is an inherently governmental
function as that term is defined in section 5 of the Federal
Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-270;
31 U.S.C. 501 note).
(c) Public-private Competition Required.--Before any
Federal department or agency may convert any function from
performance by a contractor to performance by a civilian
employee of the department or agency, the department or
agency shall conduct a public-private competition similar to
a public-private competition under Office of Management and
Budget Circular A-76 that examines the cost of performance of
the function by civilian employees and the cost of
performance of the function by one or more contractors to
demonstrate whether converting to performance by civilian
employees will result in savings to the Government over the
life of the contract. Upon completion of the competition, the
Federal department or agency shall select the option that is
determined pursuant to the competition to result in the most
savings to the Government.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentlewoman
from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Kansas.
Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
In 2008, Congress passed legislation to suspend public-private
competitions at the DOD through the OMB Circular A-76. That moratorium
remains in place today. In 2009, the OMB issued a memorandum which
regulated the move to insourcing at the DOD.
Today, nearly half of the Federal Government owns and operates
thousands of activities that are commercial in nature. These functions
are not inherent or unique to government; rather, they can be found in
small and Main Street businesses across the Nation. Not only are these
Federal agencies duplicating private business, but many engage in
unfair government competition with the private sector.
My amendment seeks to place a moratorium on the insourcing of
previously contracted activities within the DOD. Exceptions would be
made, number one, if the activity were inherently governmental and,
thereby, should never have been contracted out in the first place; or,
number two, if the DOD would employ a reverse A-76 to itemize specific
costs saved to the taxpayer, should the DOD be able to

[[Page H4734]]

perform the commercial activity more efficiently for the taxpayer.
According to the OMB, the act of conducting the A-76 competition
alone can generate a savings of 10 to 40 percent on average. That is
just the average savings generated from simply going through the
process.
While the A-76 process is not perfect, it is the best opportunity we
have for a cost comparison. As an accountant, I understand the
importance of a cost comparison. This amendment is just the first step.
Studies also show that utilizing the A-76 public-private cost
comparisons can save up to $27 billion per year. Again, this is just by
implementing the cost comparison tool.
In 2011, the Department of Defense completed a report in response to
section 325 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2010, which concluded with two
major recommendations to Congress, the first of which is to lift the
suspension on A-76 competitions. This is the recommendation from the
DOD.
This amendment will provide the DOD with the flexibility to use the
private sector for commercial activities and save valuable taxpayer
money. I encourage a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise this evening in strong opposition to this amendment.
Put simply, this amendment would cost taxpayers. It would not be in
the best interests of our military readiness, and it is not supported
by the Department of Defense. This amendment is extreme in its
intention.
It overrides every other law on the books in terms of the management
of the national defense workload by prohibiting the transfer of the
workload from the private sector to the public sector.
For years now, Congress and the DOD have established statutes,
regulations, and policies for determining the correct mix of the
workforce between military contractor and civilian.
As the cochair of the Depot and Arsenal Caucus, I am deeply concerned
that this amendment would put back into place a severely flawed system
that would do significant damage to our organic industrial base,
including to our arsenals and depots, at a time when it is critical
that we maintain these facilities' capabilities to equip our troops.
I proudly represent the Rock Island Arsenal, where thousands of
highly skilled people work every day to equip our troops. Our organic
industrial base has, time and again, shown its critical importance to
our men and women in uniform.
When our troops on the ground needed improved armor on their
vehicles, it was the Rock Island Arsenal that was able to rapidly
produce and field that lifesaving armor to protect our troops; and as a
military parent, I am personally thankful that the workforce at Rock
Island Arsenal and organic industrial base facilities across our
country are there to equip our men and women in uniform.
This amendment would starve our critical organic industrial base,
sending it into a death spiral, undermining key elements of our
national security infrastructure, and reducing our ability to meet our
national security strategy.
In addition to the impact on military operations, this amendment
would also not produce the best value for the Department of Defense and
for our servicemen and servicewomen. Again, it is not wanted by our
Nation's military leaders.
For these reasons, I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues
to join me in voting against it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I would like to yield 1
minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott).
Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I also rise in opposition
to the amendment of my colleague's from Kansas.
Our military has three workforces. We have the uniformed, we have the
civilian, and we have the contractor. All three are vital to the
national security of this country. The defense workforce must be
managed in what makes the most long-term sense for both the mission of
national security and the taxpayer.
This amendment would prohibit the insourcing of contracted services,
even when it would make sense for the taxpayer and would save money. By
disrupting the Department of Defense's management practice, this
amendment would impair military readiness. The Department did not ask
for this proposed change, and it is against this amendment.
I believe that this amendment is bad for the long-term security of
the Nation, and I would ask that you oppose it.
Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).
Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I have enormous respect for my friends from
Kansas. We usually agree, but in this case, we don't.
I represent Tinker Air Force Base, which has 15,000 Federal civilian
defense employees, along with thousands of private employees, working
in contract facilities on and around the base. Usually, they work
together, but sometimes, they compete for work. When they do, that work
should go to whomever can do the work better and cheaper.
This amendment overrides every other law in the book, in terms of
managing the defense workload by prohibiting the transfer of the
workload from the private to the public sector, even when the public
sector can do it better and cheaper.

{time} 1945

That, in my view is inefficient, it is counterproductive, and
ultimately it is unfair. We should allow the work to flow to those best
able to complete it, and we should rely on the services to actually
make the decisions in this regard.
So I urge the rejection of the amendment.
Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, opponents may argue that this is a burden
to place on the DOD when they are seeking to insource, but I believe
that ensuring taxpayer dollars are well spent and that taxpayers are
getting the best value for their money is hardly a burden.
A formal, documented process which shows the cost savings will make
sure that this is fair for the small businesses who depend on these
contracts to thrive.
The American Legion approves of this proposed amendment. They stated:

The practice of converting functions and services that have
been performed by contractors with government employees
limits the amount of contracts that can go to the private
sector to stimulate and grow the veteran small business
industrial base. When the government takes a couple of
positions away from a small business, they are essentially
crippling the small business' ability to succeed in the
private sector. These practices primarily affect small
businesses, as large contractors are rarely affected by
insourcing policy because of their size and number of
employees.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, this chart--for those with keen
eyesight--kind of puts this in perspective.
The blue is what we spend on the civilian workforce. The green is
what has been spent over the last decade on military personnel. The
yellow is on contract services. And the white is the rest of it.
The premise of this amendment is that the blue is too big.
There are times when competition, especially on acquisition, is
extremely helpful. There are also times where competition on
sustainment or maintenance has a habit of unintentionally hurting our
readiness, at least that was the result of the GAO study in 2010.
So the committee has wisely tried to strike a balance between those
two, making sure that there is competition when it makes sense, all of
which is defined in title X of our code, which demands a core workload
be established

[[Page H4735]]

by the military of what our needs are and what is most cost-effective.
Unfortunately, the first line of the amendment which says that
``notwithstanding any other provision of law'' simply turns all of that
on its head. This takes precedence over the entire code, which I am
assuming is the reason DOD communicated the Defense Department does not
want this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is also supported by the
TRSA, MAPPS, the Business Coalition for Fair Competition, and the
American Conservative Union.
Mr. Chairman, I will submit their statements in support for the
Record.

Submitted for the Record in Support of Jenkins Amendment #135

Textile Rental Services Association (TRSA): In its 1996
examination of the issue, the Center for Naval Analyses
likewise found benefits of competing work. The visibility and
identification of alternate providers were beneficial aspects
of the process identified by the Center. As a bottom line,
the Center for Naval Analyses determined a 30% average
savings resulted from this beneficial focus on competition,
with savings persisting over time. A leaner, more efficient
government is a worthy goal, and Rep. Jenkins (KS) Amendment
#135 is a means to achieve this goal.
MAPPS: We have seen insourcing take place beyond
`inherently governmental' activities such as commercial
activities like mapping and geospatial activities. The
Jenkins Amendment is the fairest approach by helping defend
business opportunities for the private sector, including
small business.
Business Coalition for Fair Competition (BCFC): The Jenkins
Amendment is the `yellow pages test' personified. This
amendment 1) prevents the outright conversion of ``commercial
activities'' from private sector firms into DOD performance;
2) requires an official cost accounting be performed and
documented to identify whether DOD performance is more cost
effective than the private sector contractor; and 3) helps
protect private sector firms, including small business, from
losing contracts taken away unfairly by the Federal
government.
American Conservative Union (ACU): The Jenkins Amendment is
essential to stopping the government goliath from gobbling up
jobs that belong in the private sector. Rather than wringing
our hands over slow growth and the lack of good paying jobs,
we should start by protecting existing private sector jobs
from further `insourcing' by this Administration. This
amendment will help do that.

Ms. JENKINS. In closing, my amendment seeks to strike a balance. If
the service is inherently governmental, it should be contracted out. If
it is a commercial activity, the Federal Government owes it to the
American taxpayer to get the best value, the most efficiency, and the
best service available.
We owe this to our warfighters to ensure they are receiving the best
possible services as they protect us. This cannot be assured without
the use of a fair competitive processes. With a debt of more than $17
trillion, calls for reductions that will erode the end strength of our
military and a stagnant private-sector job market, we must find ways to
reduce spending and find efficiencies at DOD while boosting job
creation in our communities.
This amendment is an opportunity to vote for small business, break up
Federal monopolies, ensure more efficient services, empower the
warfighter, and maintain funding for DOD.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I yield back the balance of
my time.
Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chair, I submit the following statements in support
of Jenkins Amendment #15 to H.R. 4435.

National Veteran Small Business Coalition (NVSBC): ``The
National Veteran Small Business Coalition (NVSBC) has seen
the negative effect of Insourcing on veteran and service
disabled veteran small businesses over the last few years.
Veterans who have fought for this government should not have
to compete for business opportunities with the same
government who ordered them in harm's way.
Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI): A leaner, more
efficient government is a worthy goal. Competitive sourcing
provides important, demonstrable benefits for our business
workforce, our economy, and our government's efficiency. The
Competitive Enterprise Institute supports Rep. Lynn Jenkins'
insourcing-and-outsourcing-related amendment to achieve that
goal.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Kansas
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Lamborn

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the appropriate place in subtitle C of title XII, insert
the following:

SEC. _. LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW
START TREATY.

(a) Limitation.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2015
for the Department of Defense may be used for implementation
of the New START Treaty until the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, certifies to the
appropriate congressional committees that--
(1) the armed forces of the Russian Federation are no
longer illegally occupying Ukrainian territory;
(2) the Russian Federation is respecting the sovereignty of
all Ukrainian territory;
(3) the Russian Federation is no longer taking actions that
are inconsistent with the INF Treaty;
(4) the Russian Federation is in compliance with the CFE
Treaty and has lifted its suspension of Russian observance of
its treaty obligations; and
(5) there have been no inconsistencies by the Russian
Federation with New START Treaty requirements.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
(2) CFE treaty.--The term ``CFE Treaty'' means the Treaty
on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, signed at Paris
November 19, 1990, and entered into force July 17, 1992.
(3) INF treaty.--The term ``INF Treaty'' means the Treaty
Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-
Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, commonly referred to as the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed at
Washington December 8, 1987, and entered into force June 1,
1988.
(4) New start treatu.--The term ``New START Treaty'' means
the Treaty between the United States of America and the
Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and
Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, signed on April 8,
2010, and entered into force on February 5, 2011
(c) Effective Date.--This section takes effect on the date
of the enactment of this Act and applies with respect to
funds described in subsection (a) that are unobligated as of
such date of enactment.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. The United
States should not be spending money to disarm ourselves--to
dramatically cut our strategic nuclear deterrent under the New START
Treaty--if the other party to the treaty is not trustworthy.
At the moment, the Russian Federation is clearly not trustworthy.
Let me remind us all of Russia's current record on observing treaties
and agreements.
In 1994, Russia, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States
signed the Budapest Memorandum. This agreement included a commitment to
``respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of
Ukraine.'' But this agreement did not keep Putin from invading
Ukrainian territory.
Strike one.
In January, The New York Times revealed that the Russian Federation
was cheating on another treaty--the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces
Treaty, or INF Treaty. According to the story, our State Department has
been raising the INF cheating issue with the Russians for about a year
now, with no response.
Strike two.
In 2007, President Putin announced that he was suspending Russian
participation in the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, or CFE. This
came after years of Russian violations of the CFE Treaty.
Strike three.

[[Page H4736]]

Is the Russian government trustworthy?
The answer is clearly no.
The question for us tonight under my amendment is whether it makes
sense for us to spend money on reducing our nuclear deterrent when the
other party to the New START Treaty is not trustworthy. If you trust
Vladimir Putin and the Russian government, vote against this amendment.
But if you, like me, don't want to put our national security in the
hands of a serial treaty violator, please vote for this amendment.
We should not be spending money implementing the New START Treaty,
which reduces our nuclear forces, unless and until Russia makes it
clear that they are a responsible actor and will abide by the
agreements they make.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in
opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
First of all, on the trust issue, you wouldn't have to negotiate with
people that you trusted.
Unfortunately, regrettably, we have to negotiate with people all the
time who are not entirely trustworthy. That is why Ronald Reagan always
said, ``Trust but verify,'' which I think was wrong. Let's verify.
Trust is a very difficult thing.
Obviously, Russia has proven itself untrustworthy, but they have
consistently reduced their nuclear weapons arsenal as a result of
treaties that were first negotiated by Ronald Reagan, and many others.
They have also worked cooperatively with us to contain nuclear
material, which has been enormously important. They would be a huge
terrorist threat if they were to ever get their hands on nuclear
material. Outside of the United States, the former Soviet Union--and
now Russia--is the number one place where you have that nuclear
material.
So having some measure of cooperation with them to contain and reduce
that material is enormously important. That is the goal of the START
Treaty.
It is not a matter of whether or not you trust Putin or Russia. I
don't trust many people, just in general, and I certainly don't trust
them. The question is: is the START Treaty, an effort to reduce the
number of nuclear weapons that Russia has and to contain and control
the fissile material that they have, is that in our best interest?
It is. And we should negotiate that.
Certainly, what Putin is doing in the Ukraine is reprehensible and
violates all manner of treaties. I support the President and the
efforts of others to condemn and sanction them as a result.
But to walk away from an effort to contain nuclear weapons I don't
believe is in the best interest of the U.S. It is not a matter of
whether you trust Russia; it is a matter of what it is in our best
interest. I believe it is in our best interest to try to contain the
nuclear fissile material available out there in the world. START is one
way to do that. Walking away from this just because we don't trust
Putin--and we don't--is not sound policy.
I urge opposition to this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I want to respond to my colleague by
saying there is a flaw in the New START Treaty, in my opinion, in that
it originally called for reductions in U.S. nuclear forces and allowed
Russia to increase its nuclear forces.
So that right there I think is a problem. But when you have serial
violations by the Russian Federation invading Ukraine, in violation of
the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the INF Treaty, and the CFE Treaty, they
are not a reliable partner in these treaties.
And so to reduce our forces, how can that be in our interest when the
other party to the treaty is not someone who is performing on these
other treaties? There could be questions on whether they are even fully
complying with the New START Treaty.
Mr. Chairman, I will enter into the Record an article from The New
York Times dated January 29 of this year detailing some of their
violations of the INF Treaty.

[From the New York Times, Jan. 29, 2014]

U.S. Says Russia Tested Missile, Despite Treaty

(By Michael R. Gordon)

Washington.--The United States informed its NATO allies
this month that Russia had tested a new ground-launched
cruise missile, raising concerns about Moscow's compliance
with a landmark arms control accord.
American officials believe Russia began conducting flight
tests of the missile as early as 2008. Such tests are
prohibited by the treaty banning medium-range missiles that
was signed in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail S.
Gorbachev, the Soviet leader at the time, and that has long
been viewed as one of the bedrock accords that brought an end
to the Cold War.
Beginning in May, Rose Gottemoeller, the State Department's
senior arms control official, has repeatedly raised the
missile tests with Russian officials, who have responded that
they investigated the matter and consider the case to be
closed. But Obama administration officials are not yet ready
to formally declare the tests of the missile, which has not
been deployed, to be a violation of the 1987 treaty.
With President Obama pledging to seek deeper cuts in
nuclear arms, the State Department has been trying to find a
way to resolve the compliance issue, preserve the treaty and
keep the door open to future arms control accords.
``The United States never hesitates to raise treaty
compliance concerns with Russia, and this issue is no
exception,'' Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman,
said. ``There's an ongoing review process, and we wouldn't
want to speculate or prejudge the outcome.''
Other officials, who asked not to be identified because
they were discussing internal deliberations, said there was
no question the missile tests ran counter to the treaty and
the administration had already shown considerable patience
with the Russians. And some members of Congress, who have
been briefed on the tests on a classified basis for well over
a year, have been pressing the White House for a firmer
response.
A public dispute over the tests could prove to be a major
new irritant in the already difficult relationship between
the United States and Russia. In recent months, that
relationship has been strained by differences over how to end
the fighting in Syria; the temporary asylum granted to Edward
J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor;
and, most recently, the turmoil in Ukraine.
The treaty banning the testing, production and possession
of medium-range missiles has long been regarded as a major
step toward curbing the American and Russian arms race. ``The
importance of this treaty transcends numbers,'' Mr. Reagan
said during the treaty signing, adding that it underscored
the value of ``greater openness in military programs and
forces.''
But after President Vladimir V. Putin rose to power and the
Russian military began to re-evaluate its strategy, the
Kremlin developed second thoughts about the accord. During
the administration of President George W. Bush, Sergei B.
Ivanov, the Russian defense minister, proposed that the two
sides drop the treaty.
Though the Cold War was over, he argued that Russia still
faced threats from nations on its periphery, including China
and potentially Pakistan. But the Bush administration was
reluctant to terminate a treaty that NATO nations regarded as
a cornerstone of arms control and whose abrogation would have
enabled the Russians to increase missile forces directed at
the United States' allies in Asia.
Since Mr. Obama has been in office, the Russians have
insisted they want to keep the agreement. But in the view of
American analysts, Russia has also mounted a determined
effort to strengthen its nuclear abilities to compensate for
the weakness of its conventional, nonnuclear forces.
At the same time, in his State of the Union address last
year, Mr. Obama vowed to ``seek further reductions in our
nuclear arsenals,'' a goal American officials at one point
hoped might form part of Mr. Obama's legacy.
But administration officials and experts outside government
say Congress is highly unlikely to approve an agreement
mandating more cuts unless the question of Russian compliance
with the medium-range treaty is resolved.
``If the Russian government has made a considered decision
to field a prohibited system,'' Franklin C. Miller, a former
defense official at the White House and the Pentagon, said,
``then it is the strongest indication to date that they are
not interested in pursuing any arms control, at least through
the remainder of President Obama's term.''
It took years for American intelligence to gather
information on Russia's new missile system, but by the end of
2011, officials say it was clear that there was a compliance
concern.
There have been repeated rumors over the last year that
Russia may have violated some of the provisions of the 1987
treaty. But the nature of that violation has not previously
been disclosed, and some news reports have focused on the
wrong system: a new two-stage missile called the RS-26. The
Russians have flight-tested it at medium range, according to
intelligence assessments, and the prevailing view among
Western officials is that it is intended to help fill the gap
in Russia's medium-range missile capabilities that resulted
from the 1987 treaty. The

[[Page H4737]]

treaty defines medium-range missiles as ground-launched
ballistic or cruise missiles capable of flying 300 to 3,400
miles.
But because Russia has conducted a small number of tests of
the RS-26 at intercontinental range, it technically qualifies
as a long-range system and will be counted under the treaty
known as New Start, which was negotiated by the Obama
administration. So it is generally considered by Western
officials to be a circumvention, but not a violation, of the
1987 treaty
One member of Congress who was said to have raised concerns
that the suspected arms control violation might endanger
future arms control efforts was John Kerry. As a senator and
chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, he received a
classified briefing on the matter in November 2012 that dealt
with compliance concerns, according to a report in The Daily
Beast.
As secretary of state, Mr. Kerry has not raised concerns
over the cruise missile tests with his Russian counterpart,
Sergey V. Lavrov, but he has emphasized the importance of
complying with arms accords, a State Department official
said.
Republican lawmakers, however, have urged the
administration to be more aggressive.
``Briefings provided by your administration have agreed
with our assessment that Russian actions are serious and
troubling, but have failed to offer any assurance of any
concrete action to address these Russian actions,''
Representative Howard McKeon, Republican of California and
chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Representative
Mike Rogers, the Michigan Republican who leads the
Intelligence Committee, said in an April letter to Mr. Obama.
And Senator Jim Risch, Republican of Idaho, and 16 other
Republican senators recently proposed legislation that would
require the White House to report to Congress on what
intelligence the United States has shared with NATO allies on
suspected violations of the 1987 treaty.
Republican members of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee have also cited the issue in holding up Ms.
Gottemoeller's confirmation as under secretary of state for
arms control and international security.
It was against this backdrop that the so-called deputies
committee, an interagency panel led by Antony Blinken, Mr.
Obama's deputy national security adviser, decided that Ms.
Gottemoeller should inform NATO's 28 members about the
compliance issue.
On Jan. 17, Ms. Gottemoeller discussed the missile tests in
a closed-door meeting of NATO's Arms Control, Disarmament and
Non-Proliferation Committee that she led in Brussels.
The Obama administration, she said, had not given up on
diplomacy. There are precedents for working out disputes over
arms control complaints, and Ms. Gottemoeller said American
officials would continue to engage the Russians to try to
resolve the controversy.
But even with the best of intentions, establishing what the
Russians are doing may not be easy. The elaborate network of
verification provisions created under the medium-range
missile treaty is no longer in effect, since all the missiles
that were believed to be covered by the agreement were long
thought to have been destroyed by May 1991.

Mr. LAMBORN. At this point I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. Bishop), my colleague.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, again, I am pleased to join my
friend from Colorado on this particular issue.
When you have a partner, which is Russia, who is already engaged in a
cyberattack against Estonia, they have invaded and declared independent
the two northern provinces of Georgia, and they also have done
everything we know about in the Ukraine right now, and, in addition,
have violated the existing INF Treaty--and we can talk about that
classified material because it was quoted on the front page of The New
York Times; they have violated that--it is in the best interest of the
United States to wait until we have a more profitable, reliable partner
before launching into another endeavor.
With that, I actually support this amendment. I think it is well-
timed, well-placed.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
First of all, just for everybody's information, you cannot actually
reveal classified information, even if it has showed up in the
newspaper, because then you are confirming it. So you are not supposed
to do that.
Second of all, if you don't like the START Treaty, that is one thing.
We can have that debate. We had that debate in the Senate and a
bipartisan group of senators confirmed the treaty and then passed it.
That is a separate debate. If you are trying to still reopen that, that
is something that the Senate has already determined.
Again, it is not a matter of Russia being trustworthy. I don't think
of them as a partner. I think of them has a reality that we have to
deal with.
In the one area where they have been fairly consistent, again,
starting with the treaty negotiated under Ronald Reagan, is they have
reduced their nuclear forces and worked with us to contain their
fissile material after the breakup of the Soviet Union. This has
reduced the amount of nuclear weapons in the world, which is a positive
step.
So, again, yes, what they are doing in the Ukraine, we ought to
oppose that. But when it comes to trying to contain nuclear material
for the protection of both of our countries and the world, that is not
something that I think we should walk away from.
I am sure there are other opportunities, other ways we can punish
Russia for their misdeeds that would make a great deal more sense. This
hurts us, it does not help us.
Again, I urge opposition to the amendment, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado has 1 minute remaining.
The gentleman from Washington has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I can't see how it would be in our
interest to keep complying with a treaty when the other party to that
treaty is not in compliance with so many other things it is supposed to
be doing.
This amendment merely calls for a halt in the spending until such
time as they come into compliance with all of these other treaties.
We are talking about reducing our nuclear forces. That is a guarantee
against the main and only existential threat against the United States:
a devastating nuclear attack, God forbid. But why in the world would we
want to give up further nuclear forces when the party that is supposed
to be working with us on this is not reliable?

{time} 2000

I do not understand that. I would ask adoption of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of
my time.
Again, I want to emphasize, the START Treaty, if you don't like the
START Treaty, that is a separate debate. That is not the purpose of
where we are at here in the House.
With regards to violating treaties, on this START Treaty, the
Russians are in compliance with it. There has been no evidence brought
forward that they are not. This is the treaty that we are talking
about.
If they have violated other treaties, we can talk about that and deal
with that.
I will also point out that they are not alone. The U.S. abrogated the
antiballistic missile treaty that we had signed with the Soviet Union
because we thought it was in our own interest, so there are different
reasons for doing those things.
Again, let me just emphasize the point. If we have an agreement with
Russia that enables us to better control nuclear weapons, I think that
is a good thing.
Don't trust them. Don't think of them as a partner. Whatever evil
things you want to say about Russia, that is fine, but let's not do
things that are contrary to our own best interest.
There are other ways to punish Russia for the treaties that they have
violated, for the horrible things that they are doing in Ukraine.
Walking away from the START Treaty undermines our interests. That is
why, again, a bipartisan group of United States Senators voted for and
put into the law the START Treaty because it is in the United States'
best interest.
So, as much as I am opposed to what Russia is doing in many areas and
agree with the gentleman on that, this amendment is the wrong way to go
about dealing with those changes, and I urge opposition.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by

[[Page H4738]]

the gentleman from Colorado will be postponed.

Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Schiff

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the appropriate place in subtitle E of title XII, insert
the following:

SEC. _. SUNSET OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General.--The Authorization for Use of Military
Force (50 U.S.C. 1541 note; Public Law 107-40) is hereby
repealed.
(b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the
date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this
Act.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Schiff) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, when Congress passed the Authorization for
Use of Military Force just days after 9/11, it provided the President
with the broad authority to strike against those who ``planned,
authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on
September 11, 2001, or harbored'' them.
That authorization no longer properly encompasses the scope of
military action that we are taking in the ongoing fight against
terrorism. While the AUMF was originally directed at a fairly narrow
range of actors, it has been used to sanction targeted strikes against
groups and militants with little relation to the individuals who
actually planned, authorized, and perpetrated the attacks on 9/11.
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution invests Congress with the
power to declare war. It is our most awesome responsibility, and it is
central to the success of our military efforts overseas. We owe it to
the men and women we send into combat to properly define and authorize
their mission.
This amendment would not immediately repeal the 2001 AUMF. Instead,
it would sunset one year from the date of enactment, providing time for
Congress and the administration to consider what authorities are needed
to protect the Nation.
I think a more narrow authorization, constrained in focus and
duration, may very well be necessary, but let's be clear. Even in the
absence of an AUMF, the administration would retain the necessary
authority to respond to threats from al Qaeda.
At a hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this morning,
Stephen Preston, General Counsel for the Department of Defense,
testified:

The AUMF is not the only authority the President has to use
force to keep us safe. The President has authority, under the
Constitution, to use military force as needed to defend the
Nation against armed attacks and imminent threat of armed
attack.

Over the course of the last year, there has been a growing
recognition of the outdated nature of the current AUMF. In Syria, for
example, one of the most violent groups on the ground is the Islamic
State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL, which grew out of al Qaeda in Iraq.
Though originally part of the al Qaeda brand, ISIL has since been
excommunicated from al Qaeda, and recent months have seen intense
fighting between ISIL and the Nusra Front, al Qaeda's preferred jihadi
group.
That raises the question of whether action against ISIL would be
covered by the current AUMF, and if it is not, do we really want to be
in a situation where Ayman al-Zawahiri is able to chose which groups
are subject to the authorization for the use of force by the United
States and which are not? That is not something I think we want to
delegate to our enemies.
Last year, during consideration of the defense appropriations bill, I
offered a similar amendment that gained the bipartisan support of 185
Members of the House, indicating strong support on both sides of the
aisle, for bringing our actions into conformity with the law.
Since then, the legally precarious nature of our military actions
under the AUMF has only become more pronounced. This amendment will
force Congress and the administration to do something about it.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Foxx). The gentleman from Texas is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Chair, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Madam Chair, as the gentleman indicates, he offered this amendment
last year, and it failed, and I believe it should fail again.
As the gentleman knows, I believe very strongly that the AUMF should
be updated. In fact, this House has voted twice to update it, but then
the Senate failed to take any action whatsoever, and I don't think
there is any reason to believe that there is any more likely prospect
of the Senate acting now than before.
So what this amendment would do, it would be to repeal the AUMF
against terrorists, without anything, anything at all to replace it
and, frankly, without any prospect of having anything to replace it, at
least in this Congress, so we would be left with no authority to take
action against terrorists bent on killing Americans.
I can't help but note, Madam Chair, that they just opened the 9/11
museum in New York in the last few days. Have we forgotten so quickly
about what this AUMF is all about?
One other factor, the President has made some comments about engaging
Congress on this issue, but he has exercised absolutely no leadership
whatsoever in doing so. What does the President propose, if he proposes
an update to the AUMF?
We have no idea. Unfortunately, that lack of leadership is all too
common for this administration.
Meanwhile, what is happening in the world? Well, terrorism is
growing, and it is getting more dangerous. I note there was a New York
Times story just 3 days ago, where the new director of the FBI says
that, before he was sworn in and got access to the latest information,
he underestimated the terrorist threat.
``I didn't have anywhere near the appreciation I got after I came
into this job just how virulent those affiliates had become,'' Mr.
Comey said. ``There are many more than I appreciated, and they are
stronger than I appreciated.''
Yet the Obama administration, Madam Chairman, wants us to believe
that terrorism is done; we have got them on the run. Everybody's going
to live happily ever after. That sort of wishful thinking is not only
unrealistic, it is dangerous.
As a matter of fact, Richard Haass, the president of the Council on
Foreign Relations, has written within the last month that:

American foreign policy is in troubling disarray.

David Brooks wrote in The New York Times:

All around, the fabric of peace and order is fraying.

I would suggest that a substantial part of that disarray and fraying
is the sort of wishful thinking that we can wish terrorism and other
problems away and go along and the world is not going to bother us.
In other words, short-term political messaging is taking precedence
over longer-term strategic interests; so repealing the current
authority that helps the military protect us against terrorism, without
something to take its place, is exactly that kind of wishful thinking.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE of California. Madam Chair, let me thank Congressman Schiff
for offering this amendment.
As this body knows, I have been offering an amendment to repeal the
Authorization for Use of Military Force for many, many years.
Congressman Schiff, this is such an important--a very important
amendment, which is critical to stopping this endless war.
Unfortunately, the Rules Committee refused to allow my bipartisan
amendment, taken from my bill, the War Authorization Review and
Determination Act, to even be considered.
For those who were not here on that sorrowful day, just 3 days after
9/11, let me just read from that short sentence--one sentence, mind
you--that

[[Page H4739]]

passed the House with just 1 hour of debate, with 420 ayes and one no.

The President is authorized to use all necessary and
appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or
persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or
aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001.

I voted against this resolution. Of course, it was the most difficult
vote of my career, but I knew then what I know now. It was too broad,
and it is open-ended.
Unfortunately, the Republican leadership has allowed a mere--what is
it--10 minutes now to debate this serious and dangerous authorization.
Supporting this amendment would be an important step to ensuring that
the President does not have a blank check to conduct endless war.
Congress must exercise its constitutional authority.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Chair, I want to respond to a couple of the points
that have been made in opposition, the first, that if the sunset goes
into effect and nothing is enacted, subsequently, there will be no
authority to take action against our enemies.
That ignores the President's authority under article II, or it is a
very, very constrained view of the President's authority under article
II as Commander in Chief, one not shared by this President, one
certainly not shared by President Bush and, indeed, one not shared by
any President, I think, in U.S. history.
This is not an effort to legislate away the threats that we face.
That cannot be done, but it is an effort to compel Congress and the
administration to bring our use of force into conformity with the laws
passed by Congress and to restore our responsibility as the body with
the power to declare war and to define the scope of any conflict.
Without a sunset, I am convinced that, a year from now, we will be
exactly where we are today, continuing to rely on an increasingly
legally unreliable AUMF, and I have confidence that, spurred on by the
necessity of acting--and we are not requiring that we act tomorrow, we
give a deadline of a year from an enactment--that should not be too
much to ask of this Congress. Congress will step up to its
responsibility.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Chair, the gentleman argues that, oh, we don't really need
these authorities, that there are other authorities.
Well, either they are important, or they are not. Either article I,
section 1 makes a difference in what the President can do to defend the
country, or it is all superfluous, and I don't know why we continue to
have these debates and declare war.
Obviously, there are different views about how far a President's
power under article II goes, but most people believe article I, section
8 means something and that for the Congress to authorize the use of
military force means something.
I would say, parenthetically, the last thing we need is to get all
balled up in court arguing about this after we have repealed the AUMF,
but have nothing to take its place.
Secondly, the gentleman argues that: well, we are not going to do
anything unless we make a deadline.
I hate to remind us all, but we have had deadlines before that we
have not exactly met. Unfortunately, repealing something this serious
without something to take its place is a dangerous game, I think, to
play.
The evolution of al Qaeda is a very serious issue, Madam Chair. We
should be having a conversation about how to update the Authorization
for Use of Military Force, but we still have to protect the country
while we are having that discussion.
Unfortunately, this puts the cart before the horse, deciding to
repeal before we know what will be used to replace it.
This amendment is not about Afghanistan, Yemen, Mali, Somalia, or
anywhere else. This amendment is about us. This is about protecting
Americans, and when the President and the military have the authority
that the Constitution allows us to give them to protect the country, we
should not abandon that lightly.
The world is still dangerous. The terrorists are still coming for us.
We need to keep this in place unless and until there is a more updated
AUMF to replace it.
Madam Chairman, I oppose the amendment and yield back the balance of
my time.

{time} 2015

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle D of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1636. ANNUAL CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE REVIEW OF COST
ESTIMATES FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

Section 1041(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239; 126 Stat. 1931) is
amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``Annual''
before ``CBO''; and
(2) by inserting ``and annually thereafter,'' after ``this
Act,''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, we all agree that transparency and
nonpartisan oversight strengthens our democracy and promotes greater
efficiency and effectiveness in government, especially in monitoring
government spending. This amendment provides every Member with an
opportunity to promote this efficiency and effectiveness through
increased transparency. The amendment would simply require the
Congressional Budget Office to update, each year, their report on the
projected costs of the United States' nuclear forces over the 10-year
budget window.
This report initially was required in the last reauthorization as a
one-time look at U.S. spending on our nuclear forces. It was released
last December and has since proven to be incredibly valuable for
Members, staff, and civil society organizations. I am sure it was
referenced by many people on the committee as this bill before us was
crafted.
The CBO's report provided an unbiased and more realistic forecast of
spending. It found that the administration's own estimates for the
costs of our nuclear weapons over the next decade were understated by
nearly $150 billion. With tight budgets, we can't afford to rely on
partial or inaccurate information, let alone such a significant
disparity.
If the United States is likely committing--at some level--to
refurbishing the nuclear triad, we all deserve to know the long-term
costs to make the strategic, effective decisions and to appreciate any
trade-offs that might be required.
Despite everyone's best intentions, these projects have a history of
egregious cost overruns. No one is better suited to help Congress
monitor these projected costs as they change and fluctuate than the
Congressional Budget Office. The amendment provides Congress with the
information that we need to make the difficult decisions.
We are scheduled to spend between one-half and two-thirds of a
trillion dollars over the next 10 years for our nuclear forces and
related programs. This spending, adjusted for inflation, is higher than
we spent at the height of the cold war.
But we can and should debate the merits of that spending. There
should be no objection from anyone about

[[Page H4740]]

knowing how much the projects will cost. It will be valuable if you
want to increase the programs. It will be valuable if you want to
decrease them. It will be valuable if you just want to fund the
existing program.
This amendment focuses on increased transparency and oversight. I
urge my colleagues to adopt it, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to his
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Madam Chair, the Blumenauer amendment is a
continuation of the gentleman's efforts to suggest that this Nation
cannot afford its nuclear deterrence requirements, which are actually
the Obama administration's requirements based on the President's
personal promises.
The gentleman, notwithstanding the views of the Obama administration,
the military leadership, and the senior civilian leadership, wants to
unilaterally cut our nuclear forces. He has earlier offered a proposal
to try to put Members of this body at odds with the National Guard in
an attempt to cut nuclear weapons funding. He has offered the REIN-IN
Act to gut the U.S. nuclear deterrent, which is relied upon by 31
American allies, despite the expanding nuclear weapons programs of
Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, and others.
It is as if the gentleman missed Vladimir Putin's massive and
unplanned nuclear weapons exercise just over a week ago and his
invasion of Ukraine and his violation of the INF Treaty and his
questionable implementation of the New START Treaty.
Perhaps the gentleman should have heard Secretary Hagel's testimony
before the Armed Services Committee this March when he said: ``Most
everybody agrees that our ability to possess nuclear weapons and the
capability that has brought us has probably done as much to deter
aggression--nuclear deterrence and the start of World War III as any
one thing.''
Or Chairman Dempsey's testimony when he was asked if, despite the
disarmament echo chamber in this town, the debate about the U.S.
nuclear posture and our strategic triad is over, he said: ``For the
record, I can speak for myself and the Joint Chiefs, and you are
correct.''
But here we are again today and again this year with a new effort to
disarm this country's deterrent. It looks harmless: Let's ask for a CBO
report.
Has the gentleman asked the CBO if it can do this annual report? I
did. They don't have the resources to do such a report.
Is the gentleman aware of the current annual reports we receive? We
have the Obama administration submit an annual report detailing these
costs. It is called the section 1043 report. We get it every year. We
then have the GAO audit that report each and every year.
These are hundreds and thousands of man-hours to produce and at great
expense each and every year. Yet let's add a third report, the
gentleman says. Why? Because maybe this report will tell us something
different than the other two reports?
What have they all shown us? They have all shown us that, by any
reasonable and informed estimate, we are spending less than 5 percent
of the defense budget on our nuclear forces--less than 5 percent. It is
a historical low.
We will spend approximately $6 trillion on defense spending over the
next 10 years. We will spend over $30 trillion, including the whole
Federal Government. How much on our nuclear forces? According to these
reports, approximately $300 billion.
I am happy to debate the gentleman on the merits of our nuclear
forces. What I am not prepared to accept is wasteful, unnecessary
annual reports just so the nuclear disarmament crowd can throw another
argument against the wall in hopes that maybe something will finally
stick that supports its lonely position that we should be unilaterally
reducing U.S. nuclear forces without regard to this Nation's security
interests or those of our allies. I urge the defeat of this amendment
and the return to common sense.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I am listening to my good friend from
Alabama, and I don't know if he has actually read my amendment.
I, too, am happy to have a debate on the level of our nuclear
spending. That is not what this amendment says. The amendment says that
we ought to have a report every year from the CBO that shows what the
accurate projections are going to be for the next 10 years.
The gentleman didn't dispute what I said, that the report that the
committee requested last year showed that it is underestimated by $150
billion.
Why don't you want the American people to know good information every
year? I am mystified by this.
If you want to increase nuclear spending, you should know the facts.
If you want to decrease nuclear spending, you deserve to have the
facts. If you just want to fund what we have got, you need to have the
facts.
The CBO showed that the Obama administration's plan for maintaining
and upgrading the nuclear arsenal is likely to cost some 66 percent
more over the next decade than senior Pentagon officials have
predicted. Virtually every major project under the National Nuclear
Security Administration's oversight is behind schedule and over budget.
I am sorry if the facts are inconvenient for the gentleman, but he
should know that if he supports the nuclear program, there will be a
day of reckoning. There is no excuse not to have the best information
available. This would simply make sure that we are requesting it from
the CBO.
And when we are talking about sums on this order of magnitude, to
pretend that the CBO can't do this analysis is silly. Of course they
can, and there is no reason they shouldn't do it. And if we approve
this amendment, it is more likely that we will have it.
I respectfully request that this amendment be approved, whether you
want to cut nuclear weapons, reduce nuclear weapons, or just fund what
we have got. I look forward to the day that we have a robust debate on
the floor of the House about what course we should take, but in the
meantime, there is no excuse not to have good information.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will
be postponed.

amendments en bloc no. 2 offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 2, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 14, 25, 29, 30,
31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 43, 68, 81, 97, 105, 122, 140, 143, 144,
146, 148, and 161 printed in part A of House Report No. 113-460,
offered by Mr. McKeon of California:

Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Kildee of Michigan

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1082. IMPROVEMENT OF FINANCIAL LITERACY.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop and
implement a training program to increase and improve
financial literacy training for incoming and outgoing
military personnel.
(b) Funding.--
(1) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 4301 for operation and maintenance,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4301, for each military department (including the Marine
Corps) is hereby increased by $2,500,000.
(2) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D--
(A) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in section
101 for shipbuilding and conversion, Navy, as specified in
the corresponding funding table in section 4101, is hereby
reduced by $5,000,000; and
(B) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in division C
for weapons activities, as specified in the corresponding
funding table in section 4701, for the B61 life extension
program and the W76 life extension program are each hereby
reduced by $2,500,000.

[[Page H4741]]

Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Rogers of Alabama

Page 520, after line 2, insert the following:

SEC. 1643. PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR SPECIFIED FUZES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Air Force may enter
into contracts for the life-of-type procurement of covered
parts of the intercontinental ballistic missile fuze.
(b) Availability of Funds.--Notwithstanding section 1502(a)
of title 31, United States Code, of the amounts authorized to
be appropriated for fiscal year 2015 by section 101 and
available for Missile Procurement, Air Force, as specified in
the funding table in section 4101, $4,500,000 shall be
available for the procurement of covered parts pursuant to
contracts entered into under subsection (a).
(c) Covered Parts Defined.--In this section, the term
``covered parts'' means commercial off-the-shelf items as
defined in section 104 of title 41, United States Code.

amendment no. 29 offered by Ms. Linda T. Saanchez of California

At the end of subtitle D of title XXVIII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 28__. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORMER AIR FORCE NORWALK DEFENSE
FUEL SUPPLY POINT, NORWALK, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Air Force
may convey, without consideration, to the City of Norwalk,
California (in this section referred to as the ``City''), all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the
real property, including any improvements thereon, consisting
of approximately 15 acres at the former Norwalk Defense Fuel
Supply Point for public purposes.
(b) Application of Environmental Laws.--Nothing in this
section shall affect the applicability of Federal, State, or
local environmental laws and regulations, including the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), to the
Department of the Air Force.
(c) Payment of Cost of Conveyance--.--
(1) Payment required.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall
require the City to cover costs to be incurred by the
Secretary, or to reimburse the Secretary for such costs
incurred by the Secretary, to carry out the conveyance under
subsection (a), including survey costs, costs for
environmental documentation related to the conveyance, and
any other administrative costs related to the conveyance. If
amounts are collected from the City in advance of the
Secretary incurring the actual costs, and the amount
collected exceeds the costs actually incurred by the
Secretary to carry out the conveyance, the Secretary shall
refund the excess amount to the City.
(2) Treatment of amounts received.--
(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), amounts received as
reimbursement under paragraph (1) shall be credited to the
fund or account that was used to cover those costs incurred
by the Secretary in carrying out the conveyance or, if the
period of availability for obligations for that appropriation
has expired, to the appropriations or fund that is currently
available to the Secretary for the same purpose. Amounts so
credited shall be merged with amounts in such fund or
account, and shall be available for the same purposes, and
subject to the same conditions and limitations, as amounts in
such fund or account.
(B) Amounts received as reimbursement under paragraph (1)
are subject to appropriations.
(d) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the property to be conveyed under subsection
(a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the
Secretary of the Air Force.
(e) Additional Terms.--The Secretary of the Air Force may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance as the Secretary considers appropriate to
protect the interests of the United States.

amendment no. 30 offered by Mr. young of Alaska

Add at the end of subtitle E of title I of division A the
following:

SEC. 142. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE OCONUS BASING OF
THE F-35A.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The Department of Defense has begun its process of
permanently stationing the F-35 at installations in the
Continental United States (in this section referred to as
``CONUS'') and forward-basing Outside the Continental United
States (in this section referred to as ``OCONUS'').
(2) The Secretary of the Air Force is assessing operating
bases for the F-35A to support Pacific Air Forces, which
includes two United States candidate bases in Alaska and
three foreign OCONUS candidate bases.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the Sense of Congress that
the Secretary of the Air Force, in the strategic basing
process for the F-35A, should place emphasis on the benefits
derived from sites that--
(1) are capable of hosting fighter-based bilateral and
multilateral training opportunities with international
partners;
(2) have sufficient airspace and range capabilities and
capacity to meet the training requirements;
(3) have existing facilities to support personnel,
operations, and logistics associated with the flying mission;
(4) have limited encroachment that would adversely impact
training or operations; and
(5) minimize the overall construction and operational
costs.

amendment no. 31 offered by mr. McKinley of west virginia

Page 47, after line 22, insert the following::

SEC. 302. INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS.

(a) Funding.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 4301 for operation and maintenance,
Defense-wide, as specified in the corresponding funding table
in section 4301, for Civil Military Programs, is hereby
increased by $55,000,000.
(b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 4301 for operation and maintenance,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4301, for the Office of the Secretary of Defense is hereby
reduced by $55,000,000.

amendment no. 34 offered by mr. bishop of utah

At the end of title III, add the following new section:

SEC. 3__. AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS TO
SUPPORT CONDUCTING A MILITARY AIR SHOW OR OPEN
HOUSE.

(a) Agreements Authorized.--Chapter 155 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:

``Sec. 2616. Military air show or open house: agreements with
local civic organization; authority to charge nominal
admission fee

``(a) Agreements Authorized.--The Secretary concerned may
enter into a contract or agreement with a non-Federal civic
organization to conduct or support an air show or open house
to feature any unit, aircraft, vessel, equipment, or members
of the armed forces under the jurisdiction of that Secretary.
``(b) Nominal Fees Authorized.--The Secretary concerned may
charge, or authorize a civic organization with which the
Secretary has entered into a contract or agreement under
subsection (a) to charge, the public a nominal admission fee
(to be determined by the Secretary) to attend a military air
show or open house.
``(c) Treatment of Fees.--Amounts collected as admission
fees under subsection (b) for an air show or open house may
be retained to cover costs associated with the air show or
open house, including costs associated with parking for the
air show or open house or the provision of temporary shuttle-
bus service for air show or open house visitors. If costs are
incurred and covered in advance of the collection of the
fees, amounts collected shall be credited to the fund or
account that was used to cover those costs. Amounts so
credited shall be merged with amounts in such fund or
account, and shall be available for the same purposes, and
subject to the same conditions and limitations, as amounts in
such fund or account. Any amounts so credited under this
subsection shall be subject to the Appropriations process of
the United States Congress.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``2616. Military air show or open house: agreements with local civic
organization; authority to charge nominal admission
fee.''.

amendment no. 35 offered by mr. swalwell of california

Page 72, after line 21, insert the following:

SEC. 354. GIFTS MADE FOR THE BENEFIT OF MILITARY MUSICAL
UNITS.

Section 974(d)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``The Secretary concerned may'' and
inserting ``The Secretary concerned shall''.

amendment no. 36 offered by mr. conaway of texas

At the end of subtitle A of title V, add the following new
section

SEC. 5__. DEFERRED RETIREMENT OF CHAPLAINS.

Section 1253 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Deferred Retirement of Chaplains.--(1) The Secretary
of the military department concerned may, subject to
paragraphs (2) and (3), defer the retirement under subsection
(a) of an officer who is appointed or designated as a
chaplain if the Secretary determines that such deferral is in
the best interest of the military department concerned.
``(2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), a deferment
under this subsection may not extend beyond the first day of
the month following the month in which the officer becomes 68
years of age.
``(3) The Secretary of the military department concerned
may extend a deferment under this subsection beyond the day
referred to in paragraph (2) if the Secretary determines that
extension of the deferment is necessary for the needs of the
military department concerned. Such an extension shall be
made on a case-by-case basis and shall be for such period as
the Secretary considers appropriate.''.

amendment no. 37 offered by mr. griffith of virginia

At the end of subtitle A of title V, insert the following:

[[Page H4742]]

SEC. 514. COMPLIANCE WITH EFFICIENCIES DIRECTIVE.

By not later than December 31, 2015, the Secretary of
Defense shall ensure that the number of flag officers and
generals are reduced to comply with the Department of Defense
efficiencies directive dated March 14, 2011.

amendment no. 38 offered by mr. mckinley of west virginia

At the end of subtitle B of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. ELECTRONIC TRACKING OF CERTAIN RESERVE DUTY.

The Secretary of Defense shall establish an electronic
means by which members of the Ready Reserve of the Armed
Forces can track their operational active-duty service
performed after January 28, 2008, under section 12301(a),
12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304 of title 10, United
States Code. The tour calculator shall specify early
retirement credit authorized for each qualifying tour of
active duty, as well as cumulative early reserve retirement
credit authorized to date under section 12731(f) of such
title.

amendment no. 39 offered by mr. israel of new york

At the end of subtitle B of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. NATIONAL GUARD CYBER PROTECTION TEAMS.

(a) Progress Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Chief of the National Guard
Bureau shall submit to the congressional defense committees a
report on the progress made by the Army National Guard to
establish 10 Cyber Protection Teams composed of members of
the National Guard to perform duties relating to analysis and
protection in support of programs to prepare for and respond
to emergencies involving an attack or natural disaster
impacting a computer, electronic, or cyber network.
(b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall
include the following:
(1) A timeframe of when stationing of the Cyber Protection
Teams will be finalized.
(2) A timeframe of activation of the Cyber Protection Teams
and whether the teams will be activated at the same time or
staggered over time.
(3) A description of what manning and basing requirements
have been established.
(4) The number and location of nominations received for a
Cyber Protection Team and the activation date estimate
provided in each nomination.
(5) An assessment of the range of stated cost projections
included in the nominations.
(6) An assessment of any identified patterns regarding ease
or difficulty of staffing individuals with required
credentials within particular regions.
(7) Any additional information deemed relevant by the Chief
of the National Guard Bureau.
(c) Form of Report.--The report required by subsection (a)
shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a
classified annex.

amendment no. 43 offered by mr. grayson of florida

At the end of subtitle D of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. REVISION TO REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE POLICY ON RETENTION OF EVIDENCE IN A
SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE TO ALLOW RETURN OF PERSONAL
PROPERTY UPON COMPLETION OF RELATED
PROCEEDINGS.

Section 586 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81; 125 Stat. 1435; 10
U.S.C. 1561 note) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(f) Return of Personal Property Upon Completion of
Related Proceedings.--Notwithstanding subsection (c)(4)(A),
personal property retained as evidence in connection with an
incident of sexual assault involving a member of the Armed
Forces may be returned to the rightful owner of such property
after the conclusion of all legal, adverse action, and
administrative proceedings related to such incident.''.

amendment no. 68 offered by mr. israel of new york

Page 195, after line 7, add the following new section:

SEC. 729. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES BY MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) mental health and substance use disorders, traumatic
brain injury, and suicide are being experienced at alarming
levels among members of the Armed Forces;
(2) members of the Armed Forces should have adequate access
to the support and care they need;
(3) public-private mental health partnerships can provide
the Department of Defense with an enhanced and unique
capability to treat members of the Armed Forces;
(4) the Department of Defense should fully implement the
pilot program authorized under section 706 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (10 U.S.C.
10101 note; Public Law 112-239) for purposes of enhancing the
efforts of the Department of Defense in research, treatment,
education, and outreach on mental health and substance use
disorders and traumatic brain injury in members of the
National Guard and Reserves.

amendment no. 81 offered by mr. grayson of florida

At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:

SEC. 827. DEBARMENT REQUIRED OF PERSONS CONVICTED OF
FRAUDULENT USE OF ``MADE IN AMERICA'' LABELS.

(a) Debarment Required.--Subsection (a) of section 2410f of
title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking ``the
Secretary shall'' and all that follows through the period and
inserting ``the person shall be debarred from contracting
with the Department of Defense unless the Secretary waives
the debarment under subsection (b).''.
(b) Waiver Authority and Notification Requirement.--Section
2410f of such title is further amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (d); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new
subsections:
``(b) Waiver for National Security.--The Secretary may
waive a debarment required by subsection (a) if the Secretary
determines that the exercise of such a waiver would be in the
national security interests of the United States.
``(c) Notification.--The Secretary shall notify the
congressional defense committees annually, not later than
March 1 of each year, of any exercise of the waiver authority
under subsection (b).''.
(c) Technical Amendments.--Section 2410f of such title is
further amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting `` `Debarment
Required.--'' after ``(a)'' ; and
(2) in subsection (d), as redesignated by subsection (b),
by inserting ``Definition.--'' before ``In this section''.

amendment no. 97 offered by mr. young of alaska

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

SEC. 1065. BUSINESS CASE ANALYSIS OF THE CREATION OF AN
ACTIVE DUTY ASSOCIATION FOR THE 68TH AIR
REFUELING WING.

(a) Business Case Analysis.--The Secretary of the Air Force
shall conduct a business case analysis of the creation of a
4-PAA (Personnel-Only) KC-135R active association with the
168th Air Refueling Wing. Such analysis shall include
consideration of--
(1) any efficiencies or cost savings achieved assuming the
168th Air Refueling Wing meets 100 percent of current air
refueling requirements after the active association is in
place;
(2) improvements to the mission requirements of the 168th
Air Refueling Wing and Air Mobility Command; and
(3) effects on the operations of Air Mobility Command.
(b) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report on the business case analysis conducted under
subsection (a).

amendment no. 105 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

At the appropriate place in title X, insert the following
new section:

SEC. __. REPORT ON CERTAIN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS AND
TECHNOLOGY AND CRITICAL NATIONAL SECURITY
INFRASTRUCTURE.

(a) Notification Required.--The Secretary of Defense and
the Director of National Intelligence shall each submit to
the appropriate congressional committees a notification of
each instance in which the Secretary or the Director
determine through analysis or reporting that an information
technology or telecommunications component from a company
suspected of being influenced by a foreign country, or a
suspected affiliate of such a company, is competing for or
has been awarded a contract to include the technology of such
company or such affiliate into a covered network.
(b) Time of Notification.--Each notification required under
subsection (a) shall be submitted not later than 30 days
after the date on which the Secretary or the Director makes a
determination described in such subsection.
(c) Elements of Notification.--Each notification submitted
under subsection (a) shall include--
(1) a description of the instance described in subsection
(a), including an identification of the company of interest
and the covered network affected;
(2) an analysis of the potential risks and the actions that
can be taken to mitigate such risks; and
(3) a description of any follow up or other response
actions to be taken.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
(A) the congressional defense committees;
(B) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the
House of Representatives; and
(C) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.
(2) Covered network.--The term ``covered network''
includes--
(A) information technology or telecommunications networks
of the Department of Defense or the intelligence community;
and
(B) information technology or telecommunications networks
of network operators supporting systems in proximity to
Department of Defense or intelligence community facilities.
(3) Intelligence community.--The term ``intelligence
community'' has the meaning

[[Page H4743]]

given the term in section 3(4) of the National Security Act
of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4)).

amendment no. 122 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

At the end of subtitle C of title XII of division A, add
the following:

SEC. _. PLAN TO REDUCE RUSSIAN FEDERATION NUCLEAR FORCE
DEPENDENCIES ON UKRAINE.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Russian Federation relies on the Ukrainian defense
industry for certain elements of its land-based nuclear
ballistic missile force, the Russian Strategic Rocket Force.
(2) Press reports indicate that Ukraine's Yuzhnoye Design
Bureau played a prominent role during the Soviet era in
producing heavy silo-based Intercontinental Ballistic
Missiles.
(3) These land-based missiles include the RS-20 ICBM, known
by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Designator, SATAN.
(4) This missile has been reported to be deployed with as
many as 10 independently targetable nuclear reentry vehicles.
(5) In a press conference on May 13, 2014, Russian
Federation Deputy Prime Minster Dmitry Rogozin stated that
his country would discontinue the sale of Russia-made rocket
engines to the United States if they will be used for
military purposes.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the United States Government should promptly enter into
discussions with the Government of Ukraine to ensure a halt
to the activities of the Yuzhnoye Design Bureau and any other
Ukrainian industry that supports the military or military
industrial base of the Russian Federation while Russia is
violating its commitments under the Budapest Memorandum,
illegally occupying Ukrainian territory and supporting groups
that are inciting violence and fomenting secessionist
movements in Ukraine.
(c) Plan.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in
conjunction with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a plan on how the United
States Government intends to work with the Government of
Ukraine to accomplish the goals expressed in subsection (b)
and any recommendations it has for how the United States and
its allies could benefit from the capability of the Yuzhnoye
Design Bureau.

amendment no. 140 offered by mr. grayson of florida

At the end of subtitle A of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. __. SPACE PROTECTION STRATEGY.

Section 911(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (10 U.S.C. 2271 note) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Fiscal years 2026 through 2030.''.

amendment no. 143 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

Page 516, after line 10, insert the following:

SEC. 1636. IMPROVEMENT TO BIENNIAL ASSESSMENT ON DELIVERY
PLATFORMS FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND THE NUCLEAR
COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM.

Section 492(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by inserting ``, and the ability to meet operational
availability requirements for,'' after ``military
effectiveness of''.

amendment no. 144 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

At the end of subtitle D of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1636. REPORTS AND BRIEFINGS OF STRATEGIC ADVISORY GROUP.

Not later than 30 days after the date on which the
President submits to Congress, under section 1105 of title
31, United States Code, a budget for a fiscal year after
fiscal year 2015, the Commander of the United States
Strategic Command shall submit to the congressional defense
committees each report and briefing provided by the Strategic
Advisory Group established pursuant to the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), including any subgroup thereof
and any successor advisory group, to the Commander during the
one-year period preceding the date of such submission. The
Commander may include with each such submission any
additional views the Commander determines appropriate.

amendment no. 146 offered by mr. israel of new york

Page 508, after line 9, add the following new section:

SEC. 1622. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ROLE OF NATIONAL GUARD
IN DEFENSE OF UNITED STATES AGAINST CYBER
ATTACKS.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) members of the National Guard may possess knowledge of
critical infrastructure in the States in which the members
serve that may be of value for purposes of defending such
infrastructure against cyber threats;
(2) traditional members of the National Guard and National
Guard technicians may have experience in both the private and
public sector that could benefit the readiness of the
Department of Defense's cyber force and the development of
cyber capabilities;
(3) the long-standing relationship the National Guard has
with local and civil authorities may be beneficial for
purposes of providing for a coordinated response to a cyber
attack and defending against cyber threats;
(4) the States are already working to establish cyber
partnerships with the National Guard; and
(5) the National Guard has a role in the defense of the
United States against cyber threats and consideration should
be given to how the National Guard might be integrated into a
comprehensive national approach for cyber defense.

amendment no. 148 offered by mr. brooks of alabama

At the end of subtitle E of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1643. PLAN TO COUNTER CERTAIN GROUND-LAUNCHED BALLISTIC
MISSILES AND CRUISE MISSILES.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On March 5, 2014, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy testified
before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate that
``[w]e are concerned about Russian activity that appears to
be inconsistent with the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces
Treaty. We've raised the issue with Russia. They provided an
answer that was not satisfactory to us, and we will, we told
them that the issue is not closed, and we will continue to
raise this.'' Congress shares this concern regarding Russian
behavior that is ``inconsistent with'' or in violation or
circumvention of the INF Treaty.
(2) The Commander of the U.S. European Command, and Supreme
Allied Commander Europe, stated on April 2, 2014, that ``a
weapon capability that violates the INF, that is introduced
into the greater European land mass is absolutely a tool that
will have to be dealt with. . .I would not judge how the
alliance will choose to react, but I would say they will have
to consider what to do about it. . .It can't go
unanswered.''.
(3) The Director of the Missile Defense Agency stated on
March 25, 2014, that Aegis Ashore missile defense sites,
including those to be deployed in the Republic of Poland and
the Republic of Romania, could be reconfigured to deal with
the threat of intermediate-range ground launched cruise
missiles with modest changes to ``the software, [and] with a
minor hardware addition.''.
(4) The ``Report on Conventional Prompt Global Strike
Options if Exempt from the Restrictions of the Intermediate-
Range Nuclear Forces Treaty Between the United States of
America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics''
provided to the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives in September 2013 by the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff stated, ``[i]n the absence of the INF
Treaty, four types of weapons systems could assist in closing
the existing JROC-validated capability gap: (1) Modifications
to existing short range or tactical weapon systems to extend
range; (2) Forward-based, ground-launched cruise missiles
(GLCMs); (3) Forward-based, ground-launched intermediate-
range ballistic missiles (IRBMs); and (4) Forward-based,
ground-launched intermediate-range missiles with trajectory
shaping vehicles (TSVs).''.
(5) The report further stated that, ``[b]ecause of INF
restrictions, examination of prohibited concepts has not been
performed by industry or the Services. Trade studies
regarding capability, affordability, and development
timelines would have to be completed prior to providing an
accurate estimate of cost, technology risk, and timeline
advantages that could be achieved with respect to these
concepts. Extensive knowledge could be leveraged from past
and current land- and sea-based systems to assist in
potential development and deployment of these currently
prohibited concepts.''.
(6) President Obama stated in Prague in April 2009 that
``Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words
must mean something.''.
(7) The Nuclear Posture Review of 2010 stated, ``it is not
enough to detect non-compliance; violators must know that
they will face consequences when they are caught.''.
(8) The July 2010 Verifiability Assessment released by the
Department of State on the New START Treaty, and as quoted in
a hearing of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate,
stated: ``[t]he costs and risks of Russian cheating or
breakout, on the other hand, would likely be very
significant'' and that the Russian Federation would be
unlikely to cheat because of the ``financial and
international political costs of such an action.''.
(b) Plan for Testing of Aegis Ashore.--
(1) In general.--The Director of the Missile Defense Agency
shall develop a plan to test, by not later than December 31,
2015, the capability of the Aegis Ashore system, including
pursuant to any appropriate modifications to the hardware or
software of such system, to counter intermediate-range ground
launched cruise missiles.
(2) Submission.--Not later than 120 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Director shall submit to the
congressional defense committees the plan under paragraph
(1), including, if determined appropriate by the Director,
whether the Director determines that such plan should be
implemented.
(c) Plan to Develop Certain Ground-launched Ballistic
Missiles and Cruise Missiles.--If, as of the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Russian Federation is not in
complete and verifiable compliance

[[Page H4744]]

with its obligations under the INF Treaty, the Secretary of
Defense shall--
(1) develop a plan for the research and development of
intermediate range ballistic and cruise missiles, including
through trade studies regarding capability, affordability,
and development timelines, for which there are validated
military requirements; and
(2) by not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, submit to the congressional defense
committees the plan developed under paragraph (1), including,
if determined appropriate by the Secretary, whether the
Secretary determines that such plan should be implemented.
(d) INF Treaty Defined.--The term ``INF Treaty'' means the
Treaty Between the United States of America and the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their
Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, commonly
referred to as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF)
Treaty, signed at Washington December 8, 1987, and entered
into force June 1, 1988.

amendment no. 161 offered by mr. kildee of michigan

At the end of subtitle C of title VII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 729. EVALUATION OF WOUNDED WARRIOR CARE AND TRANSITION
PROGRAM.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
gaining new ideas and an objective perspective are critical
to addressing issues regarding the treatment of wounded
warriors.
(b) Evaluation.--The Secretary of Defense shall seek to
enter into a contract with a private organization to evaluate
the wounded warrior care and transition program of the
Department of Defense. Such evaluation shall identify
deficiencies in the treatment of wounded warriors and offer
recommendations to the Secretary of Defense and Congress to
improve such treatment. The Secretary may not award a
contract to a private organization to carry out such
evaluation unless the private organization received less than
20 percent of the annual revenue of the organization during
the previous five years from contracts with the Department of
Defense or the Department of Veterans Affairs.
(c) Funding.--
(1) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 1405 for the Defense Health Program,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4501, is hereby increased by $20,000,000.
(2) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D--
(A) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in section
101 for shipbuilding and conversion, Navy, as specified in
the corresponding funding table in section 4101, is hereby
reduced by $10,000,000; and
(B) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in division C
for weapons activities, as specified in the corresponding
funding table in section 4701, for the B61 life extension
program and the W76 life extension program are each hereby
reduced by $5,000,000.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
Swalwell) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments
en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the
minority.
At this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
DeSantis) for the purpose of a colloquy.
Mr. DeSANTIS. Madam Chair, I rise to commend the Armed Services
Committee for their hard work. There is a lot going on, and they
deserve a lot of credit.
I just wanted to take the opportunity to highlight an aircraft that
is a vital component of our national security, and particularly to our
Navy. That is the E-2D Hawkeye, which is the Navy's carrier-based
airborne early warning and battle management command and control
system. It provides theater air and missile defense, synthesizing
information from multiple onboard and off-board sensors, making complex
tactical decisions, and disseminating actionable information to Joint
Forces.
Our ability to take an aircraft carrier and move that anywhere in the
world and then project power from there is critical to our national
security, and the E-2D serves as the eyes of the fleet, protecting our
assets and our forces. I just want to say that I think it is vitally
important that our fleet is equipped with these.
There is no better person that I know of in this body to speak to the
importance of the E-2D than my colleague from Oklahoma, Jim
Bridenstine, who is also a lieutenant commander in the Navy Reserve and
is a former E-2 pilot himself. So I will yield to my friend from
Oklahoma to discuss the importance of this aircraft.
Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Well, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from
Florida, who is championing a cause that is near and dear to my heart,
a platform that I have spent many hours in. I flew combat off of an
aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf and the north Arabian Sea. In the
E-2 Hawkeye, I flew combat in Afghanistan, flew combat in Iraq.

{time} 2030

I can tell you that the missions that we did, airborne battle space
command and control, and control of the assets that provide close air
support to our troops on the ground, was critically important to the
mission in both theaters. I can tell you that we did air intercept
control in order to have dominance of the skies. We provided airborne
early warning.
It is not without reason that the E-2 Hawkeye is the first aircraft
that comes off of the aircraft carrier when we launch a mission, and it
is the last aircraft to come back. We are the first ones to the fight,
and we are the last ones home.
It is also not without reason that when the E-2 gets airborne, when
the rest of the air wing is on the deck and the ship is steaming across
the ocean, the Hawkeye is always working because we are that airborne
early warning asset that can provide threat recognition to the carrier
battle group.
The Hawkeye is a critical node in America's force structure, and I
would say that I was also involved in generating the requirements for
the next generation Hawkeye, the E-2D. And Congress has recognized the
value of the E-2D by providing the Navy with multiyear procurement
authority. Multiyear procurement drives down costs by enabling block
buys, improving supplier surety, and stabilizing production lines. As
my friend from Florida knows, the Navy requested four E-2Ds for the
fiscal year 15 budget request, which is one less anticipated.
I would just like to thank the chairman of the committee for being
able to work with us on ensuring that we can get another E-2D Hawkeye.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlelady from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
Ms. BONAMICI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I rise today to express support for strong Buy
American provisions within the Department of Defense procurement
policy. I would like to thank Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith,
and Ranking Member Swalwell for engaging in this colloquy to discuss
our shared goal to promote increased procurement of domestically
manufactured solar devices for use by the Department of Defense.
The Buy American Act is especially important when it comes to
supporting nascent American industries, and strong Buy American
policies can assist development of domestic manufacturing capability
with regard to renewable energy. Currently, the Department of Defense
is required to comply with Buy American Act provisions for procurement
of energy produced from solar panels if those panels are located on
government property and the electricity produced by the panels is
reserved exclusively for use by the Department.
Recently, we have witnessed the development of large-scale solar
installations that are not located on government property, though the
electricity produced is still exclusively used by the Department of
Defense. I support a minor language change that would require DOD's
procurement process to comply with the Buy American Act for electricity
that is exclusively used by the Department of Defense or is generated
from solar devices located on government property.
This small change is worthy of support. The Congressional Budget
Office has scored this proposal as costing $2 million over a 10-year
budget window, and my amendment was not made in order because of this
score. I understand CBO rules, but I strongly submit that this
investment in domestic manufacturing not only strengthens our energy
independence, but also strengthens our industrial base. I hope the
chairman and ranking member will work with me to advance this important
issue.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for her work in this

[[Page H4745]]

area, and I appreciate her efforts to advance U.S. manufacturing and
our industrial base, and I thank her, again, for her hard work on this
issue. I look forward to working with you as we move forward on this.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Chairman, I thank my good friend for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I would like to address two amendments that I offered
that are included in the en bloc amendment, one that deals with
expanding financial resources and tools for servicemembers and one that
funds an independent study to improve wounded warrior care.
For too long, unscrupulous lenders have targeted servicemembers on
military bases with financial products that could have long-term
negative impacts on their family's financial security. Inadequate
financial understanding or literacy training on some of these financial
products can lead to financial difficulty for servicemembers. Many
servicemembers often require security clearances to perform their
duties, and financial difficulties and the loss of a clearance can have
an enormous impact on military combat readiness.
This first amendment that I offer would allocate $10 million to
expand financial literacy resources for incoming and transitioning
servicemembers to ensure that they are not unfairly targeted by
predatory lenders.
The other amendment that is included is an important one to fund an
independent study to improve wounded warrior care. While the DOD is
still confronting significant challenges and issues regarding its care
and transition of wounded warriors, and while improvements have been
made, it is obvious that wounded warriors are still failing to receive
the care that they need and that they deserve. Caring for these
individuals who have served honorably should--and I know always will
be--one of our most solemn duties.
For this reason, a review, a comprehensive review, an independent and
comprehensive review and study of this type should be awarded to an
entity that is free of any current obligation; 20 percent of its
revenues in the last several years should not have come from contracts
from the DOD or the VA, ensuring independence. It is really important
that we take a close look at how we are providing services to these
servicemembers, and this independent study would do so.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I will continue to reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Saanchez).
Ms. LINDA T. SAANCHEZ of California. Madam Chairman, I rise today in
support of my amendment to H.R. 4435, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015.
It facilitates the transfer of a portion of the U.S. Air Force
Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply Point, also known as the Norwalk Tank Farm,
to the city of Norwalk. If enacted, it would allow 15 acres of the 51-
acre area to be designated for public purposes and transferred to city
hands. City officials have worked tirelessly for over a decade, and
this amendment is a reflection of the compromise reached by the U.S.
Air Force and the city of Norwalk.
My amendment is of significant importance for my district. Once this
land is transferred, this currently blighted property will mean real
opportunity for the city of Norwalk and the surrounding communities.
This property is currently located next to an elementary school and a
child care learning center. Once the land has been completely cleaned
and remediated and the park is built, children will have somewhere safe
to go after school and on weekends.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on my amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Ben Ray Lujaan).
Mr. BEN RAY LUJAAN of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, the ability of our
national labs to meet their mission relies on the strength of their
foundational capabilities. I submitted an amendment that would give the
Directors of our national laboratories the authority to accept grant
funding from nonprofits and foundations for scientific research that
supports the core missions of these labs.
After discussion with the committee staff, rather than offering this
amendment tonight, I look forward to working with Chairman Rogers of
the Strategic Forces Subcommittee and Chairman McKeon and Ranking
Member Smith of the Armed Services Committee to find an acceptable
solution on this issue.
I also want to thank Mr. McKeon for his service and his time. It has
really been an honor to get to know him, and I continue to look forward
to working with him for many years to come.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BEN RAY LUJAAN of New Mexico. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. I thank the gentleman from New Mexico. I agree
with the importance of the national labs. I look forward to working
with you to find ways to strengthen their capabilities and meet their
important missions. I expect we will be able to find a way to ensure
nonprofits have access to our national laboratories without using
defense funding to subsidize such work.
Mr. BEN RAY LUJAAN of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, I appreciate all
the staff's time on this.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Nolan).
Mr. NOLAN. Madam Chairman, my amendment prohibits construction of any
projects in Afghanistan over $500,000--unless the U.S. Government can
conduct proper audits, inspection, and oversight.
Up to $79 billion has been authorized for new projects in this bill,
most of which are outside the area in which our personnel can travel
and operate safely and therefore will most likely go uninspected and
unaudited. To date, $60 billion of the $100 billion of these so-called
nation-building projects are completely unaccounted for.
The blue area here in this first chart shows where our military and
civilian personnel were allowed to travel and operate safely in the
year 2009. The blue area in the second chart shows how dramatically the
safe areas have been reduced.
Moreover, since traditional banking services do not exist in these
non-blue, non-safe areas, contracts are financed with truckloads of
cash. It is the perfect recipe for fraud, graft, and abuse. It is time
to stop it. Our Nation's taxpayers and our soldiers deserve better.
Madam Chairman, Members of the House, I urge adoption of the
amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en
bloc amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my
amendment to fix the Department of Defense (DoD) policy with respect to
military bands.
I want to thank my friend, Congressman Patrick Meehan, for
cosponsoring this important amendment I also want to thank Chairman
McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for their support.
For decades, military musical units have accepted assistance from
community organizations to travel and perform at public events such as
ceremonies and parades at no cost to taxpayers.
Last April, the DoD decided to no longer accept such support, forcing
military bands to cancel numerous public performances across the
country.
We learned that this new policy was issued because gifts from
community organizations were not credited to the appropriate account.
To combat this problem, last year Congressman Meehan and I sponsored
an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2014 (NDAA) in order to credit these contributions to the appropriate
accounts, and thus, allow military bands to perform at community
events. Our amendment was adopted. A version was included as Section
351 of NDAA, as enacted into Public Law 133-66.

[[Page H4746]]

Despite the intent of the amendment, it has come to our attention
that, although the Secretary of Defense is allowed to accept outside
donations, his office likely will continue the status quo and prevent
military musical units from receiving assistance from outside
organizations.
It is hard to believe that during a time of tight budgets DoD would
reject assistance from community organizations to facilitate band
performances.
It would be in the financial interest of DoD to continue to allow
military bands, such as the Marine bands, to travel with the assistance
of community organizations.
Additionally, public performances by military bands bring a sense of
patriotism and community to our cities and towns.
It also increases goodwill and helps to enliven community events,
increasing attendance and economic activity.
The intent behind the Section 351 of Public Law 133-66 is clear--to
allow bands, like the Marine Band, to perform at community events when
the expenses are fully covered by a private organization.
In early May, Congressman Meehan and I sent a letter to DoD
expressing our frustration with it continuing the current policy. We
have not yet received a response from DoD on this issue.
Since DoD apparently is choosing not to abide by the intent of our
original amendment, we offered this new amendment to require DoD to
accept gifts for military bands. Our amendment removes the discretion
of DoD.
This simple amendment will once again allow military musical units to
travel and perform at community events at no cost to taxpayers.
I urge all Members to support the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 26 will
not be offered.
The Chair understands that amendment No. 27 will not be offered.

Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 28
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle D of title XXXI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 3143. BUDGET INCREASE FOR DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.

(a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 3102 for defense environmental
cleanup, as specified in the corresponding funding table in
section 4701, is hereby increased by $20,000,000.
(b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amounts authorized to be
appropriated in this title for weapons activities, as
specified in the corresponding funding table in section 4701,
for Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield
campaign is hereby reduced by $20,000,000.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Hastings) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Madam Chair, our nuclear weapons production programs played a pivotal
role in our Nation's defense for decades. It helped end World War II,
and it helped end the cold war. But these programs created a large
amount of radioactive nuclear waste, and the Federal Government has a
legal responsibility to clean up this waste.
This amendment restores a portion of the proposed reduction for the
Department of Energy's environmental management program, which is
tasked with cleaning up the nuclear defense waste at sites across our
country.
Hanford's Richland Operations Office in my district is one of the
defense nuclear waste sites, and it is facing a cut of over $100
million, putting cleanup progress and legally enforceable cleanup
commitments at risk.
Even at a time of tight budget constraints, the Federal Government
must meet existing legal obligations to clean up its defense nuclear
waste. Existing legal obligations of the Federal Government, like
cleanup of its nuclear waste sites, must be met before funding optional
activities, regardless of how valuable those other activities may be.
By adding back $20 million for the defense environmental management
program--a small portion of the overall cut--this amendment helps to
ensure that cleanup can move forward safely, efficiently, and in a
timely manner.

{time} 2045

It would help ensure that the Richland Operations Office can complete
the successful and nearly complete River Corridor Closure Project and
meet cleanup commitments.
I might add that the river I am talking about that this River
Corridor Closure Project abuts is the Columbia River, which is a main
waterway through central Washington, so I ask my colleagues to support
this amendment.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I claim the time in
opposition on behalf of the ranking member.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield myself 2 minutes.
I rise in opposition to the Hastings amendment, and while I
understand and appreciate the gentleman from Washington's interest in
environmental cleanup, I am afraid that it does so at the expense of
research.
Inertial confinement fusion is critical to our national security. It
keeps our nuclear weapons safe and ready at a time of growing threats
across the globe.
This amendment does not just target research at the National Ignition
Facility--which is in my congressional district, which includes
Livermore, California--it also tries to cut the whole budget for
inertial confinement fusion.
It ropes in the Z facility at Sandia National Laboratories in New
Mexico and the OMEGA laser at the University of Rochester in New York.
Budgets right now are tight, and I know all Members would welcome the
chance to add more money to priorities they believe in, but it is a
mistake to try to fund such priorities by shortchanging critical
science that helps us in our national security mission, as well as meet
our future energy needs.
This science keeps us safe. It will also eventually revolutionize how
we think about and produce energy, and we can't let ourselves fall
behind or cede leadership to other nations who are making large
investments in inertial confinement fusion, including France, Russia,
and China.
I ask all Members to reject this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Chair, I am prepared to close, and
so I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of
my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance
of my time.
I simply want to say, Madam Chair, that the environmental management
program is a program that is the result of our war efforts going back
to the Second World War. As I mentioned in my opening statement, we won
the Second World War because of this activity and won the cold war
largely because of this activity, but developing nuclear weapons
creates a tremendous amount of waste, and that is the responsibility of
the Federal Government.
I mentioned Hanford, and I mentioned one of the projects at Hanford,
and I want to remind my colleagues of how much nuclear waste is stored
underground at Hanford.
Fifty-six million gallons of radioactive/hazardous waste is stored
underground on the upper plateau at Hanford. If you were to quantify
how much 56 million gallons would be, it would fill up over 20 House
chambers.
This amendment does not address particularly that program, but I just
want to remind my colleagues that cleaning up this waste is a massive,
massive taking, and it must be done, simply because what the programs
did initially by ending the war, so I urge

[[Page H4747]]

my colleagues to support this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 590, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 3 consisting of amendment Nos. 40, 42, 44, 45,
46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 130, 133, 139, and
141 printed in part A of House Report No. 113-460, offered by Mr.
McKeon of California:

amendment no. 40 offered by mr. Coffman of colorado

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

SEC. 5__. ENHANCEMENT OF PARTICIPATION OF MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONALS IN BOARDS FOR CORRECTION OF
MILITARY RECORDS AND BOARDS FOR REVIEW OF
DISCHARGE OR DISMISSAL OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES.

(a) Boards for Correction of Military Records.--Section
1552 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new
subsection (g):
``(g) Any medical advisory opinion issued to a board
established under subsection (a)(1) with respect to a member
or former member of the armed forces who was diagnosed while
serving in the armed forces as experiencing a mental health
disorder shall include the opinion of a clinical psychologist
or psychiatrist if the request for correction of records
concerned relates to a mental health disorder.''.
(b) Boards for Review of Discharge or Dismissal.--
(1) Review for certain former members with ptsd or tbi.--
Subsection (d)(1) of section 1553 of such title is amended by
striking ``physician, clinical psychologist, or
psychiatrist'' the second place it appears and inserting
``clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with
training on mental health issues connected with post
traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury (as
applicable)''.
(2) Review for certain former members with mental health
diagnoses.--Such section is further amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(e) In the case of a former member of the armed forces
(other than a former member covered by subsection (d)) who
was diagnosed while serving in the armed forces as
experiencing a mental health disorder, a board established
under this section to review the former member's discharge or
dismissal shall include a member who is a clinical
psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with special
training on mental health disorders.''.

amendment no. 42 offered by mr. thompson of pennsylvania

Page 108, after line 17, insert the following:

SEC. 528. PRELIMINARY MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 31 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 520d. Preliminary mental health assessments

``(a) Provision of Mental Health Assessment.--Before any
individual enlists in an armed force or is commissioned as an
officer in an armed force, the Secretary concerned shall
provide the individual with a mental health assessment. The
Secretary shall use such results as a baseline for any
subsequent mental health examinations, including such
examinations provided under sections 1074f and 1074m of this
title.
``(b) Use of Assessment.--The Secretary may not consider
the results of a mental health assessment conducted under
subsection (a) in determining the assignment or promotion of
a member of the Armed Forces.
``(c) Application of Privacy Laws.--With respect to
applicable laws and regulations relating to the privacy of
information, the Secretary shall treat a mental health
assessment conducted under subsection (a) in the same manner
as the medical records of a member of the armed forces.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding after the item
relating to section 520c the following new item:

``520d. Preliminary mental health assessments.''.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the National Institute of Mental
Health of the National Institutes of Health shall submit to
Congress and the Secretary of Defense a report on preliminary
mental health assessments of members of the Armed Forces.
(2) Matters included.--The report under paragraph (1) shall
include the following:
(A) Recommendations with respect to establishing a
preliminary mental health assessment of members of the Armed
Forces to bring mental health screenings to parity with
physical screenings of members.
(B) Recommendations with respect to the composition of the
mental health assessment, best practices, and how to track
assessment changes relating to traumatic brain injuries,
post-traumatic stress disorder, and other conditions.
(3) Coordination.--The National Institute of Mental Health
shall carry out paragraph (1) in coordination with the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Director of the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, the surgeons general of
the military departments, and other relevant experts.

amendment no. 44 offered by ms. velaazquez of new york

At the end of subtitle D of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. ESTABLISHMENT OF PHONE SERVICE FOR PROMPT REPORTING
OF HAZING INVOLVING A MEMBER OF THE ARMED
FORCES.

(a) Establishment Required.--The Secretary concerned (as
defined in section 101(a)(9) of title 10, United States Code)
shall develop and implement a phone service through which an
individual can anonymously call to report incidents of hazing
in that branch of the Armed Forces.
(b) Hazing Described.--For purposes of carrying out this
section, the Secretary of Defense (and the Secretary of the
Department in which the Coast Guard operates) shall use the
definition of hazing contained in the August 28, 1997,
Secretary of Defense Policy Memorandum, which defined hazing
as any conduct whereby a member of the Armed Forces,
regardless of branch or rank, without proper authority causes
another member to suffer, or be exposed to, any activity
which is cruel, abusive, humiliating, oppressive, demeaning,
or harmful. Soliciting or coercing another person to
perpetrate any such activity is also considered hazing.
Hazing need not involve physical contact among or between
members of the Armed Forces. Hazing can be verbal or
psychological in nature. Actual or implied consent to acts of
hazing does not eliminate the culpability of the perpetrator.

amendment no. 45 offered by mrs. mcmorris rodgers of washington

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

SEC. 548. ROLE OF MILITARY SPOUSE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS IN
ADDRESSING UNEMPLOYMENT AND UNDEREMPLOYMENT OF
SPOUSES OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND
CLOSING THE WAGE GAP BETWEEN MILITARY SPOUSES
AND THEIR CIVILIAN COUNTERPARTS.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Members of the Armed Forces and their families make
enormous sacrifices in defense of the United States.
(2) Military spouses face a unique lifestyle marked by
frequent moves, increased family responsibility during
deployments, and limited career opportunities in certain
geographic locations.
(3) These circumstances present significant challenges to
military spouses who desire to build a portable career
commensurate with their skills, including education and
experience.
(4) According to a recent Department of Defense survey, the
unemployment rate for civilians married to a military member
is 25 percent, but the unemployment rate is 33 percent for
spouses of junior enlisted members. The same survey revealed
that 85 percent of military spouses want or need to work.
(5) A recent Military Officers Association of American
(MOAA)/Institute for Veterans and Military Families' (IVMF)
Military Spouse Employment Report revealed that an
overwhelming ninety percent of female military spouses are
underemployed.
(6) The Department of Defense has demonstrated its
commitment to helping military spouses obtain employment by
creating the Military Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP),
the Military Spouse Career Center, and the Military Spouse
Career Advancement Accounts (MyCAA). More than 61,000
military spouses have been hired as part of the Military
Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP) since the MSEP launch in
June 2011.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Secretary of Defense should continue to work to
reduce the unemployment and underemployment of spouses of
members of the Armed Forces (in this section referred to as
``military spouses'') and support closing the wage gap
between military spouses and their civilian counterparts;
(2) in this process, the Secretary should prioritize
efforts that assist military spouses in pursuing portable
careers that match their skill set, including education and
experience; and
(3) in evaluating the effectiveness of military spouse
employment programs, the Secretary should collect information
that provides a comprehensive assessment of the program,
including whether program goals are being achieved.
(c) Data Collection Related to Efforts to Address
Underemployment of Military Spouses.--
(1) Data collection required.--In addition to monitoring
the number of military spouses who obtain employment through
military spouse employment programs, the Secretary of Defense
shall collect data to evaluate the effectiveness of military
spouse

[[Page H4748]]

employment programs in addressing the underemployment of
military spouses and in closing the wage gap between military
spouses and their civilian counterparts. Information
collected shall include whether positions obtained by
military spouses through military spouse employment programs
match their education and experience.
(2) Report required.--Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
evaluating the progress of military spouse employment
programs in reducing military spouse unemployment, reducing
the wage gap between military spouses and their civilian
counterparts, and addressing the underemployment of military
spouses.
(d) Military Spouse Employment Programs Defined.--In this
section, the term ``military spouse employment programs''
means the Military Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP).

amendment no. 46 offered by mr. mcnerney of california

Page 127, line 10, insert after the period the following:
``In establishing the eligibility requirements to be used by
the program manager for the selection of the civilian
employment staffing agencies, the Secretary of Defense shall
also take into account civilian employment staffing agencies
that are willing to work and consult with State and county
Veterans Affairs offices and State National Guard offices,
when appropriate.''.

amendment no. 47 offered by mr. cook of california

At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 553. DIRECT EMPLOYMENT PILOT PROGRAM FOR MEMBERS OF THE
NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE.

(a) Program Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may carry
out a pilot program to enhance the efforts of the Department
of Defense to provide job placement assistance and related
employment services directly to members in the National Guard
and Reserves.
(b) Administration.--The pilot program shall be offered to,
and administered by, the adjutants general appointed under
section 314 of title 32, United States Code.
(c) Cost-sharing Requirement.--As a condition on the
provision of funds under this section to a State to support
the operation of the pilot program in the State, the State
must agree to contribute an amount, derived from non-Federal
sources, equal to at least 30 percent of the funds provided
by the Secretary of Defense under this section.
(d) Direct Employment Program Model.--The pilot program
should follow a job placement program model that focuses on
working one-on-one with a member of a reserve component to
cost-effectively provide job placement services, including
services such as identifying unemployed and under employed
members, job matching services, resume editing, interview
preparation, and post-employment follow up. Development of
the pilot program should be informed by State direct
employment programs for members of the reserve components,
such as the programs conducted in California and South
Carolina.
(e) Evaluation.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop
outcome measurements to evaluate the success of the pilot
program.
(f) Reporting Requirements.--
(1) Report required.--Not later than March 1, 2019, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report describing the results of the
pilot program. The Secretary shall prepare the report in
coordination with the Chief of the National Guard Bureau.
(2) Elements of report.--A report under paragraph (1) shall
include the following:
(A) A description and assessment of the effectiveness and
achievements of the pilot program, including the number of
members of the reserve components hired and the cost-per-
placement of participating members.
(B) An assessment of the impact of the pilot program and
increased reserve component employment levels on the
readiness of members of the reserve components.
(C) A comparison of the pilot program to other programs
conducted by the Department of Defense and Department of
Veterans Affairs to provide unemployment and underemployment
support to members of the reserve components.
(D) Any other matters considered appropriate by the
Secretary.
(g) Limitation on Total Fiscal-year Obligations.--The total
amount obligated by the Secretary of Defense to carry out the
pilot program for any fiscal year may not exceed $20,000,000.
(h) Duration of Authority.--
(1) In general.--The authority to carry out the pilot
program expires September 30, 2018.
(2) Extension.--Upon the expiration of the authority under
paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense may extend the pilot
program for not more than two additional fiscal years.

amendment no. 48 offered by mr. lamborn of colorado

At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 553. ENHANCEMENT OF AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT SUPPORT FOR
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY ATHLETIC
PROGRAMS.

Section 9362 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
striking subsections (e), (f), and (g) and inserting the
following new subsections:
``(e) Acceptance of Support.--
``(1) Support received from the corporation.--
Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, the Secretary of
the Air Force may accept from the corporation funds,
supplies, equipment, and services for the support of the
athletic programs of the Academy.
``(2) Funds received from other sources.--The Secretary may
charge fees for the support of the athletic programs of the
Academy. The Secretary may accept and retain fees for
services and other benefits provided incident to the
operation of its athletic programs, including fees from the
National Collegiate Athletic Association, fees from athletic
conferences, game guarantees from other educational
institutions, fees for ticketing or licensing, and other
consideration provided incidental to the execution of the
athletic programs of the Academy.
``(3) Limitation.--The Secretary shall ensure that
contributions accepted under this subsection do not reflect
unfavorably on the ability of the Department of the Air
Force, any of its employees, or any member of the armed
forces to carry out any responsibility or duty in a fair and
objective manner, or compromise the integrity or appearance
of integrity of any program of the Department of the Air
Force, or any individual involved in such a program.
``(f) Leases and Licenses.--
``(1) Support received from the corporation.--In accordance
with section 2667 of this title, the Secretary of the Air
Force may enter into leases or licenses with the corporation
for the purpose of supporting the athletic programs of the
Academy. Consideration provided under such a lease or license
may be provided in the form of funds, supplies, equipment,
and services for the support of the athletic programs of the
Academy.
``(2) Support to the corporation.--The Secretary may
provide support services to the corporation without charge
while the corporation conducts its support activities at the
Academy. In this section, the term `support services'
includes the providing of utilities, office furnishings and
equipment, communications services, records staging and
archiving, audio and video support, and security systems in
conjunction with the leasing or licensing of property. Any
such support services may only be provided without any
liability of the United States to the corporation.
``(g) Contracts and Cooperative Agreements.--The Secretary
of the Air Force may enter into contracts and cooperative
agreements with the corporation for the purpose of supporting
the athletic programs of the Academy. Notwithstanding section
2304(k) of this title, the Secretary may enter such contracts
or cooperative agreements on a sole source basis pursuant to
section 2304(c)(5) of this title. Notwithstanding chapter 63
of title 31, a cooperative agreement under this section may
be used to acquire property, services, or travel for the
direct benefit or use of the Academy athletic programs.
``(h) Trademarks and Service Marks.--
``(1) Licensing, marketing, and sponsorship agreements.--
Consistent with section 2260 (other than subsection (d)) of
this title, an agreement under subsection (g) may authorize
the corporation to enter into licensing, marketing, and
sponsorship agreements relating to trademarks and service
marks identifying the Academy, subject to the approval of the
Secretary of the Air Force.
``(2) Limitations.--No such licensing, marketing, or
sponsorship agreement may be entered into if it would reflect
unfavorably on the ability of the Department of the Air
Force, any of its employees, or any member of the armed
forces to carry out any responsibility or duty in a fair and
objective manner, or if the Secretary determines that the use
of the trademark or service mark would compromise the
integrity or appearance of integrity of any program of the
Department of the Air Force, or any individual involved in
such a program.''.

amendment no. 49 offered by ms. bonamici of oregon

Add at the end of subtitle F of title V the following (and
conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 553. REPORT ON TUITION ASSISTANCE.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army shall, not later
than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives a report on the requirement of
the Army, effective January 1, 2014, that members of the Army
may become eligible for the Army's tuition assistance program
only after serving a period of 1 year after completing
certain training courses, such as advance individual
training, officer candidate school, and the basic officer
leader course.
(b) Contents.--The report under subsection (a) shall
include the Secretary's--
(1) evaluation of the potential savings in costs resulting
from requiring all service members to wait a period of 1 year
after training described in subsection (a) before becoming
eligible for the Army's tuition assistance program;
(2) evaluation of the impact that the 1-year waiting period
described in subsection (a) will have on recruitment for the
National Guard; and
(3) explanation of the extent to which the qualities of the
National Guard, including the role of college students and
college-bound students in the National Guard, were considered
before reaching the decision to

[[Page H4749]]

require all service members to wait a period of 1 year before
becoming eligible for the Army's tuition assistance program.

amendment no. 50 offered by mr. sean patrick maloney of new york

Page 132, lines 18 and 19, strike ``4-year'' and insert
``5-year''.
Page 133, lines 9 and 10, strike ``4-year'' and insert ``5-
year''.

amendment no. 51 offered by mr. gerlach of pennsylvania

At the end of subtitle H of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5. RECOGNITION OF WERETH MASSACRE OF 11 AFRICAN-AMERICAN
SOLDIERS OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY DURING THE
BATTLE OF THE BULGE.

Congress officially recognizes the dedicated service and
ultimate sacrifice on behalf of the United States of the 11
African-American soldiers of the 333rd Field Artillery
Battalion of the United States Army who were massacred in
Wereth, Belgium, during the Battle of the Bulge on December
17, 1944.

amendment no. 52 offered by mrs. bustos of illinois

At the end of subtitle H of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 574. REPORT ON ARMY REVIEW, FINDINGS, AND ACTIONS
PERTAINING TO MEDAL OF HONOR NOMINATION OF
CAPTAIN WILLIAM L. ALBRACHT.

Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall--
(1) conduct a review of the initial review, findings, and
actions undertaken by the Army in connection with the Medal
of Honor nomination of Captain William L. Albracht; and
(2) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report describing
the results of the review required by this section, including
an accounting of all evidence submitted with regard to the
nomination.

amendment no. 53 offered by ms. chu of california

At the end of subtitle I of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. COMPTROLLER GENERAL AND MILITARY DEPARTMENT REPORTS
ON HAZING IN THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Comptroller General Report.--
(1) Report required.--Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of
the United States shall submit to the designated
congressional committees a report on the policies to prevent
hazing, and systems initiated to track incidents of hazing,
in each of the Armed Forces, including reserve components,
officer candidate schools, military service academies,
military academy preparatory schools, and basic training and
professional schools for enlisted members.
(2) Elements.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall
include the following:
(A) An evaluation of the definition of hazing by the Armed
Forces.
(B) A description of the criteria used, and the methods
implemented, in the systems to track incidents of hazing in
the Armed Forces.
(C) An assessment of the following:
(i) The scope of hazing in each Armed Force.
(ii) The policies in place and the training on hazing
provided to members throughout the course of their careers
for each Armed Force.
(iii) The available outlets through which victims or
witnesses of hazing can report hazing both within and outside
their chain of command, and whether or not anonymous
reporting is permitted.
(iv) The actions taken to mitigate hazing incidents in each
Armed Force.
(v) The effectiveness of the training and policies in place
regarding hazing.
(vi) The number of alleged and substantiated incidents of
hazing over the last five years for each Armed Force, the
nature of these cases and actions taken to address such
matters through non-judicial and judicial action.
(D) An evaluation of the additional actions, if any, the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security
propose to take to further address the incidence of hazing in
the Armed Forces.
(E) Such recommendations as the Comptroller General
considers appropriate for improving hazing prevention
programs, policies, and other actions taken to address hazing
within the Armed Forces.
(3) Designated congressional committees defined.--In this
subsection, the term ``designated congressional committees''
means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform, and the Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform, and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives.
(b) Military Department Reports.--
(1) Reports required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, each Secretary of a
military department, in consultation with the Chief of Staff
of each Armed Force under the jurisdiction of such Secretary,
shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report containing
an update to the hazing reports required by section 534 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013
(Public Law 112-239; 126 Stat. 1726).
(2) Elements.--Each report on an Armed Force required by
paragraph (1) shall include the following:
(A) A discussion of the policies of the Armed Force for
preventing and responding to incidents of hazing, including
discussion of any changes or newly implemented policies since
the submission of the reports required by section 534 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.
(B) A description of the methods implemented to track and
report, including report anonymously, incidents of hazing in
the Armed Force.
(C) An assessment by the Secretary submitting such report
of the following:
(i) The scope of the problem of hazing in the Armed Force.
(ii) The effectiveness of training on recognizing,
reporting and preventing hazing provided members of the Armed
Force.
(iii) The actions taken to prevent and respond to hazing
incidents in the Armed Force since the submission of the
reports under such section.
(D) A description of the additional actions, if any, the
Secretary submitting such report and the Chief of Staff of
the Armed Force propose to take to further address the
incidence of hazing in the Armed Force.

amendment no. 54 offered by mr. langevin of rhode island

At the end of subtitle I of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH STUDY OF RISK
AND RESILIENCY OF UNITED STATES SPECIAL
OPERATIONS FORCES AND EFFECTIVENESS OF
PRESERVATION OF THE FORCE AND FAMILIES PROGRAM.

(a) Study Required.--The Director of the National Institute
of Mental Health shall conduct a study of the risk and
resiliency of the United States Special Operations Forces and
effectiveness of the United States Special Operations
Command's Preservation of the Force and Families Program on
reducing risk and increasing resiliency.
(b) Elements of the Study.--The study conducted under
subsection (a) shall specifically include an assessment of
each of the following: --
(1) The mental, behavioral, and psychological health of the
United States Special Operations Force, the United States
Special Operations Command's Preservation of the Force and
Families Program's focus on physical development to address
the mental, behavioral, and psychological health of the
United States Special Operations Force, including
measurements of effectiveness on reducing suicide and other
mental, behavioral and psychological risks, and increasing
resiliency of the United States Special Operations Forces.
(2) The United States Special Operations Command's Human
Performance Program, including measurements of effectiveness
on reducing risk and increasing resiliency of United States
Special Operations Forces.
(3) Such other matters as the Director of the National
Institute of Mental Health considers appropriate.
(c) Submission of Report.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the
National Institute of Mental Health shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report containing the
results of the study conducted under subsection (a).

amendment no. 55 offered by mr. lamalfa of california

At the end of subtitle J of title V, insert the following:

SEC. 594. ACCESS OF CONGRESSIONAL CASEWORKERS TO INFORMATION
ABOUT DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS CASEWORK
BROKERED TO OTHER OFFICES OF THE DEPARTMENT.

If Department of Veterans Affairs casework is brokered out
to another office of the Department from its original
submission site, a caseworker in a congressional office may
contact the brokered office to receive an update on the
constituent's case, and that office of the Department is
required to update the congressional staffer regardless of
their thoughts on jurisdiction.

amendment no. 56 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

At the end of subtitle J of title V (page 162, after line
18) add the following:

SEC. __. PILOT PROGRAM ON PROVISION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION TO
STATE VETERANS AGENCIES TO FACILITATE THE
TRANSITION OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES FROM
MILITARY SERVICE TO CIVILIAN LIFE.

(a) Pilot Program Required.--Commencing not later than 90
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall carry out a pilot program to
assess the feasibility and advisability of providing the
information described in subsection (b) on members of the
Armed Forces who are separating from the Armed Forces to
State veterans agencies as a means of facilitating the
transition of members of the Armed Forces from military
service to civilian life.

[[Page H4750]]

(b) Covered Information.--The information described in this
subsection with respect to a member is as follows:
(1) Department of Defense Form DD 214.
(2) A personal email address.
(3) A personal telephone number.
(4) A mailing address.
(c) Voluntary Participation.--The participation of a member
in the pilot program shall be at the election of the member.
(d) Form of Provision of Information.--Information shall be
provided to State veterans agencies under the pilot program
in digitized electronic form.
(e) Use of Information.--Information provided to State
veterans agencies under the pilot program may be shared by
such agencies with appropriate county veterans service
offices in such manner and for such purposes as the Secretary
shall specify for purposes of the pilot program.
(f) Report.--Not later than 15 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report on the pilot program. The report shall include a
description of the pilot program and such recommendations,
including recommendations for continuing or expanding the
pilot program, as the Secretary considers appropriate in
light of the pilot program.

amendment no. 58 offered by mr. bishop of new york

Page 162, after line 18, insert the following:

SEC. 594. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE RECOVERY OF THE
REMAINS OF CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES
KILLED IN THURSTON ISLAND, ANTARCTICA.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Commencing August 26, 1946, though late February 1947
the United States Navy Antarctic Developments Program Task
Force 68, codenamed ``Operation Highjump'' initiated and
undertook the largest ever-to-this-date exploration of the
Antarctic continent.
(2) The primary mission of the Task Force 68 organized by
Rear Admiral Richard E. Byrd Jr. USN, (Ret) and led by Rear
Admiral Richard H. Cruzen, USN, was to do the following:
(A) Establish the Antarctic research base Little America
IV.
(B) In the defense of the United States of America from
possible hostile aggression from abroad - to train personnel
test equipment, develop techniques for establishing,
maintaining and utilizing air bases on ice, with
applicability comparable to interior Greenland, where
conditions are similar to those of the Antarctic.
(C) Map and photograph a full two-thirds of the Antarctic
Continent during the classified, hazardous duty/volunteer-
only operation involving 4700 sailors, 23 aircraft and 13
ships including the first submarine the U.S.S. Sennet, and
the aircraft carrier the U.S.S. Philippine Sea, brought to
the edge of the ice pack to launch (6) Navy ski-equipped,
rocket-assisted R4Ds.
(D) Consolidate and extend United States sovereignty over
the largest practicable area of the Antarctic continent.
(E) Determine the feasibility of establishing, maintaining
and utilizing bases in the Antarctic and investigating
possible base sites.
(3) While on a hazardous duty/all volunteer mission vital
to the interests of National Security and while over the
eastern Antarctica coastline known as the Phantom Coast, the
PBM-5 Martin Mariner ``Flying Boat'' ``George 1'' entered a
whiteout over Thurston Island. As the pilot attempted to
climb, the aircraft grazed the glacier's ridgeline and
exploded within 5 seconds instantly killing Ensign Maxwell
Lopez, Navigator and Wendell ``Bud'' Hendersin, Aviation
Machinists Mate 1st Class while Frederick Williams, Aviation
Radioman 1st Class died several hours later. Six other
crewmen survived including the Captain of the ``George 1's''
seaplane tender U.S.S. Pine Island.
(4) The bodies of the dead were protected from the
desecration of Antarctic scavenging birds (Skuas) by the
surviving crew wrapping the bodies and temporarily burying
the men under the starboard wing engine nacelle.
(5) Rescue requirements of the ``George-1'' survivors
forced the abandonment of their crewmates' bodies.
(6) Conditions prior to the departure of Task Force 68
precluded a return to the area to the recover the bodies.
(7) For nearly 60 years Navy promised the families that
they would recover the men: ``If the safety, logistical, and
operational prerequisites allow a mission in the future,
every effort will be made to bring our sailors home.''.
(8) The Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command twice offered to
recover the bodies of this crew for Navy.
(9) A 2004 NASA ground penetrating radar overflight
commissioned by Navy relocated the crash site three miles
from its crash position.
(10) The Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command offered to
underwrite the cost of an aerial ground penetrating radar
(GPR) survey of the crash site area by NASA.
(11) The Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command studied the
recovery with the recognized recovery authorities and
national scientists and determined that the recovery is only
``medium risk''.
(12) National Science Foundation and scientists from the
University of Texas, Austin, regularly visit the island.
(13) The crash site is classified as a ``perishable site'',
meaning a glacier that will calve into the Bellingshausen
Sea.
(14) The National Science Foundation maintains a presence
in area - of the Pine Island Glacier.
(15) The National Science Foundation Director of Polar
Operations will assist and provide assets for the recovery
upon the request of Congress.
(16) The United States Coast Guard is presently pursuing
the recovery of 3 WWII air crewmen from similar circumstances
in Greenland.
(17) On Memorial Day, May 25, 2009, President Barak Obama
declared: ``. . .the support of our veterans is a sacred
trust. . .we need to serve them as they have served us. .
.that means bringing home all our POWs and MIAs. . .''.
(18) The policies and laws of the United States of America
require that our armed service personnel be repatriated.
(19) The fullest possible accounting of United States
fallen military personnel means repatriating living American
POWs and MIAs, accounting for, identifying, and recovering
the remains of military personnel who were killed in the line
of duty, or providing convincing evidence as to why such a
repatriation, accounting, identification, or recovery is not
possible.
(20) It is the responsibility of the Federal Government to
return to the United States for proper burial and respect all
members of the Armed Forces killed in the line of duty who
lie in lost graves.
(b) Sense of Congress.--In light of the findings under
subsection (a), Congress--
(1) reaffirms its support for the recovery and return to
the United States, the remains and bodies of all members of
the Armed Forces killed in the line of duty, and for the
efforts by the Joint POW-MIA Accounting Command to recover
the remains of members of the Armed Forces from all wars,
conflicts and missions;
(2) recognizes the courage and sacrifice of all members of
the Armed Forces who participated in Operation Highjump and
all missions vital to the national security of the United
States of America;
(3) acknowledges the dedicated research and efforts by the
US Geological Survey, the National Science Foundation, the
Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command, the Fallen American
Veterans Foundation and all persons and organizations to
identify, locate, and advocate for, from their temporary
Antarctic grave, the recovery of the well-preserved frozen
bodies of Ensign Maxwell Lopez, Naval Aviator, Frederick
Williams, Aviation Machinist's Mate 1ST Class, Wendell
Hendersin, Aviation Radioman 1ST Class of the ``George 1''
explosion and crash; and
(4) encourages the Department of Defense to review the
facts, research and to pursue new efforts to undertake all
feasible efforts to recover, identify, and return the well-
preserved frozen bodies of the ``George 1'' crew from
Antarctica's Thurston Island.

amendment no. 59 offered by mr. farr of california

Page 162, after line 18, insert the following:

SEC. 594. NAME OF THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE JOINT OUTPATIENT CLINIC,
MARINA, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Designation.--The Department of Veterans Affairs and
Department of Defense joint outpatient clinic to be
constructed at the intersection of the proposed Ninth Street
and the proposed First Avenue in Marina, California, shall be
known and designated as the ``Major General William H.
Gourley VA-DOD Outpatient Clinic''.
(b) References.--Any reference in a law, regulation, map,
document, record, or other paper of the United States to the
Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense
joint outpatient clinic referred to in subsection (a) shall
be deemed to be a reference to the ``Major General William H.
Gourley VA-DOD Outpatient Clinic''.

amendment no. 130 offered by mr. kelly of pennsylvania

At the appropriate place in subtitle E of title XII of
division A, insert the following:

SEC. _. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT THE
ARMS TRADE TREATY.

(a) In General.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2015 for the Department of Defense may be
obligated or expended to implement the Arms Trade Treaty, or
to make any change to existing programs, projects, or
activities as approved by Congress in furtherance of,
pursuant to, or otherwise to implement the Arms Trade Treaty,
unless the Arms Trade Treaty has received the advice and
consent of the Senate and has been the subject of
implementing legislation, as required, by the Congress.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to preclude the Department of Defense from
assisting foreign countries in bringing their laws and
regulations up to United States standards.

amendment no. 133 offered by mr. kelly of pennsylvania

At the end of subtitle F of title XII of division A, add
the following:

SEC. _. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE NAVAL CAPABILITIES OF
THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) Mistral class amphibious assault warships, each of
which has the capacity to carry 16 helicopters, up to 700
soldiers, four landing craft, 60 armored vehicles, and 13

[[Page H4751]]

tanks, would significantly increase the the naval
capabilities of the Russian navy;
(2) Mistral class warships would allow the Russian navy to
expand its naval presence in the region, thereby augmenting
its capabilities against Ukraine, Georgia, and Baltic member
states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization;
(3) France should not proceed with its sale of two Mistral
class warships to the Russian Federation; and
(4) the President, the Secretary of State, and the
Secretary of Defense should use diplomatic means to urge
their counterparts in the Government of France not to proceed
with its sale of two Mistral class warships to the Russian
Federation.

amendment no. 139 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

At the end of subtitle C of title XV, insert the following:

SEC. 1523. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR THE AFGHANISTAN
INFRASTRUCTURE FUND.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act may be used for the
Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund until all funds appropriated
for the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund before the date of
the enactment of this Act are obligated or expended.

amendment no. 141 offered by mr. lamborn of colorado

At the appropriate place in subtitle B of title 16, insert
the following new section:

SEC. 16__. REPORT ON GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION IN THE RUSSIAN
FEDERATION.

(a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence
shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on
Armed Services of the Senate a report on the status of
governance and democratization in the Russian Federation.
(b) Contents.--The report required under subsection (a)
shall include--
(1) a description of the extent of political and economic
corruption among the senior leadership of the Russian
Federation; and
(2) an analysis of the assets of the senior leadership of
the Russian Federation, with a particular focus on the
illegal attainment and movement of those assets, including
the use of family or friends to hide assets.
(c) Form.--The report required under subsection (a) shall
be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a
classified annex.
(d) Public Availability.--The Director of National
Intelligence shall make publicly available on the Internet
the unclassified portion of the report required under
subsection (a).

We're already implementing the treaty.

Amazingly, in that same speech, Mr. Countryman stated:

We don't have to change any laws to implement the treaty.

That is not up to him or the administration to decide. It is up to
the Senate to provide its advice and consent on the treaty, and the
House and Senate to pass the necessary implementing legislation.
This President's assertion is deeply disrespectful to the Senate and
the House and to the Constitution he is sworn to uphold. I urge my
colleagues to stand with me in support of the Second Amendment, our
Nation's sovereignty, and vote in support of this amendment to renew
the annual ban on funding the ATT.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McKEON. I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman.
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of
my amendment to H.R. 4435 to express the sense of Congress against
France's impending sale of Mistral class helicopter amphibious assault
warships to Russia and urging the President and the Secretaries of
State and Defense to seek to stop this sale.
Zoos often have signs posted that say don't feed the bears because it
is just common sense. Similarly, I would like to say now, especially,
don't feed the Russian bear; but with the sale of these advanced
warships, France isn't just feeding the Russian bear, it is serving up
fine dining on a silver plate.
A Mistral is no mere civilian hull, as France's Defense Minister
claims. Just one Mistral class warship has the capacity to carry 16
helicopters, up to 700 soldiers, four landing craft, 60 armored
vehicles, and 13 tanks and has the advanced communications capabilities
that make it capable of operating as a command and control vessel.
France wants to send Russia two of them--Vladivostok and Sevastopol--
which just happens to be the name of the naval base in Crimea, which
Russia has just annexed from Ukraine.
These warships would allow the Russian navy to expands its naval
presence in the region, augmenting its capabilities against Ukraine,
Georgia, and Baltic members of NATO, but don't take my word for it.
Admiral Vysotsky, former head of Russia's navy, boasted that Russia
would have won its war against Georgia in 2008 in just 40 minutes,
instead of 26 hours, if it just had these ships back then.
It makes no sense for France to provide these warships to Russia when
it is occupying Georgia and amassing troops on Ukraine's border.
France's support of Russia's navy is unbecoming of a close NATO ally,
and it has got to stop.
I urge my colleagues to stand with me in support of this commonsense
amendment for the sake of our allies and our friends in Europe.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
Ms. BONAMICI. Madam Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding,
and I rise in support of the en bloc amendment, which includes the
amendment I offered with the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), to
call attention to an important issue facing the Army National Guard.
Soldiers join the National Guard to serve their country. Often, they
choose the National Guard because they want to balance service with
civilian careers or postsecondary education. The Army's tuition
assistance program is a valuable benefit for soldiers who want to
pursue opportunities for professional growth or attend college while
off duty.
In January of 2014, the Army changed its tuition assistance program,
and now, all soldiers must wait one full year after initial training
before becoming eligible for tuition assistance. This change affects
all soldiers, but it may disproportionately harm those in the National
Guard.
Nonprior service soldiers in the National Guard, some of whom attend
college full time, will have to wait at least a year, and perhaps much
longer, depending on the availability of training courses before they
get help paying for their education.
The Bonamici-Walden amendment asks the Secretary of the Army to
evaluate how this one-size-fits-all change to tuition assistance could
affect citizens-soldiers enrolled in education programs.
I would like to thank Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and
their staffs for their willingness to accept this important amendment
to help protect education benefits and ensure a strong citizen-soldier
force.

[[Page H4752]]

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson).
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, first of all, I want to
thank Chairman McKeon for his service on this committee and in this
body as a colleague; and quite frankly, on behalf of my wife Penny and
I, as military parents, thank you for your service to those who serve.
I want to thank you, also, for allowing me to discuss my amendment
and have it as part of this en bloc. My amendment will institute a
preliminary mental health assessment for all incoming military
recruits. A recent Army study found:

Nearly one in five Army soldiers enters the service with a
mental disorder, and nearly half of all soldiers who have
tried suicide first attempted it before enlisting.

In March, Representative Tim Ryan of Ohio, and I introduced the
bipartisan H.R. 4305, the Medical Evaluation Parity for Service Members
Act of 2014, which is the exact language of this amendment.
This small but subsequent change to current law will bring mental
health to parity with physical health during entrance screenings. A
preliminary evaluation will also have the purpose of serving as a
baseline to identify changes in behavioral health, including traumatic
brain injury and/or posttraumatic stress injury throughout an
individual's military career.
Protecting individual privacy was taken into the utmost consideration
when putting this amendment together. While the MEPS Act is not a cure-
all, it will be a significant step in further understanding a well-
documented gap in behavioral health information that exists among our
service branches; and of equal importance, it will assist with the
mental wellness of our servicemembers and veterans.
Since introduction, the MEPS Act has garnered over 35 bipartisan
cosponsors and the support of over 40 major military, veteran, and
health advocacy groups.
I thank all those who supported this legislation and worked with me
and my staff to put this together. I ask for your support as we pass
this important piece of legislation.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).
Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Chair, I want to thank Rules Committee Chairman
Pete Sessions for making this amendment in order, and I want to thank
Chairman McKeon for his service and for allowing this amendment to be
part of the en bloc package.
My amendment adds the voice of the House to those of many Americans,
including Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who would like to see the names of
the 74 sailors lost aboard the USS Frank E. Evans added to the Vietnam
Memorial.
The USS Frank Evans, a destroyer, was launched near the end of World
War II and was recommissioned for the Korea and Vietnam conflicts.
After participating in combat off the coast of Vietnam, the Evans was
deployed for the Operation Sea Spirit training exercise in the South
China Sea.
On the morning of June 3, 1969, the Evans was training with an
Australian navy carrier when the two ships collided.

{time} 2100

The Melbourne ripped the American destroyer in two. The bow sank in
just 3 minutes, leaving only a stern section afloat. Seventy-four
sailors perished.
Although they were in the South China Sea, these sailors' names have
been excluded from the Vietnam Memorial because the Evans was outside
the designated combat zone which determines inclusion on the wall.
Although these men did not die in direct combat, they were
instrumental in advancing military objectives in Vietnam and
participated in the conflict just days before the collision.
I thank the chairman for allowing this amendment which would
encourage the addition of their names to the wall.
My amendment adds the voice of this House to those of many Americans,
including Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who would like to see the names of
the 74 sailors lost aboard the USS Frank E. Evans added to the Vietnam
Memorial.
The USS Frank E. Evans, a destroyer, was launched near the end of
World War II and was recommissioned for the Korea and Vietnam
conflicts. After participating in combat off the coast of Vietnam, the
Evans was deployed for the ``Operation Sea Spirit'' training exercises
in the South China Sea.
On the morning of June 3, 1969, the Evans was training with the
Australian Navy carrier HMAS Melbourne, when the two ships collided.
The Melbourne ripped the American destroyer in two. The bow sank in
just three minutes, leaving only the stern section afloat. Seventy-four
sailors perished.
Although they were in the South China Sea, these sailors' names have
been excluded from the Vietnam Veterans Memorial because the Evans was
outside the designated combat zone which determines inclusion on the
Wall. Although these men did not die in direct combat, they were
instrumental in advancing American military objectives in Vietnam and
had participated in the conflict just days before the collision. This
happenstance should not obscure their valor, patriotism, and ultimate
sacrifice for their country, especially as other exceptions to the
stated policy have been made, including by Ronald Reagan, who waived
the combat zone criteria to add 68 names of U.S. Marines who were
killed when a ``rest and recreation'' flight to Hong Kong crashed.
It has been nearly 45 years to the day since that June night in 1969,
and the passage of time has made duller and less distinct, boundaries
and criteria that may have seemed reasonable and clear back then. The
74 sailors from the Evans belong with the other 58,000 Americans who
gave their lives in Vietnam--on the Wall--where Americans from every
corner of this great nation can give our silent thanks for their having
given the ``last full measure of devotion.''
Mr. McKEON. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Walberg), my friend and colleague.
Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I want to thank the chairman for including
this amendment en bloc.
As our men and women transition out of the Armed Forces, they are
confronted with a number of challenges as they reintegrate into
civilian life. My amendment offers a simple change to current DOD
policy that I believe will greatly benefit our servicemembers as they
return home.
Based on bipartisan legislation I have introduced, the Servicemembers
Transition Improvement Act, this amendment would require a pilot
program at DOD to transmit a comprehensive copy of a servicemember's
information to State veterans agencies.
Veterans service agencies are a powerful resource, helping veterans
through job assistance programs and navigating the benefits they have
earned. This legislation will enable veterans service offices to assist
separating servicemembers who reside in their communities and confirms
that caring for our men and women in uniform does not end when they
leave military service.
Also, Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of my bipartisan
amendment with Mr. Cohen of Tennessee to prohibit new funds for the
Afghanistan infrastructure fund and ensure American tax dollars are
invested wisely.
We have already spent billions of dollars toward rebuilding the
infrastructure of Afghanistan, and Congress has appropriated over $1.2
billion alone to the Afghanistan infrastructure fund since it was
created in 2011.
In their most recent report, SIGAR reported that only $229 million of
the $1.2 billion Congress has appropriated has actually been disbursed
for projects. More importantly, SIGAR has repeatedly found that the
projects which are underway are behind schedule and years away from
completion.
Without any assurance that these projects are needed or can be
completed, let's focus these funds on growing our economy, investing in
American infrastructure, and paying off our debt.
I want to thank Chairman McKeon for accepting this amendment in the
en bloc and would encourage my colleagues to vote in support of it.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth).
Ms. DUCKWORTH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the en bloc package,
including my amendment which will strengthen our military families.
Madam Chair, last Mother's Day I traveled to Afghanistan with a
bipartisan group of Members of Congress. We heard firsthand about the
difficult mental and physical challenges our brave servicemen and -
women must overcome. One such challenge was their maternity leave
policy, which is not in line with the Family and Medical Leave Act.

[[Page H4753]]

Currently, the Department of Defense permits Active Duty mothers to
take 6 weeks of maternity leave. This is 6 weeks less than mandated by
the Family and Medical Leave Act.
My amendment, which is based on my widely supported bipartisan bill,
the Military Opportunities for Mothers, or MOM, Act, would give
servicemembers the option of extending leave to the same amount that is
guaranteed to their civilian sisters. It has received widespread
support because my colleagues have heard from female servicemembers and
veterans on how bad this policy of just 6 weeks is for the retention of
talented women, morale, and mental health.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and give our military
mothers a chance at a healthier, stronger future for their families and
our country. Extending maternity leave for these women is the least we
can do for those who sacrifice so much for our country.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Coffman), my friend and colleague, a member of the
Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. COFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your service to our Nation
as the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. As a veteran, I
deeply appreciate all you have done and will do until the end of your
term.
Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this en bloc amendment to the
National Defense Authorization Act because it contains an amendment I
offered which provides servicemembers diagnosed with a mental health
condition who have been discharged access to a physician with special
mental health training to provide an additional level of expert review
on appeal.
According to the Congressional Research Service, from 2001 to 2011,
well over 900,000 servicemembers were diagnosed with at least one
mental health condition. While the majority of those diagnosed were
able to continue serving, many were ultimately discharged from the
military either directly for their mental health issues or for conduct
linked to those diagnoses.
Current law insufficiently equips servicemembers diagnosed with a
mental health disorder during appeal of a discharge. My amendment
corrects this injustice and ensures fairness for those suffering from
mental health issues as a result of their service to our Nation.
I urge my colleagues to support this en bloc amendment.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I now yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Murphy).
Mr. MURPHY of Florida. Madam Chair, I want to thank the gentleman
from Washington for yielding. I want to thank the chairman for his
efforts on this evening's work.
I rise today in support of my amendment to improve mental health and
suicide prevention for our Nation's veterans.
Every day our country loses 22 of our Nation's heroes to suicide.
This heartbreaking statistic remains a devastating reality that should
shake every Member in this House. Truly providing our heroes with the
respect and care they have earned means treating not only physical, but
invisible wounds as well.
With damning reports about the VA failing our veterans and our
country, my amendment would insist on more accountability by requiring
an independent third-party evaluation of existing suicide prevention
efforts to improve coordination and integration between the DOD and the
VA.
Outcomes of servicemember and veteran suicide prevention programs are
too important to be left to government agencies, particularly ones
embroiled in scandal.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. Our Nation must not
continue to fail those who served us so bravely.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1 minute
remaining. The gentleman from Washington has 5 minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth).
Ms. DUCKWORTH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment which
is included in the next en bloc amendment, which will strengthen small
business participation in government contracts.
In my district and across the country, small businesses are the
backbone of our economy. They innovate, know how to operate on a tight
budget, and create good-paying jobs. My small businesses in Elgin,
Illinois, should be able to win government contracts from the
Department of Defense because I know they will do more with taxpayer
dollars and provide superior products and services for our military.
This amendment would raise the small business prime contracting goal
from 23 percent to 25 percent and establish a subcontracting goal of 40
percent. It would allow small businesses to reap $10 billion annually
in new work. These steps will ensure small businesses are able to
compete, remain a powerful employment source, and save taxpayers money.
Small businesses are a vital part of Illinois' Eighth Congressional
District. That is why last year I came to the House floor to speak on
behalf of small business amendments that I offered in the past. This
time I am happy to partner with my colleague, the chairman of the Small
Business Committee, to fight for this critical pillar of our country.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. McKEON. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of the en bloc
package that is before us tonight, which includes my amendment that
will finally recognize the valiant service of merchant mariners who
operated domestically during World War II.
Ensuring that individuals who sacrifice so much in service to our
country receive the recognition they deserve is one of the most
important jobs we have as Members of Congress.
I am grateful for the bipartisan support my amendment has received
from colleagues like my good friends Janice Hahn from California and
Walter Jones from North Carolina. With support for my amendment coast
to coast, I am proud to stand here today one step closer to correcting
an injustice that has remained for over 70 years. Madam Chair, after 70
long years, these mariners deserve to receive recognition for their
service to our country.
I thank the chairman, I thank the ranking member for including this
amendment in the en bloc package this evening, and I ask my colleagues
to support final passage.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I have no further speakers, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en
bloc amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 4 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, pursuant to House Resolution 590, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 4 consisting of amendment Nos. 41, 61, 62, 63,
64, 66, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 110, 112, 125, 138, 156, 157, and
160 printed in part A of House Report No. 113-460, offered by Mr.
McKeon of California:

Amendment No. 41 Offered by Ms. Duckworth of Illinois

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

SEC. 5__. AVAILABILITY OF ADDITIONAL LEAVE FOR MEMBERS OF THE
ARMED FORCES IN CONNECTION WITH THE BIRTH OF A
CHILD.

Section 701(j) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as paragraphs
(2) and (3), respectively;
(2) by inserting after ``(j)'' the following new paragraph
(1):
``(1) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary
concerned, a member of the armed forces who gives birth to a
child shall receive 42 days of convalescent leave to be used
in connection with the birth of the child. At the discretion
of the member, the member shall be allowed up to 42
additional days in a leave of absence status in connection
with the birth of the child upon the expiration of the
convalescent leave, except that--
``(A) a member who uses this additional leave is not
entitled to basic pay for any day

[[Page H4754]]

on which such additional leave is used, but shall be
considered to be on active duty for all other purposes; and
``(B) the commanding officer of the member may recall the
member to duty from such leave of absence status when
necessary to maintain unit readiness.''; and
(3) in paragraph (3), as redesignated, by striking
``paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (1) and (2)''.

Amendment No. 61 Offered by Mr. Bilirakis of Florida

At the end of subtitle C of title VI, add the following new
section:

SEC. 6__. TRANSPORTATION ON MILITARY AIRCRAFT ON A SPACE-
AVAILABLE BASIS FOR DISABLED VETERANS WITH A
SERVICE-CONNECTED, PERMANENT DISABILITY RATED
AS TOTAL.

(a) Availability of Transportation.--Section 2641b of title
10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new
subsection (f):
``(f) Special Priority for Certain Disabled Veterans.--(1)
The Secretary of Defense shall provide, at no additional cost
to the Department of Defense and with no aircraft
modification, transportation on scheduled and unscheduled
military flights within the continental United States and on
scheduled overseas flights operated by the Air Mobility
Command on a space-available basis for any veteran with a
service-connected, permanent disability rated as total.
``(2) Notwithstanding subsection (d)(1), in establishing
space-available transportation priorities under the travel
program, the Secretary shall provide transportation under
paragraph (1) on the same basis as such transportation is
provided to members of the armed forces entitled to retired
or retainer pay.
``(3) The requirement to provide transportation on
Department of Defense aircraft on a space-available basis on
the priority basis described in paragraph (2) to veterans
covered by this subsection applies whether or not the travel
program is established under this section.
``(4) In this subsection, the terms `veteran' and `service-
connected' have the meanings given those terms in section 101
of title 38.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Subsection (f) of section 2641b of
title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a),
shall take effect at the end of the 90-day period beginning
on the date of the enactment of this Act.

Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mr. Ross of Florida

At the end of subtitle D of title VI, insert the following:

SEC. 634. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FUNDS TO CLOSE COMMISSARY
STORES.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act may be used to close any
commissary store.

Amendment No. 63 Offered by Mr. Hanna of New York

Page 175, after line 12, insert the following new section:

SEC. 642. AVAILABILITY FOR PURCHASE OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS MEMORIAL HEADSTONES AND MARKERS FOR
MEMBERS OF RESERVE COMPONENTS WHO PERFORMED
CERTAIN TRAINING.

Section 2306 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(i)(1) The Secretary shall make available for purchase a
memorial headstone or marker for the marked or unmarked grave
of an individual described in paragraph (2) or for the
purpose of commemorating such an individual whose remains are
unavailable.
``(2) An individual described in this paragraph is an
individual who--
``(A) as a member of a National Guard or Reserve component
performed inactive duty training or active duty for training
for at least six years but did not serve on active duty; and
``(B) is not otherwise ineligible for a memorial headstone
or marker on account of the nature of the individual's
separation from the Armed Forces or other cause.
``(3) A headstone or marker for the grave of an individual
may be purchased under this subsection by--
``(A) the individual;
``(B) the surviving spouse, child, sibling, or parent of
the individual; or
``(C) an individual other than the next of kin, as
determined by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
``(4) In establishing the prices of the headstones and
markers made available for purchase under this section, the
Secretary shall ensure the prices are sufficient to cover the
costs associated with the production and delivery of such
headstones and markers.
``(5) No person may receive any benefit under the laws
administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs solely by
reason of this subsection.
``(6) This subsection does not authorize any new burial
benefit for any person or create any new authority for any
individual to be buried in a national cemetery.
``(7) The Secretary shall coordinate with the Secretary of
Defense in establishing procedures to determine whether an
individual is an individual described in paragraph (2).''.

Amendment No. 64 Offered by Mrs. Capps of California

Page 177, after line 12, insert the following:

SEC. 703. AVAILABILITY OF BREASTFEEDING SUPPORT, SUPPLIES,
AND COUNSELING UNDER THE TRICARE PROGRAM.

Section 1079(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(18) Breastfeeding support, supplies (including breast
pumps and associated equipment), and counseling shall be
provided as appropriate during pregnancy and the postpartum
period.''.

Amendment No. 66 Offered by Mrs. Ellmers of North Carolina

Page 184, after line 13, insert the following:

SEC. 715. PROVISION OF WRITTEN NOTICE OF CHANGE TO TRICARE
BENEFITS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 55 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 1097c the
following new section:

``Sec. 1097d. TRICARE program: notice of change to benefits

``(a) Provision of Notice.--(1) If the Secretary makes a
significant change to any benefits provided by the TRICARE
program to covered beneficiaries, the Secretary shall provide
individuals described in paragraph (2) with written notice
explaining such changes.
``(2) The individuals described by this paragraph are
covered beneficiaries and providers participating in the
TRICARE program who may be affected by a significant change
covered by a notification under paragraph (1).
``(3) The Secretary shall provide notice under paragraph
(1) through electronic means.
``(b) Timing of Notice.--The Secretary shall provide notice
under paragraph (1) of subsection (a) by the earlier of the
following dates:
``(1) The date that the Secretary determines would afford
individuals described in paragraph (2) of such subsection
adequate time to understand the change covered by the
notification.
``(2) The date that is 90 days before the date on which the
change covered by the notification becomes effective.
``(3) The effective date of a significant change that is
required by law.
``(c) Significant Change Defined.--In this section, the
term `significant change' means a system-wide change--
``(1) in policy regarding services provided under the
TRICARE program (not including the addition of new services
or benefits); or
``(2) in payment rates of more than 20 percent.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1097c the following new item:
``1097d. TRICARE program: notice of change to benefits.''.

Amendment No. 69 Offered by Mr. Murphy of Florida

At the end of subtitle C of title VII, insert the
following:

SEC. ____. IMPROVEMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH CARE.

(a) Evaluations of Mental Health Care and Suicide
Prevention Programs.--
(1) In general.--Not less than once each year, the
Secretary concerned (as defined in section 101(a)(9) of title
10, United States Code) shall contract with a third party
unaffiliated with the Department of Veterans Affairs or the
Department of Defense to conduct an evaluation of the mental
health care and suicide prevention programs carried out under
the laws administered by such Secretary.
(2) Elements.--Each evaluation conducted under paragraph
(1) shall--
(A) use metrics that are common among and useful for
practitioners in the field of mental health care and suicide
prevention;
(B) identify the most effective mental health care and
suicide prevention programs conducted by the Secretary
concerned;
(C) propose best practices for caring for individuals who
suffer from mental health disorders or are at risk of
suicide; and
(D) make recommendations to improve the coordination and
integration of mental health and suicide prevention services
between the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department
of Defense to improve the delivery and effectiveness of such
services.

Amendment No. 70 Offered by Mr. Pascrell of New Jersey

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

SEC. 7__. PRIMARY BLAST INJURY RESEARCH.

The peer-reviewed Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain
Injury Research Program shall conduct a study on blast injury
mechanics covering a wide range of primary blast injury
conditions, including traumatic brain injury, in order to
accelerate solution development in this critical area.

Amendment No. 71 Offered by Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California

At the end of subtitle C of title VII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 729. REPORT ON EFFORTS TO TREAT INFERTILITY OF MILITARY
FAMILIES.

(a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report on what
steps the Secretary is taking to ensure that members of the
Armed Forces and the dependents of such members have access
to reproductive counseling and a full spectrum of treatments
for infertility, including in vitro fertilization.

[[Page H4755]]

(b) Matters Included.--The report under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) An assessment of treatment options available at
military medical treatment facilities throughout the military
health system.
(2) An identification of factors that might disrupt
treatment, including availability of options, lack of timely
access to treatment, change in duty station, or overseas
deployments.
(3) The number of members of the Armed Forces who have used
specific treatment options, including in vitro fertilization.
(4) The number of dependents of members who have used
specific treatment options, including in vitro fertilization.
(5) An identification of non-Department of Defense
treatment options for infertility that could benefit members
and the dependents of members.
(6) Any other matters the Secretary determines appropriate.

Amendment No. 73 Offered by Mr. Mulvaney of South Carolina

Page 197, after line 16, insert the following new section
(and amend the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 805. MAXIMIZING COMPETITION IN DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTS.

(a) Public Design-build Construction Process Improvement.--
Section 3309 of title 41, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``and the contract is
in an amount of $1,000,000 or greater'' after ``appropriate
for use'';
(2) by striking the second sentence of subsection (d) and
inserting the following: ``The maximum number specified in
the solicitation shall not exceed 5 unless the head of the
agency approves the contracting officer's justification with
respect to the solicitation that a number greater than 5 is
in the Federal Government's interest. The contracting officer
shall provide written documentation of how a maximum number
exceeding 5 is consistent with the purposes and objectives of
the two-phase selection procedures.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Report.--
``(1) In general.--The Director of the Office of Management
and Budget shall require the head of each agency to appoint
an individual who shall provide to the Director an annual
compilation of each instance the agency awarded a contract
pursuant to this section in which--
``(A) more than 5 offerors were selected to submit
competitive proposals pursuant to subsection (c)(4); or
``(B) the contract was awarded without using the two-phase
selection procedures described in subsection (c).
``(2) Publication.--The Director shall prepare an annual
report containing the information provided by each executive
agency under subparagraph (A). The report shall be accessible
to the public through electronic means, and the Director
shall publish a notice of availability in the Federal
Register.
``(3) Fiscal years covered; deadline.--The Director shall
submit to Congress the report prepared under subparagraph (B)
for the fiscal year during which this subsection is enacted,
and each of the next 4 fiscal years, not later than 60 days
after the end of each such fiscal year.''.
(b) Defense Design-build Construction Process
Improvement.--Section 2305a of title 10, United States Code,
is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``and the contract is
in an amount of $1,000,000 or greater'' after ``appropriate
for use'';
(2) by striking the second sentence of subsection (d) and
inserting the following: ``The maximum number specified in
the solicitation shall not exceed 5 unless the head of the
agency approves the contracting officer's justification with
respect to an individual solicitation that a number greater
than 5 is in the Federal Government's interest. The
contracting officer shall provide written documentation of
how a maximum number exceeding 5 is consistent with the
purposes and objectives of the two-phase selection
procedures.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(g) Report.--(1) The Director of the Office of Management
and Budget shall require the head of each agency to appoint
an individual who shall provide to the Director an annual
compilation of each instance the agency awarded a contract
pursuant to this section in which--
``(A) more than 5 offerors were selected to submit
competitive proposals pursuant to subsection (c)(4); or
``(B) the contract was awarded without using the two-phase
selection procedures described in subsection (c).
``(2) The Director shall prepare an annual report
containing the information provided by each executive agency
under subparagraph (A). The report shall be accessible to the
public through electronic means, and the Director shall
publish a notice of availability in the Federal Register.
``(3) The Director shall submit to Congress the report
prepared under subparagraph (B) for the fiscal year during
which this subsection is enacted, and each of the next 4
fiscal years, not later than 60 days after the end of each
such fiscal year''.
(c) GAO Report.--Not later than the end of fiscal year
2021, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
issue a report analyzing the extent to which Federal agencies
are in compliance with the reporting requirements in section
2305a(f) of title 10, United States Code, and section 3309(g)
of title 41, United States Code.

Amendment No. 74 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

At the end of subtitle A of title VIII (page 197, after
line 16), insert the following new section:

SEC. 805. PERMANENT AUTHORITY FOR USE OF SIMPLIFIED
ACQUISITION PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL
ITEMS.

Section 4202 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (division D
of Public Law 104-106; 10 U.S.C. 2304 note) is amended by
striking subsection (e).

Amendment No. 75 Offered by Ms. Meng of New York

Page 214, line 9, insert after ``terms.'' the following:
``(C) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
`a contract awarded as part of the Federal Strategic Sourcing
Initiative' shall mean a contract award pursuant to the
process established by the Interagency Strategic Sourcing
Leadership Council that was created by the Office of
Management and Budget pursuant to Memorandum M-13-02 issued
on December 5, 2012.
``(8) Study of strategic sourcing.--
``(A) Study.--Not later than the last day of fiscal year
2015, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
initiate a study on the affect of contracts awarded as part
of the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative on the small
business industrial base.
``(B) Scope.--For each North American Classification System
Code assigned to a contract awarded as part of the Federal
Strategic Sourcing Initiative, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall examine the following:
``(i) The number of small business concerns participating
as prime contractors in that North American Industrial
Classification System code in the federal procurement
marketplace prior to the award of a contract awarded as part
of the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative.
``(ii) The number of small business concerns participating
as prime contractors in that North American Industrial
Classification System code in the federal procurement
marketplace after the award of a contract awarded as part of
the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative.
``(iii) The number of small business concerns anticipated
to be participating as prime contractors in that North
American Industrial Classification System code in the federal
procurement marketplace at the time that the a contract
awarded as part of the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative
expires.
``(iv) The affect of any changes between subsection (a)(1),
(a)(2), and (a)(3) on the health of the small business
industrial base, and the sustainability of any savings
achieved by contract awarded as part of the Federal Strategic
Sourcing Initiative.
``(C) Report.--Not later than 12 months after initiating
the study required by subparagraph (A), the Comptroller
General of the United States shall report to the Committee on
Small Business of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the
Senate on the results from such study and, if warranted, any
recommendations on how to mitigate any negative affects ont
eh small business industrial base or the sustainability of
savings.''.
Page 218, insert after line 20 the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 817. PUBLICATION OF REQUIRED JUSTIFICATION THAT
CONSOLIDATION OF CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS.

Section 44(c)(2)(A) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
657q(c)(2)(A)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``This justification shall be published prior to the issuance
of a solicitation.''.

Amendment No. 76 Offered by Mr. Hanna of New York

Page 218, strike lines 17 through 20 and insert the
following (and conform the table the contents accordingly):

SEC. 816. IMPROVING FEDERAL SURETY BONDS.

(a) Surety Bond Requirements.--Chapter 93 of subtitle VI of
title 31, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 9310. INDIVIDUAL SURETIES.

``If another applicable law or regulation permits the
acceptance of a bond from a surety that is not subject to
sections 9305 and 9306 and is based on a pledge of assets by
the surety, the assets pledged by such surety shall--
``(1) consist of eligible obligations described under
section 9303(a); and
``(2) be submitted to the official of the Government
required to approve or accept the bond, who shall deposit the
assets with a depository described under section 9303(b).'';
and
(2) in the table of contents for such chapter, by adding at
the end the following:

``9310. Individual sureties''.

(b) SBA Surety Bond Guarantee.--Section 411(c)(1) of the
Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 694b(c)(1))
is amended by striking ``70'' and inserting ``90''.
(c) GAO Study.--
(1) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall carry out a study on the following:
(A) All instances during the 10-year period prior to the
date of enactment of the Act in

[[Page H4756]]

which a surety bond proposed or issued by a surety in
connection with a Federal project was--
(i) rejected by a Federal contracting officer; or
(ii) accepted by a Federal contracting officer, but was
later found to have been backed by insufficient collateral or
to be otherwise deficient or with respect to which the surety
did not perform.
(B) The consequences to the Federal Government,
subcontractors, and suppliers of the instances described
under paragraph (1).
(C) The percentages of all Federal contracts that were
awarded to new startup businesses (including new startup
businesses that are small disadvantaged businesses or
disadvantaged business enterprises), small disadvantaged
businesses, and disadvantaged business enterprises as prime
contractors in the 2-year period prior to and the 2-year
period following the date of enactment of this Act, and an
assessment of the impact of this Act and the amendments made
by this Act upon such percentages.
(2) Report.--Not later than the end of the 3-year period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General shall issue a report to the Committee on
the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs of the
Senate containing all findings and determinations made in
carrying out the study required under subsection (a).
(3) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(A) Disadvantaged business enterprise.--The term
``disadvantaged business enterprise'' has the meaning given
that term under section 26.5 of title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations.
(B) New startup business.--The term ``new startup
business'' means a business that was formed in the 2-year
period ending on the date on which the business bids on a
Federal contract that requires giving a surety bond.
(C) Small disadvantaged business.--The term ``small
disadvantaged business'' has the meaning given that term
under section 124.1002(b) of title 13, Code of Federal
Regulations.

Amendment No. 110 Offered by Ms. Meng of New York

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1082. ANNUAL REPORT ON PERFORMANCE OF REGIONAL OFFICES
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

Section 7734 of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by inserting before the period
the following: ``and on the performance of any regional
office that fails to meet its administrative goals'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'';
(3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph (3):
``(3) in the case of any regional office that, for the year
covered by the report, did not meet the administrative goal
of no claim pending for more than 125 days and an accuracy
rating of 98 percent--
``(A) a signed statement prepared by the individual serving
as director of the regional office as of the date of the
submittal of the report containing--
``(i) an explanation for why the regional office did not
meet the goal;
``(ii) a description of the additional resources needed to
enable the regional office to reach the goal; and
``(iii) a description of any additional actions planned for
the subsequent year that are proposed to enable the regional
office to meet the goal; and
``(B) a statement prepared by the Under Secretary for
Benefits explaining how the failure of the regional office to
meet the goal affected the performance evaluation of the
director of the regional office; and''.

Amendment No. 112 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

At the end of title XI, add the following:

SEC. 1107. EXTENSION OF PART-TIME REEMPLOYMENT AUTHORITY.

(a) CSRS.--Section 8344(l)(7) of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by strike ``5 years'' and inserting ``10
years''.
(b) FERS.--Section 8468(i)(7) of such title is amended by
striking ``5 years'' and inserting ``10 years''.

Amendment No. 125 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

At the end of subtitle D of title XII of division A, add
the following:

SEC. _. SALE OF F-16 AIRCRAFT TO TAIWAN.

The President shall carry out the sale of no fewer than 66
F-16C/D multirole fighter aircraft to Taiwan.

Amendment No. 138 Offered by Mr. Mulvaney of South Carolina

Page 484, after line 12, insert the following:

SEC. 1523. CODIFICATION OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
CRITERIA.

The Secretary of Defense shall implement the following
criteria in requests for overseas contingency operations:
(1) Geographic Area Covered - For theater of operations for
non-classified war overseas contingency operations funding,
the geographic areas in which combat or direct combat support
operations occur are: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrhyzstan, the Horn of Africa,
Persian Gulf and Gulf nations, Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean,
the Philippines, and other countries on a case-by-case basis.
(2) Permitted Inclusions in the Overseas Contingency
Operation Budget
(A) Major Equipment
(i) Replacement of loses that have occurred but only for
items not already programmed for replacement in the Future
Years Defense Plan (FYDP), but not including accelerations,
which must be made in the base budget.
(ii) Replacement or repair to original capability (to
upgraded capability if that is currently available) of
equipment returning from theater. The replacement may be a
similar end item if the original item is no longer in
production. Incremental cost of non-war related upgrades, if
made, should be included in the base.
(iii) Purchase of specialized, theater-specific equipment.
(iv) Funding for major equipment must be obligated within
12 months.
(B) Ground Equipment Replacement
(i) For combat losses and returning equipment that is not
economical to repair, the replacement of equipment may be
given to coalition partners, if consistent with approved
policy.
(ii) In-theater stocks above customary equipping levels on
a case-by-case basis.
(C) Equipment Modifications
(i) Operationally-required modifications to equipment used
in theater or in direct support of combat operations and that
is not already programmed in FYDP.
(ii) Funding for equipment modifications must be able be
obligated in 12 months.
(D) Munitions
(i) Replenishment of munitions expended in combat
operations in theater.
(ii) Training ammunition for theater-unique training
events.
(iii) While forecasted expenditures are not permitted, a
case-by-case assessment for munitions where existing stocks
are insufficient to sustain theater combat operations.
(E) Aircraft Replacement
(i) Combat losses by accident that occur in the theater of
operations.
(ii) Combat losses by enemy action that occur in the
theater of operations.
(F) Military Construction
(i) Facilities and infrastructure in the theater of
operations in direct support of combat operations. The level
of construction should be the minimum to meet operational
requirements.
(ii) At non-enduring locations, facilities and
infrastructure for temporary use.
(iii) At enduring locations, facilities and infrastructure
for temporary use.
(iv) At enduring locations, construction requirements must
be tied to surge operations or major changes in operational
requirements and will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
(G) Research and development projects for combat operations
in these specific theaters that can be delivered in 12
months.
(H) Operations
(i) Direct War costs:

(I) Transport of personnel, equipment, and supplies to,
from and within the theater of operations.
(II) Deployment-specific training and preparation for
unites and personnel (military and civilian) to assume their
directed missions as defined in the orders for deployment
into the theater of operations.

(ii) Within the theater, the incremental costs above the
funding programmed in the base budget to:

(I) Support commanders in the conduct of their directed
missions (to include Emergency Response Programs).
(II) Build and maintain temporary facilities.
(III) Provide food, fuel, supplies, contracted services and
other support.
(IV) Cover the operational costs of coalition partners
supporting US military missions, as mutually agreed.

(iii) Indirect war costs incurred outside the theater of
operations will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

(I) Health

(i) Short-term care directly related to combat.
(ii) Infrastructure that is only to be used during the
current conflict.
(J) Personnel
(i) Incremental special pays and allowances for Service
members and civilians deployed to a combat zone.
(ii) Incremental pay, special pays and allowances for
Reserve Component personnel mobilized to support war
missions.
(K) Special Operations Command
(i) Operations that meet the criteria in this guidance.
(ii) Equipment that meets the criteria in this guidance.

(L) Prepositioned Supplies and equipment for resetting in-
theater stocks of supplies and equipment to pre-war levels.

(M) Security force funding to train, equip, and sustain
Iraqi and Afghan military and police forces.
(N) Fuel
(i) War fuel costs and funding to ensure that logistical
support to combat operations is not degraded due to cash
losses in the Department of Defense's baseline fuel program.
(ii) Enough of any base fuel shortfall attributable to fuel
price increases to maintain sufficient on-hand cash for the
Defense Working Capital Funds to cover seven days
disbursements.
(3) Excluded items from Overseas Contingency Funding that
must be funded from the base budget

[[Page H4757]]

(A) Training vehicles, aircraft, ammunition, and
simulators, but not training base stocks of specialized,
theater-specific equipment that is required to support combat
operations in the theater of operations, and support to
deployment-specific training described above.
(B) Acceleration of equipment service life extension
programs already in the Future Years Defense Plan.
(C) Base Realignment and Closure projects.
(D) Family support initiatives
(i) Construction of childcare facilities.
(ii) Funding for private-public partisanships to expand
military families' access to childcare.
(iii) Support for service members' spouses professional
development.
(E) Programs to maintain industrial base capacity including
``war-stoppers.''
(F) Personnel
(i) Recruiting and retention bonuses to maintain end-
strength.
(ii) Basic Pay and the Basic allowances for Housing and
Subsistence for permanently authorized end strength.
(iii) Individual augmentees on a case-by-case basis.
(G) Support for the personnel, operations, or the
construction or maintenance of facilities, at U.S. Offices of
Security Cooperation in theater.
(H) Costs for reconfiguring prepositioned supplies and
equipment or for maintaining them.
(4) Special Situations - Items proposed for increases in
reprogrammings or as payback for prior reprogrammings must
meet the criteria above.

Amendment No. 156 Offered by Mr. Pierluisi of Puerto Rico

At the end of subtitle B of title XXVIII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 28__. USE OF FORMER BOMBARDMENT AREA ON ISLAND OF
CULEBRA, PUERTO RICO.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the statutory prohibition restricting environmental cleanup
of the former bombardment area on the island of Culebra,
Puerto Rico, is a unique anomaly for the Department of
Defense and its formerly used defense sites.
(b) Modification of Restriction on Federal Decontamination
Authority.--Section 204(c) of the Military Construction
Authorization Act, 1974 (Public Law 93-166; 87 Stat. 668) is
amended by adding at the end the following new sentence:
``The first sentence of this subsection shall not apply to
the portions of the former bombardment area that were
identified as having regular public access in the Department
of Defense study entitled `Study Relating to the Presence of
Unexploded Ordnance in a Portion of the Former Naval
Bombardment Area of Culebra Island, Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico' and dated April 20, 2012, which was prepared in
accordance with section 2815 of the Ike Skelton National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law
111-383; 124 Stat. 4464).''.

amendment no. 157 offered by mr. connolly of virginia

At the end of the bill, add the following new division:

DIVISION E--FEDERAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION REFORM

SEC. 5001. SHORT TITLE.

This division may be cited as the ``Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act''.

SEC. 5002. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

The table of contents for this division is as follows:

DIVISION E--FEDERAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION REFORM

Sec. 5001. Short title.
Sec. 5002. Table of contents.
Sec. 5003. Definitions.

TITLE LI--MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WITHIN FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT

Sec. 5101. Increased authority of agency Chief Information Officers
over information technology.
Sec. 5102. Lead coordination role of Chief Information Officers
Council.
Sec. 5103. Reports by Government Accountability Office.

TITLE LII--DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION

Sec. 5201. Purpose.
Sec. 5202. Definitions.
Sec. 5203. Federal data center optimization initiative.
Sec. 5204. Performance requirements related to data center
consolidation.
Sec. 5205. Cost savings related to data center optimization.
Sec. 5206. Reporting requirements to Congress and the Federal Chief
Information Officer.

TITLE LIII--ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATION AND WASTE IN INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION

Sec. 5301. Inventory of information technology software assets.
Sec. 5302. Website consolidation and transparency.
Sec. 5303. Transition to the cloud.
Sec. 5304. Elimination of unnecessary duplication of contracts by
requiring business case analysis.

TITLE LIV--STRENGTHENING IT ACQUISITION WORKFORCE

Sec. 5411. Expansion of training and use of information technology
acquisition cadres.
Sec. 5412. Plan on strengthening program and project management
performance.
Sec. 5413. Personnel awards for excellence in the acquisition of
information systems and information technology.

TITLE LV--ADDITIONAL REFORMS

Sec. 5501. Maximizing the benefit of the Federal strategic sourcing
initiative.
Sec. 5502. Governmentwide software purchasing program.
Sec. 5503. Promoting transparency of blanket purchase agreements.
Sec. 5504. Additional source selection technique in solicitations.
Sec. 5505. Enhanced transparency in information technology investments.
Sec. 5506. Enhanced communication between government and industry.
Sec. 5507. Clarification of current law with respect to technology
neutrality in acquisition of software.
Sec. 5508. No additional funds authorized.

SEC. 5003. DEFINITIONS.

In this division:
(1) Chief acquisition officers council.--The term ``Chief
Acquisition Officers Council'' means the Chief Acquisition
Officers Council established by section 1311(a) of title 41,
United States Code.
(2) Chief information officer.--The term ``Chief
Information Officer'' means a Chief Information Officer (as
designated under section 3506(a)(2) of title 44, United
States Code) of an agency listed in section 901(b) of title
31, United States Code.
(3) Chief information officers council.--The term ``Chief
Information Officers Council'' or ``CIO Council'' means the
Chief Information Officers Council established by section
3603(a) of title 44, United States Code.
(4) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget.
(5) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal agency'' means each
agency listed in section 901(b) of title 31, United States
Code.
(6) Federal chief information officer.--The term ``Federal
Chief Information Officer'' means the Administrator of the
Office of Electronic Government established under section
3602 of title 44, United States Code.
(7) Information technology or it.--The term ``information
technology'' or ``IT'' has the meaning provided in section
11101(6) of title 40, United States Code.
(8) Relevant congressional committees.--The term ``relevant
congressional committees'' means each of the following:
(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and
the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
(B) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.

TITLE LI--MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WITHIN FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT

SEC. 5101. INCREASED AUTHORITY OF AGENCY CHIEF INFORMATION
OFFICERS OVER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

(a) Presidential Appointment of CIOs of Certain Agencies.--
(1) In general.--Section 11315 of title 40, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by redesignating subsection (a) as subsection (e) and
moving such subsection to the end of the section; and
(B) by inserting before subsection (b) the following new
subsection (a):
``(a) Presidential Appointment or Designation of Certain
Chief Information Officers.--
``(1) In general.--There shall be within each agency listed
in section 901(b)(1) of title 31 an agency Chief Information
Officer. Each agency Chief Information Officer shall--
``(A)(i) be appointed by the President; or
``(ii) be designated by the President, in consultation with
the head of the agency; and
``(B) be appointed or designated, as applicable, from among
individuals who possess demonstrated ability in general
management of, and knowledge of and extensive practical
experience in, information technology management practices in
large governmental or business entities.
``(2) Responsibilities.--An agency Chief Information
Officer appointed or designated under this section shall
report directly to the head of the agency and carry out, on a
full-time basis, responsibilities as set forth in this
section and in section 3506(a) of title 44 for Chief
Information Officers designated under paragraph (2) of such
section.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--Section 3506(a)(2) of title 44,
United States Code, is amended--
(A) by striking ``(A) Except as provided under subparagraph
(B), the head of each agency'' and inserting ``The head of
each agency, other than an agency with a Presidentially
appointed or designated Chief Information Officer as provided
in section 11315(a)(1) of title 40,''; and
(B) by striking subparagraph (B).
(b) Authority Relating to Budget and Personnel.--Section
11315 of title 40, United States Code, is further amended by
inserting after subsection (c) the following new subsection:
``(d) Additional Authorities for Certain CIOs.--

[[Page H4758]]

``(1) Budget-related authority.--
``(A) Planning.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the head of each agency listed in section 901(b)(1) or
901(b)(2) of title 31 and in section 102 of title 5 shall
ensure that the Chief Information Officer of the agency has
the authority to participate in decisions regarding the
budget planning process related to information technology or
programs that include significant information technology
components.
``(B) Allocation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, amounts appropriated for any agency listed in section
901(b)(1) or 901(b)(2) of title 31 and in section 102 of
title 5 for any fiscal year that are available for
information technology shall be allocated within the agency,
consistent with the provisions of appropriations Acts and
budget guidelines and recommendations from the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget, in such manner as
specified by, or approved by, the Chief Information Officer
of the agency in consultation with the Chief Financial
Officer of the agency and budget officials.
``(2) Personnel-related authority.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, the head of each agency listed in
section 901(b)(1) or 901(b)(2) of title 31 shall ensure that
the Chief Information Officer of the agency has the authority
necessary to approve the hiring of personnel who will have
information technology responsibilities within the agency and
to require that such personnel have the obligation to report
to the Chief Information Officer in a manner considered
sufficient by the Chief Information Officer.''.
(c) Single Chief Information Officer in Each Agency.--
(1) Requirement.--Section 3506(a)(3) of title 44, United
States Code, is amended--
(A) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(3)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(B) Each agency shall have only one individual with the
title and designation of `Chief Information Officer'. Any
bureau, office, or subordinate organization within the agency
may designate one individual with the title `Deputy Chief
Information Officer', `Associate Chief Information Officer',
or `Assistant Chief Information Officer'.''.
(2) Effective date.--Section 3506(a)(3)(B) of title 44,
United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), shall take
effect as of October 1, 2014. Any individual serving in a
position affected by such section before such date may
continue in that position if the requirements of such section
are fulfilled with respect to that individual.

SEC. 5102. LEAD COORDINATION ROLE OF CHIEF INFORMATION
OFFICERS COUNCIL.

(a) Lead Coordination Role.--Subsection (d) of section 3603
of title 44, United States Code, is amended to read as
follows:
``(d) Lead Interagency Forum.--
``(1) In general.--The Council is designated the lead
interagency forum for improving agency coordination of
practices related to the design, development, modernization,
use, operation, sharing, performance, and review of Federal
Government information resources investment. As the lead
interagency forum, the Council shall develop cross-agency
portfolio management practices to allow and encourage the
development of cross-agency shared services and shared
platforms. The Council shall also issue guidelines and
practices for infrastructure and common information
technology applications, including expansion of the Federal
Enterprise Architecture process if appropriate. The
guidelines and practices may address broader transparency,
common inputs, common outputs, and outcomes achieved. The
guidelines and practices shall be used as a basis for
comparing performance across diverse missions and operations
in various agencies.
``(2) Report.--Not later than December 1 in each of the 6
years following the date of the enactment of this paragraph,
the Council shall submit to the relevant congressional
committees a report (to be known as the `CIO Council Report')
summarizing the Council's activities in the preceding fiscal
year and containing such recommendations for further
congressional action to fulfill its mission as the Council
considers appropriate.
``(3) Relevant congressional committees.--For purposes of
the report required by paragraph (2), the relevant
congressional committees are each of the following:
``(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and
the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
``(B) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.''.
(b) References to Administrator of E-Government as Federal
Chief Information Officer.--
(1) References.--Section 3602(b) of title 44, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The
Administrator may also be referred to as the Federal Chief
Information Officer.''.
(2) Definition.--Section 3601(1) of such title is amended
by inserting ``or Federal Chief Information Officer'' before
``means''.

SEC. 5103. REPORTS BY GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE.

(a) Requirement to Examine Effectiveness.--The Comptroller
General of the United States shall examine the effectiveness
of the Chief Information Officers Council in meeting its
responsibilities under section 3603(d) of title 44, United
States Code, as added by section 5102, with particular focus
on whether agencies are actively participating in the Council
and heeding the Council's advice and guidance.
(b) Reports.--Not later than 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller
General shall submit to the relevant congressional committees
a report containing the findings and recommendations of the
Comptroller General from the examination required by
subsection (a).

TITLE LII--DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION

SEC. 5201. PURPOSE.

The purpose of this title is to optimize Federal data
center usage and efficiency.

SEC. 5202. DEFINITIONS.

In this title:
(1) Federal data center optimization initiative.--The term
``Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative'' or the
``Initiative'' means the initiative developed and implemented
by the Director, through the Federal Chief Information
Officer, as required under section 5203.
(2) Covered agency.--The term ``covered agency'' means any
agency included in the Federal Data Center Optimization
Initiative.
(3) Data center.--The term ``data center'' means a closet,
room, floor, or building for the storage, management, and
dissemination of data and information, as defined by the
Federal Chief Information Officer under guidance issued
pursuant to this section.
(4) Federal data center.--The term ``Federal data center''
means any data center of a covered agency used or operated by
a covered agency, by a contractor of a covered agency, or by
another organization on behalf of a covered agency.
(5) Server utilization.--The term ``server utilization''
refers to the activity level of a server relative to its
maximum activity level, expressed as a percentage.
(6) Power usage effectiveness.--The term ``power usage
effectiveness'' means the ratio obtained by dividing the
total amount of electricity and other power consumed in
running a data center by the power consumed by the
information and communications technology in the data center.

SEC. 5203. FEDERAL DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION INITIATIVE.

(a) Requirement for Initiative.--The Federal Chief
Information Officer, in consultation with the chief
information officers of covered agencies, shall develop and
implement an initiative, to be known as the Federal Data
Center Optimization Initiative, to optimize the usage and
efficiency of Federal data centers by meeting the
requirements of this division and taking additional measures,
as appropriate.
(b) Requirement for Plan.--Within 6 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Chief Information
Officer, in consultation with the chief information officers
of covered agencies, shall develop and submit to Congress a
plan for implementation of the Initiative required by
subsection (a) by each covered agency. In developing the
plan, the Federal Chief Information Officer shall take into
account the findings and recommendations of the Comptroller
General review required by section 5205(e).
(c) Matters Covered.--The plan shall include--
(1) descriptions of how covered agencies will use
reductions in floor space, energy use, infrastructure,
equipment, applications, personnel, increases in
multiorganizational use, server virtualization, cloud
computing, and other appropriate methods to meet the
requirements of the initiative; and
(2) appropriate consideration of shifting Federally owned
data center workload to commercially owned data centers.

SEC. 5204. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO DATA CENTER
CONSOLIDATION.

(a) Server Utilization.--Each covered agency may use the
following methods to achieve the maximum server utilization
possible as determined by the Federal Chief Information
Officer:
(1) The closing of existing data centers that lack adequate
server utilization, as determined by the Federal Chief
Information Officer. If the agency fails to close such data
centers, the agency shall provide a detailed explanation as
to why this data center should remain in use as part of the
submitted plan. The Federal Chief Information Officer shall
include an assessment of the agency explanation in the annual
report to Congress.
(2) The consolidation of services within existing data
centers to increase server utilization rates.
(3) Any other method that the Federal Chief Information
Officer, in consultation with the chief information officers
of covered agencies, determines necessary to optimize server
utilization.
(b) Power Usage Effectiveness.--Each covered agency may use
the following methods to achieve the maximum energy
efficiency possible as determined by the Federal Chief
Information Officer:
(1) The use of the measurement of power usage effectiveness
to calculate data center energy efficiency.
(2) The use of power meters in facilities dedicated to data
center operations to frequently measure power consumption
over time.
(3) The establishment of power usage effectiveness goals
for each data center.
(4) The adoption of best practices for managing--
(A) temperature and airflow in facilities dedicated to data
center operations; and
(B) power supply efficiency.

[[Page H4759]]

(5) The implementation of any other method that the Federal
Chief Information Officer, in consultation with the Chief
Information Officers of covered agencies, determines
necessary to optimize data center energy efficiency.

SEC. 5205. COST SAVINGS RELATED TO DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION.

(a) Requirement To Track Costs.--
(1) In general.--Each covered agency shall track costs
resulting from implementation of the Federal Data Center
Optimization Initiative within the agency and submit a report
on those costs annually to the Federal Chief Information
Officer. Covered agencies shall determine the net costs from
data consolidation on an annual basis.
(2) Factors.--In calculating net costs each year under
paragraph (1), a covered agency shall use the following
factors:
(A) Energy costs.
(B) Personnel costs.
(C) Real estate costs.
(D) Capital expense costs.
(E) Maintenance and support costs such as operating
subsystem, database, hardware, and software license expense
costs.
(F) Other appropriate costs, as determined by the agency in
consultation with the Federal Chief Information Officer.
(b) Requirement To Track Savings.--
(1) In general.--Each covered agency shall track realized
and projected savings resulting from implementation of the
Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative within the agency
and submit a report on those savings annually to the Federal
Chief Information Officer. Covered agencies shall determine
the net savings from data consolidation on an annual basis.
(2) Factors.--In calculating net savings each year under
paragraph (1), a covered agency shall use the following
factors:
(A) Energy savings.
(B) Personnel savings.
(C) Real estate savings.
(D) Capital expense savings.
(E) Maintenance and support savings such as operating
subsystem, database, hardware, and software license expense
savings.
(F) Other appropriate savings, as determined by the agency
in consultation with the Federal Chief Information Officer.
(3) Public availability.--The Federal Chief Information
Officer shall make publicly available a summary of realized
and projected savings for each covered agency. The Federal
Chief Information Officer shall identify any covered agency
that failed to provide the annual report required under
paragraph (1).
(c) Requirement To Use Cost-Effective Measures.--Covered
agencies shall use the most cost-effective measures to
implement the Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative,
such as using estimation to measure or track costs and
savings using a methodology approved by the Federal Chief
Information Officer.
(d) Government Accountability Office Review.--Not later
than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Comptroller General of the United States shall examine
methods for calculating savings from the Initiative and using
them for the purposes identified in subsection (d), including
establishment and use of a special revolving fund that
supports data centers and server optimization, and shall
submit to the Federal Chief Information Officer and Congress
a report on the Comptroller General's findings and
recommendations.

SEC. 5206. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS TO CONGRESS AND THE FEDERAL
CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER.

(a) Agency Requirement To Report to CIO.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), each
covered agency each year shall submit to the Federal Chief
Information Officer a report on the implementation of the
Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative, including
savings resulting from such implementation. The report shall
include an update of the agency's plan for implementing the
Initiative.
(2) Department of defense.--The Secretary of Defense shall
comply with paragraph (1) each year by submitting to the
Federal Chief Information Officer a report with relevant
information collected under section 2867 of Public Law 112-81
(10 U.S.C. 2223a note) or a copy of the report required under
section 2867(d) of such law.
(b) Federal Chief Information Officer Requirement To Report
to Congress.--Each year, the Federal Chief Information
Officer shall submit to the relevant congressional committees
a report that assesses agency progress in carrying out the
Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative and updates the
plan under section 5203. The report may be included as part
of the annual report required under section 3606 of title 44,
United States Code.

TITLE LIII--ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATION AND WASTE IN INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION

SEC. 5301. INVENTORY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SOFTWARE
ASSETS.

(a) Plan.--The Director shall develop a plan for conducting
a Governmentwide inventory of information technology software
assets.
(b) Matters Covered.--The plan required by subsection (a)
shall cover the following:
(1) The manner in which Federal agencies can achieve the
greatest possible economies of scale and cost savings in the
procurement of information technology software assets,
through measures such as reducing the procurement of new
software licenses until such time as agency needs exceed the
number of existing and unused licenses.
(2) The capability to conduct ongoing Governmentwide
inventories of all existing software licenses on an
application-by-application basis, including duplicative,
unused, overused, and underused licenses, and to assess the
need of agencies for software licenses.
(3) A Governmentwide spending analysis to provide knowledge
about how much is being spent for software products or
services to support decisions for strategic sourcing under
the Federal strategic sourcing program managed by the Office
of Federal Procurement Policy.
(c) Availability.--The inventory of information technology
software assets shall be available to Chief Information
Officers and such other Federal officials as the Chief
Information Officers may, in consultation with the Chief
Information Officers Council, designate.
(d) Deadline and Submission to Congress.--Not later than
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Director shall complete and submit to Congress the plan
required by subsection (a).
(e) Implementation.--Not later than two years after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall
complete implementation of the plan required by subsection
(a).
(f) Review by Comptroller General.--Not later than two
years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall review the
plan required by subsection (a) and submit to the relevant
congressional committees a report on the review.

SEC. 5302. WEBSITE CONSOLIDATION AND TRANSPARENCY.

(a) Website Consolidation.--The Director shall--
(1) in consultation with Federal agencies, and after
reviewing the directory of public Federal Government websites
of each agency (as required to be established and updated
under section 207(f)(3) of the E-Government Act of 2002
(Public Law 107-347; 44 U.S.C. 3501 note)), assess all the
publicly available websites of Federal agencies to determine
whether there are duplicative or overlapping websites; and
(2) require Federal agencies to eliminate or consolidate
those websites that are duplicative or overlapping.
(b) Website Transparency.--The Director shall issue
guidance to Federal agencies to ensure that the data on
publicly available websites of the agencies are open and
accessible to the public.
(c) Matters Covered.--In preparing the guidance required by
subsection (b), the Director shall--
(1) develop guidelines, standards, and best practices for
interoperability and transparency;
(2) identify interfaces that provide for shared, open
solutions on the publicly available websites of the agencies;
and
(3) ensure that Federal agency Internet home pages, web-
based forms, and web-based applications are accessible to
individuals with disabilities in conformance with section 508
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794d).
(d) Deadline for Guidance.--The guidance required by
subsection (b) shall be issued not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 5303. TRANSITION TO THE CLOUD.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
transition to cloud computing offers significant potential
benefits for the implementation of Federal information
technology projects in terms of flexibility, cost, and
operational benefits.
(b) Governmentwide Application.--In assessing cloud
computing opportunities, the Chief Information Officers
Council shall define policies and guidelines for the adoption
of Governmentwide programs providing for a standardized
approach to security assessment and operational authorization
for cloud products and services.
(c) Additional Budget Authorities for Transition.--In
transitioning to the cloud, a Chief Information Officer of an
agency listed in section 901(b) of title 31, United States
Code, may establish such cloud service Working Capital Funds,
in consultation with the Chief Financial Officer of the
agency, as may be necessary to transition to cloud-based
solutions. Any establishment of a new Working Capital Fund
under this subsection shall be reported to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
and relevant Congressional committees.

SEC. 5304. ELIMINATION OF UNNECESSARY DUPLICATION OF
CONTRACTS BY REQUIRING BUSINESS CASE ANALYSIS.

(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to leverage
the Government's buying power and achieve administrative
efficiencies and cost savings by eliminating unnecessary
duplication of contracts.
(b) Requirement for Business Case Approval.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 33 of title 41, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 3312. Requirement for business case approval for new
Governmentwide contracts

``(a) In General.--An executive agency may not issue a
solicitation for a covered Governmentwide contract unless the
agency performs a business case analysis for the contract and
obtains an approval of the business case analysis from the
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.
``(b) Review of Business Case Analysis.--

[[Page H4760]]

``(1) In general.--With respect to any covered
Governmentwide contract, the Administrator for Federal
Procurement Policy shall review the business case analysis
submitted for the contract and provide an approval or
disapproval within 60 days after the date of submission. Any
business case analysis not disapproved within such 60-day
period is deemed to be approved.
``(2) Basis for approval of business case.--The
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy shall approve or
disapprove a business case analysis based on the adequacy of
the analysis submitted. The Administrator shall give primary
consideration to whether an agency has demonstrated a
compelling need that cannot be satisfied by existing
Governmentwide contract in a timely and cost-effective
manner.
``(c) Content of Business Case Analysis.--The Administrator
for Federal Procurement Policy shall issue guidance
specifying the content for a business case analysis submitted
pursuant to this section. At a minimum, the business case
analysis shall include details on the administrative
resources needed for such contract, including an analysis of
all direct and indirect costs to the Federal Government of
awarding and administering such contract and the impact such
contract will have on the ability of the Federal Government
to leverage its purchasing power.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Covered governmentwide contract.--The term `covered
Governmentwide contract' means any contract, blanket purchase
agreement, or other contractual instrument for acquisition of
information technology or other goods or services that allows
for an indefinite number of orders to be placed under the
contract, agreement, or instrument, and that is established
by one executive agency for use by multiple executive
agencies to obtain goods or services. The term does not
include--
``(A) a multiple award schedule contract awarded by the
General Services Administration;
``(B) a Governmentwide acquisition contract for information
technology awarded pursuant to sections 11302(e) and
11314(a)(2) of title 40;
``(C) orders under Governmentwide contracts in existence
before the effective date of this section; or
``(D) any contract in an amount less than $10,000,000,
determined on an average annual basis.
``(2) Executive agency.--The term `executive agency' has
the meaning provided that term by section 105 of title 5.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
33 of title 41, United States Code, is amended by adding
after the item relating to section 3311 the following new
item:

``3312. Requirement for business case approval for new Governmentwide
contracts.''.
(c) Report.--Not later than June 1 in each of the next 6
years following the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy shall submit to
the relevant congressional committees a report on the
implementation of section 3312 of title 41, United States
Code, as added by subsection (b), including a summary of the
submissions, reviews, approvals, and disapprovals of business
case analyses pursuant to such section.
(d) Guidance.--The Administrator for Federal Procurement
Policy shall issue guidance for implementing section 3312 of
such title.
(e) Revision of FAR.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Acquisition
Regulation shall be amended to implement section 3312 of such
title.
(g) Effective Date.--Section 3312 of such title is
effective on and after 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

TITLE LIV--STRENGTHENING IT ACQUISITION WORKFORCE

SEC. 5411. EXPANSION OF TRAINING AND USE OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION CADRES.

(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to ensure
timely progress by Federal agencies toward developing,
strengthening, and deploying personnel with highly
specialized skills in information technology acquisition,
including program and project managers, to be known as
information technology acquisition cadres.
(b) Report to Congress.--Section 1704 of title 41, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(j) Strategic Plan on Information Technology Acquisition
Cadres.--
``(1) Five-year strategic plan to congress.--Not later than
June 1 following the date of the enactment of this
subsection, the Director shall submit to the relevant
congressional committees a 5-year strategic plan (to be known
as the `IT Acquisition Cadres Strategic Plan') to develop,
strengthen, and solidify information technology acquisition
cadres. The plan shall include a timeline for implementation
of the plan and identification of individuals responsible for
specific elements of the plan during the 5-year period
covered by the plan.
``(2) Matters covered.--The plan shall address, at a
minimum, the following matters:
``(A) Current information technology acquisition staffing
challenges in Federal agencies, by previous year's
information technology acquisition value, and by the Federal
Government as a whole.
``(B) The variety and complexity of information technology
acquisitions conducted by each Federal agency covered by the
plan, and the specialized information technology acquisition
workforce needed to effectively carry out such acquisitions.
``(C) The development of a sustainable funding model to
support efforts to hire, retain, and train an information
technology acquisition cadre of appropriate size and skill to
effectively carry out the acquisition programs of the Federal
agencies covered by the plan, including an examination of
interagency funding methods and a discussion of how the model
of the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund could
be applied to civilian agencies.
``(D) Any strategic human capital planning necessary to
hire, retain, and train an information acquisition cadre of
appropriate size and skill at each Federal agency covered by
the plan.
``(E) Governmentwide training standards and certification
requirements necessary to enhance the mobility and career
opportunities of the Federal information technology
acquisition cadre within the Federal agencies covered by the
plan.
``(F) New and innovative approaches to workforce
development and training, including cross-functional
training, rotational development, and assignments both within
and outside the Government.
``(G) Appropriate consideration and alignment with the
needs and priorities of the acquisition intern programs.
``(H) Assessment of the current workforce competency and
usage trends in evaluation technique to obtain best value,
including proper handling of tradeoffs between price and
nonprice factors.
``(I) Assessment of the current workforce competency in
designing and aligning performance goals, life cycle costs,
and contract incentives.
``(J) Assessment of the current workforce competency in
avoiding brand-name preference and using industry-neutral
functional specifications to leverage open industry standards
and competition.
``(K) Use of integrated program teams, including fully
dedicated program managers, for each complex information
technology investment.
``(L) Proper assignment of recognition or accountability to
the members of an integrated program team for both individual
functional goals and overall program success or failure.
``(M) The development of a technology fellows program that
includes provisions for recruiting, for rotation of
assignments, and for partnering directly with universities
with well-recognized information technology programs.
``(N) The capability to properly manage other transaction
authority (where such authority is granted), including
ensuring that the use of the authority is warranted due to
unique technical challenges, rapid adoption of innovative or
emerging commercial or noncommercial technologies, or other
circumstances that cannot readily be satisfied using a
contract, grant, or cooperative agreement in accordance with
applicable law and the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
``(O) The use of student internship and scholarship
programs as a talent pool for permanent hires and the use and
impact of special hiring authorities and flexibilities to
recruit diverse candidates.
``(P) The assessment of hiring manager satisfaction with
the hiring process and hiring outcomes, including
satisfaction with the quality of applicants interviewed and
hires made.
``(Q) The assessment of applicant satisfaction with the
hiring process, including the clarity of the hiring
announcement, the user-friendliness of the application
process, communication from the hiring manager or agency
regarding application status, and timeliness of the hiring
decision.
``(R) The assessment of new hire satisfaction with the
onboarding process, including the orientation process, and
investment in training and development for employees during
their first year of employment.
``(S) Any other matters the Director considers appropriate.
``(3) Annual report.--Not later than June 1 in each of the
5 years following the year of submission of the plan required
by paragraph (1), the Director shall submit to the relevant
congressional committees an annual report outlining the
progress made pursuant to the plan.
``(4) Government accountability office review of the plan
and annual report.--
``(A) Not later than 1 year after the submission of the
plan required by paragraph (1), the Comptroller General of
the United States shall review the plan and submit to the
relevant congressional committees a report on the review.
``(B) Not later than 6 months after the submission of the
first, third, and fifth annual report required under
paragraph (3), the Comptroller General shall independently
assess the findings of the annual report and brief the
relevant congressional committees on the Comptroller
General's findings and recommendations to ensure the
objectives of the plan are accomplished.
``(5) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) The term `Federal agency' means each agency listed in
section 901(b) of title 31.
``(B) The term `relevant congressional committees' means
each of the following:
``(i) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and
the Committee on

[[Page H4761]]

Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
``(ii) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.''.

SEC. 5412. PLAN ON STRENGTHENING PROGRAM AND PROJECT
MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE.

(a) Plan on Strengthening Program and Project Management
Performance.--Not later than June 1 following the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director, in consultation with the
Director of the Office of Personnel Management, shall submit
to the relevant congressional committees a plan for improving
management of IT programs and projects.
(b) Matters Covered.--The plan required by subsection (a)
shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) Creation of a specialized career path for program
management.
(2) The development of a competency model for program
management consistent with the IT project manager model.
(3) A career advancement model that requires appropriate
expertise and experience for advancement.
(4) A career advancement model that is more competitive
with the private sector and that recognizes both Government
and private sector experience.
(c) Combination With Other Cadres Plan.--The Director may
combine the plan required by subsection (a) with the IT
Acquisition Cadres Strategic Plan required under section
1704(j) of title 41, United States Code, as added by section
5411.

SEC. 5413. PERSONNEL AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE IN THE ACQUISITION
OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.

(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management shall develop policy and guidance for
agencies to develop a program to recognize excellent
performance by Federal Government employees and teams of such
employees in the acquisition of information systems and
information technology for the agency.
(b) Elements.--The program referred to in subsection (a)
shall, to the extent practicable--
(1) obtain objective outcome measures; and
(2) include procedures for--
(A) the nomination of Federal Government employees and
teams of such employees for eligibility for recognition under
the program; and
(B) the evaluation of nominations for recognition under the
program by 1 or more agency panels of individuals from
Government, academia, and the private sector who have such
expertise, and are appointed in such a manner, as the
Director of the Office of Personal Management shall establish
for purposes of the program.
(c) Award of Cash Bonuses and Other Incentives.--In
carrying out the program referred to in subsection (a), the
Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in
consultation with the Director of the Office of Management
and Budget, shall establish policies and guidance for
agencies to reward any Federal Government employee or teams
of such employees recognized pursuant to the program--
(1) with a cash bonus, to the extent that the performance
of such individual or team warrants the award of such bonus
and is authorized by any provision of law;
(2) through promotions and other nonmonetary awards;
(3) by publicizing--
(A) acquisition accomplishments by individual employees;
and
(B) the tangible end benefits that resulted from such
accomplishments, as appropriate; and
(4) through other awards, incentives, or bonuses that the
head of the agency considers appropriate.

TITLE LV--ADDITIONAL REFORMS

SEC. 5501. MAXIMIZING THE BENEFIT OF THE FEDERAL STRATEGIC
SOURCING INITIATIVE.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy
shall prescribe regulations providing that when the Federal
Government makes a purchase of services and supplies offered
under the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative (managed by
the Office of Federal Procurement Policy) but such Initiative
is not used, the contract file for the purchase shall include
a brief analysis of the comparative value, including price
and nonprice factors, between the services and supplies
offered under such Initiative and services and supplies
offered under the source or sources used for the purchase.

SEC. 5502. GOVERNMENTWIDE SOFTWARE PURCHASING PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--The Administrator of General Services, in
collaboration with the Department of Defense, shall identify
and develop a strategic sourcing initiative to enhance
Governmentwide acquisition, shared use, and dissemination of
software, as well as compliance with end user license
agreements.
(b) Examination of Methods.--In developing the initiative
under subsection (a), the Administrator shall examine the use
of realistic and effective demand aggregation models
supported by actual agency commitment to use the models, and
supplier relationship management practices, to more
effectively govern the Government's acquisition of
information technology.
(c) Governmentwide User License Agreement.--The
Administrator, in developing the initiative under subsection
(a), shall allow for the purchase of a license agreement that
is available for use by all executive agencies as one user to
the maximum extent practicable and as appropriate.

SEC. 5503. PROMOTING TRANSPARENCY OF BLANKET PURCHASE
AGREEMENTS.

(a) Price Information To Be Treated as Public
Information.--The final negotiated price offered by an
awardee of a blanket purchase agreement shall be treated as
public information.
(b) Publication of Blanket Purchase Agreement
Information.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of General Services
shall make available to the public a list of all blanket
purchase agreements entered into by Federal agencies under
its Federal Supply Schedules contracts and the prices
associated with those blanket purchase agreements. The list
and price information shall be updated at least once every 6
months.

SEC. 5504. ADDITIONAL SOURCE SELECTION TECHNIQUE IN
SOLICITATIONS.

Section 3306(d) of title 41, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
(2) by striking the period and inserting ``; or'' at the
end of paragraph (2); and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) stating in the solicitation that the award will be
made using a fixed price technical competition, under which
all offerors compete solely on nonprice factors and the fixed
award price is pre-announced in the solicitation.''.

SEC. 5505. ENHANCED TRANSPARENCY IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
INVESTMENTS.

(a) Public Availability of Information About IT
Investments.--Section 11302(c) of title 40, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph:
``(2) Public availability.--
``(A) In general.--The Director shall make available to the
public the cost, schedule, and performance data for all of
the IT investments listed in subparagraph (B),
notwithstanding whether the investments are for new IT
acquisitions or for operations and maintenance of existing
IT.
``(B) Investments listed.--The investments listed in this
subparagraph are the following:
``(i) At least 80 percent (by dollar value) of all
information technology investments Governmentwide.
``(ii) At least 60 percent (by dollar value) of all
information technology investments in each Federal agency
listed in section 901(b) of title 31.
``(iii) Every major information technology investment (as
defined by the Office of Management and Budget) in each
Federal agency listed in section 901(b) of title 31.
``(C) Quarterly review and certification.--For each
investment listed in subparagraph (B), the agency Chief
Information Officer and the program manager of the investment
within the agency shall certify, at least once every quarter,
that the information is current, accurate, and reflects the
risks associated with each listed investment. The Director
shall conduct quarterly reviews and publicly identify
agencies with an incomplete certification or with significant
data quality issues.
``(D) Continuous availability.--The information required
under subparagraph (A), in its most updated form, shall be
publicly available at all times.
``(E) Waiver or limitation authority.--The applicability of
subparagraph (A) may be waived or the extent of the
information may be limited--
``(i) by the Director, with respect to IT investments
Governmentwide; and
``(ii) by the Chief Information Officer of a Federal
agency, with respect to IT investments in that agency;
if the Director or the Chief Information Officer, as the case
may be, determines that such a waiver or limitation is in the
national security interests of the United States.''.
(b) Additional Report Requirements.--Paragraph (3) of
section 11302(c) of such title, as redesignated by subsection
(a), is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The
report shall include an analysis of agency trends reflected
in the performance risk information required in paragraph
(2).''.

SEC. 5506. ENHANCED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND
INDUSTRY.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council shall
prescribe a regulation making clear that agency acquisition
personnel are permitted and encouraged to engage in
responsible and constructive exchanges with industry, so long
as those exchanges are consistent with existing law and
regulation and do not promote an unfair competitive advantage
to particular firms.

SEC. 5507. CLARIFICATION OF CURRENT LAW WITH RESPECT TO
TECHNOLOGY NEUTRALITY IN ACQUISITION OF
SOFTWARE.

(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish
guidance and processes to

[[Page H4762]]

clarify that software acquisitions by the Federal Government
are to be made using merit-based requirements development and
evaluation processes that promote procurement choices--
(1) based on performance and value, including the long-term
value proposition to the Federal Government;
(2) free of preconceived preferences based on how
technology is developed, licensed, or distributed; and
(3) generally including the consideration of proprietary,
open source, and mixed source software technologies.
(b) Technology Neutrality.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed to modify the Federal Government's long-standing
policy of following technology-neutral principles and
practices when selecting and acquiring information technology
that best fits the needs of the Federal Government.
(c) Guidance.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Director, in consultation with
the Chief Information Officers Council, shall issue guidance
concerning the technology-neutral procurement and use of
software within the Federal Government.
(d) Matters Covered.--In issuing guidance under subsection
(c), the Director shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) Guidance to clarify that the preference for commercial
items in section 3307 of title 41, United States Code,
includes proprietary, open source, and mixed source software
that meets the definition of the term ``commercial item'' in
section 103 of title 41, United States Code, including all
such software that is used for non-Government purposes and is
licensed to the public.
(2) Guidance regarding the conduct of market research to
ensure the inclusion of proprietary, open source, and mixed
source software options.
(3) Guidance to define Governmentwide standards for
security, redistribution, indemnity, and copyright in the
acquisition, use, release, and collaborative development of
proprietary, open source, and mixed source software.
(4) Guidance for the adoption of available commercial
practices to acquire proprietary, open source, and mixed
source software for widespread Government use, including
issues such as security and redistribution rights.
(5) Guidance to establish standard service level agreements
for maintenance and support for proprietary, open source, and
mixed source software products widely adopted by the
Government, as well as the development of Governmentwide
agreements that contain standard and widely applicable
contract provisions for ongoing maintenance and development
of software.
(e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 2 years after the
issuance of the guidance required by subsection (b), the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the
relevant congressional committees a report containing--
(1) an assessment of the effectiveness of the guidance;
(2) an identification of barriers to widespread use by the
Federal Government of specific software technologies; and
(3) such legislative recommendations as the Comptroller
General considers appropriate to further the purposes of this
section.

SEC. 5508. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED.

No additional funds are authorized to carry out the
requirements of this division and the amendments made by this
division. Such requirements shall be carried out using
amounts otherwise authorized or appropriated.

Amendment No. 160 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

Page 459, line 15, strike ``None'' and insert ``(a)
People's Republic of China.--None''.
Page 459, after line 21, insert the following new
subsection:
(b) Russian Federation.--
(1) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
missile defense systems of the Russian Federation should not
be integrated into the missile defense systems of the United
States or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization if such
integration undermines the security of the United States or
NATO.
(2) Prohibition.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2015 for the Department of Defense or for United
States contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization may be obligated or expended to integrate
missile defense systems of the Russian Federation into
missile defense systems of the United States if such
integration undermines the security of the United States or
NATO.
(3) Waiver.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the
prohibition in paragraph (2) if the Secretary, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, determines that the
Russian Federation--
(A) has withdrawn military forces and assets from Ukraine's
Crimean peninsula, other than at those operating in
accordance with its 1997 agreement on the Status and
Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet Stationing on the Territory
of Ukraine; and
(B) has ceased aggressive actions, particularly along
Ukraine's eastern border, that have led to a destabilization
of the Ukrainian government and the safety of its residents.

{time} 2115

We are going to have substantially less money over the course of the
next 10 years for defense than we thought we were going to have.
That is true even if sequestration goes away. If sequestration
happens, we really face a challenge. So the question is how are we
going to restructure our defense plans to deal with the fact that we
are going to have substantially less money than we had going forward.
The answer in this bill is we are not going to deal with it this year,
and we are going to hope things get better and maybe deal with it next
year.
The administration confronted this problem in a number of areas. I
will walk through them. Number one, in the very controversial and
difficult area of personnel costs, they found savings in health care by
expanding what servicemembers would have to pay for their health care,
they reduced somewhat the subsidy to our commissaries, they reduced the
housing subsidy, and they also reduced the pay raise down to 1 percent
and got rid of it for senior officers.
Except for the last part of that, we ducked all of those. That is $2
billion over 5 years that the administration was able to save. Nothing
was offered, nothing was done on our part to deal with that.
In the Guard and Reserve, the Army has put together a plan to
restructure their helicopters in a way that is way too complicated to
explain, but that saves $12 billion over the course of 5 years. We put
into our bill an amendment saying they can't do that at all in 2015.
Also added in one of the en bloc amendments was an amendment now that
says we are going to study it for a longer period of time even beyond
that--that is another $12 billion--and we don't make it up anywhere
because that is over 5 years, so we can get away with that in 2015.
I mentioned the Navy issue: 14 ships that the Navy has said they will
lay up

[[Page H4763]]

in order to save money. That is roughly $3.5 billion that they will
save. Again, we got rid of that in order to pay for it in the short-
term. We didn't come up with more money or cut something else. We
raided the ship modernization accounts to fund that in the short term,
which again does not deal or address the problem. DOD also proposed
getting rid of the A-10 and getting rid of the U-2. We stopped them
from doing both of those things.
We have at every turn blocked just about every single proposal the
administration has made to save money over the long-term. In each one
of those isolated incidents, there are strong arguments that tend to be
mostly parochial. In other words, if it is in your district or in your
neighborhood then you rise up in furious anger against it, but there
may be arguments as to why that isn't the best choice. But there was no
alternative proposed. We simply got creative in our accounting to get
through 2015. These are mostly 5-year savings, so we can sort of
stagger our way through 2015 and create a massive bow wave down the
road that we are not at all prepared to deal with.
I am sorry I left out the big one: BRAC. It is estimated we are
wasting $6 billion a year on facilities that we don't need. Absolutely
the only argument that exists against doing another BRAC round, given
how much we have drawn down our force structure and the fact that the
military estimates that they are 25 percent over capacity in terms of
their facilities, is that Members don't want to run the risk of having
a base be closed in their district. I get that. There are a ton of
bases in the State of Washington. But we have to confront these issues
because the money is not going to magically appear.
So the amendments that were disallowed, I was hoping to have the
opportunity on those two amendments to have the broader debate about
making the choices now. I don't think we should simply rubberstamp what
the White House has done. If we don't like those cuts, let's come up
with another one. This is the conversation I had with my adjutant
general in the State of Washington, who was concerned about the cuts to
the Army Guard and the Air Force Guard. He was talking about everything
he didn't like about it. I said: Look, present me an alternative, give
us an alternative that says here is how we are going to save $12
billion instead, and I am happy to look at it. But just to say: We
don't like the cuts, I get that. Nobody--well, there are some. Most
people don't like the cuts, but they are there. We passed the Budget
Control Act, we shut down the government, we passed the budget
agreement last year that set the levels for FY14 and FY15, and we still
have on the books 8 more years of sequestration.
If Congress doesn't want the administration to wind up making all
these choices, then we have got to step up and make the decisions now
rationally about where we are going to be in terms of the budget.
The final point I will make on that is that what happens when we
don't make those decisions is that readiness gets cut. In this bill,
readiness is cut by $1.2 billion from the President's request. Plus,
there is another $633 billion that we take out of OCO to fund the A-10.
That is probably readiness as well, because they use the OCO account to
backfill some of the cuts in readiness. So that is $1.8 billion out of
the readiness account that was already depleted because of the
shutdowns, because of the CRs.
Well, what is readiness? We had an interesting discussion about this
in committee. Readiness is not the size of the force. Readiness is the
capability of the force. Are the troops trained and equipped to perform
the missions that we have asked them to do?
The chairman has quite eloquently on a number of occasions pointed to
past wars: the Korean war and World War II, where we had to ramp up in
a hurry and we sent troops over who were not ready to fight, and many
of them were killed and injured because they were not ready to fight.
If we raid readiness accounts to protect personnel, to stop BRAC, to
stop the Pentagon from cutting the U-2 or the A-10, or from shutting
down a Guard unit, if we do that they've got to raid readiness, because
that is the easiest thing to do. You spend less on fuel, you don't
repair some equipment that is out there, you fly less, you drive less,
you train less. What we wind up with is the hollow force that nobody
wants.
So as we go into conference and as we go forward, it is an obligation
of this Congress to say: What is our plan? Right now our plan is hope.
I didn't serve in the military, but I heard very early on in my time on
the Armed Services Committee one of the sayings in the military is
``hope is not a strategy.'' We are hoping that the money will appear,
we are hoping that somehow we magically won't have to make those
decisions.
I think we are past that point. The decisions are going to get made.
They are either going to get made poorly if we ignore them, or
preferably they will get made well so that we do our best to put
together a force that no matter the size is at least capable and ready
to perform the missions that we might ask of them.
So ruling those amendments out of order I think was most
unfortunate--that we weren't able to have that debate. But rest
assured, as the chairman has pointed out, this is his last term, so I
would say there is no ducking this, but I guess you can retire. You
won't be here. But the country will have to deal with those decisions
one way or the other, and we thus far have not made them.

So I would urge us to start looking at this and saying if we are not
going to do a BRAC, then what are we going to do. If we are not going
to shrink the Guard this way, then what are we going to do.
Let's get some concrete proposals on the table that are something
other than, don't cut anything in my backyard, and closing our eyes and
hoping that the problem will go away.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlelady from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski), my friend and colleague, a
member of the Armed Services Committee.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Madam Chair, I want to thank Chairman McKeon for
including this amendment that I cosponsor with Congressman Roskam.
Israel and the United States face common threats in the Middle East,
from the ongoing civil war in Syria, continued rocket fire from
terrorist organizations in the Gaza Strip, and the looming threat of a
nuclear-armed Iran.
In particular, Iran's brazen quest for nuclear weapons poses an
existential threat to our ally Israel. A nuclear Iran would trigger an
arms race in the Middle East, further destabilizing a region plagued by
persistent volatility and, in the process, threatening U.S. national
security and international stability.
Military action against Iran is an absolute last resort, only after
we exhaust all peaceful options. However, it would be irresponsible not
to prepare for a worst-case scenario.
This amendment would require the administration to certify that
Israel maintains an independent capability to remove existential
threats to its own security. Specifically, this report would ensure the
smooth transfer to Israel of aerial refueling tankers, advanced bunker-
buster munitions, and other capabilities and platforms critical to
Israel's self-defense.
This is an important amendment for the security of both the U.S. as
well as our ally Israel.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en
bloc amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PIERLUISI. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to
enable DOD to remove unexploded ordnance from certain areas on the
island of Culebra, Puerto Rico, which was used as a military training
range for decades.
Under the FUDS program, the Army Corps of Engineers is
decontaminating limited areas of Culebra. However, DOD asserts that a
1974 law prohibits the use of Federal funds to decontaminate land that
constituted the bombardment zone. Approximately 400 acres of this land
were conveyed to the government of Puerto Rico in 1982 for use as a
public park. DOD contends that the 1974 law has not been superseded by
Federal cleanup authorities enacted in 1986.
As a result of this rigid interpretation, Culebra is the only former
defense site of several thousand across the United States that

[[Page H4764]]

DOD claims it is barred by statute from decontaminating. The resulting
state of affairs poses a direct threat to public safety, since this
land encompasses popular beaches, campgrounds and a trail. In a
congressionally-required study, DOD reported that there have been many
incidents where members of the public encountered unexploded munitions
that could have caused serious harm.
My amendment would authorize the Corps of Engineers to decontaminate
those areas within the 400-acre parcel where the risk to public safety
is the greatest. It will ensure that the 1974 Act ceases to serve as an
obstacle to implementation of current Federal policy, which provides
that the federal government is responsible for cleaning lands that were
contaminated as a result of its actions. The amendment ensures that
Culebra will be treated the same--no better and no worse--than other
formerly used defense sites.
The U.S. citizens living in Culebra sacrificed so that our military
could receive the training it required. Congress, in turn, should now
take this small step to enable DOD to remove unexploded munitions from
the island.
I thank the Committee leadership and, in particular, the gentleman
from Virginia, Mr. Wittman, for working with me on this issue.
Mr. CONNELLY. Madam Chair, I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking
Member of the Armed Services Committee and their staff for working with
me on a number of amendments to this bill.
In particular, I am proud to have worked with the Chairman of the
Oversight Committee, Mr. Issa, to co-author the Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act, or FITARA.
In the 21st century, effective governance is inextricably linked with
how well government leverages technology to serve its citizens.
Yet current laws governing Federal IT procurement are antiquated and
cumbersome.
Our bipartisan amendment would comprehensively streamline and
strengthen the process.
It enhances CIO authorities to ensure agency heads have talented
leaders to recruit and retain talented IT staff and to oversee critical
IT investments.
It accelerates data center optimization and strengthens the
accountability and transparency of Federal IT programs.
If enacted, 80 percent of the approximately $80 billion spent
annually on Federal IT investment would be posted online for public
review, compared to the 50 percent or less today.
Again, I thank the Chair and Ranking Member for their support.
Mr. ISSA. Madam Chair, this amendment is a modified version of
language that was incorporated in the House-passed NDAA authorization
bill last year, and that was adopted again by the House earlier this
year as a standalone bill, H.R. 1232, the Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act.
The amendment reforms--Government-wide--the process by which federal
information technology is acquired and deployed.
It takes a streamlined and precise approach to solving a huge problem
in Federal IT--the broken system by which the government procures and
deploys critical IT infrastructure.
President Barack Obama, on Nov. 14, 2013, stated ``One of the things
[the federal government] does not do well is information technology
procurement This is kind of a systematic problem that we have across
the board.'' I agree.
I commend the Administrations' recent steps to strengthen IT
management by strengthening the eGov office and focusing on
duplications via what is called PortfolioStat reviews.
In its annual reports to Congress, GAO has identified duplicative IT
investments as a significant problem. Our oversight hearings confirmed
that despite spending more than $600 billion over the past decade, too
often Federal IT investments run over budget, become behind schedule,
or never deliver on the promised solution or functionality.
Indeed, industry experts have estimated that as much as 25 percent of
the annual $80 billion spent on IT is attributable to mismanaged or
duplicative IT investments.
In terms of potential cost savings, some in the industry have
estimated that more than one trillion dollars could be saved over the
next ten years if the government adopted the ``proven'' IT best
practices currently in use by the private sector.
We need to enhance the best value to the taxpayer by aligning the
cumbersome federal acquisition process to major trends in the IT
industry.
FITARA accomplishes this by--
1. Creating a clear line of responsibility, authority, and
accountability over IT investment and management decisions by
empowering agency CIOs;
2. Accelerating the consolidation and optimization of the Federal
Government's proliferating data centers;
3. Increasing the accuracy and transparency of IT investment
scorecards by requiring 80 percent of Government-wide IT spending be
covered by a public website called the IT Dashboard; and
4. Ensuring procurement decisions give due consideration to all
technologies--including open source--and that contracts are awarded
based on long-term best value proposition.
This is a significant and timely reform that will enhance both
defense and non-defense procurement. I urge all members to support this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 5 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, pursuant to House Resolution 590, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 5 consisting of amendment Nos. 77, 78, 79, 80,
83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 98, 107, 108, 109, 111, 116, and 135
printed in part A of House Report No. 113-460, offered by Mr. McKeon of
California:

Amendment No. 77 Offered by Mr. Graves of Missouri

Page 218, after line 20, insert the following new section
(and amend the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 817. SMALL BUSINESS PRIME AND SUBCONTRACT PARTICIPATION
GOALS RAISED; ACCOUNTING OF SUBCONTRACTORS.

(a) Prime Contracting Goals.--Section 15(g)(1)(A) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``23 percent'' and inserting
``25 percent''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(vi) The Governmentwide goal for participation by small
business concerns in subcontract awards shall be established
at not less than 40 percent of the total value of all
subcontract dollars awarded pursuant to section 8(d) of this
Act for each fiscal year.''.
(b) Delayed Effective Date.--The amendment made by
subsection (a)(2) of this section shall take effect only
beginning on the date on which the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration has promulgated any regulations
necessary, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation has been
revised, to implement section 1614 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 and the amendments
made by such section.
(c) Repeal of Certain Provision Pertaining to Accounting of
Subcontractors.--Section 15(g) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 644(g)) is amended by striking paragraph (3).

Amendment No. 78 Offered by Mr. Caardenas of California

Page 218, insert after line 20 the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 817. SMALL BUSINESS CYBER EDUCATION.

The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Administrator of the Small Business Administration, may make
every reasonable effort to promote an outreach and education
program to assist small businesses (as defined in section 3
of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)) contracted by the
Department of Defense to assist such businesses to--
(1) understand the gravity and scope of cyber threats;
(2) develop a plan to protect intellectual property; and
(3) develop a plan to protect the networks of such
businesses.

Amendment No. 79 Offered by Mr. Collins of New York

At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:

SEC. 827. INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.

Section 9(jj) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(jj))
is amended to read as follows:
``(jj) Innovative Approaches to Technology Transfer.--
``(1) Grant program.--
``(A) In general.--Each Federal agency required by
subsection (n) to establish an STTR program shall carry out a
grant program to support innovative approaches to technology
transfer at institutions of higher education (as defined in
section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1001(a)), nonprofit research institutions and Federal
laboratories in order to improve or accelerate the
commercialization of federally funded research and technology
by small business concerns, including new businesses.
``(B) Awarding of grants and awards.--
``(i) In general.--Each Federal agency required by
subparagraph (A) to participate in this program, shall award,
through a competitive, merit-based process, grants, in the
amounts listed in subparagraph (C) to institutions of higher
education, technology transfer organizations that facilitate
the commercialization of technologies developed by one or
more such institutions of higher education, Federal
laboratories, other public and private nonprofit entities,
and consortia thereof, for initiatives that help identify
high-quality, commercially viable federally funded research
and technologies and to facilitate and accelerate their
transfer into the marketplace.

[[Page H4765]]

``(ii) Use of funds.--Activities supported by grants under
this subsection may include--

``(I) providing early-stage proof of concept funding for
translational research;
``(II) identifying research and technologies at
institutions that have the potential for accelerated
commercialization;
``(III) technology maturation funding to support activities
such as prototype construction, experiment analysis, product
comparison, and collecting performance data;
``(IV) technical validations, market research, clarifying
intellectual property rights position and strategy, and
investigating commercial and business opportunities;
``(V) programs to provide advice, mentoring,
entrepreneurial education, project management, and technology
and business development expertise to innovators and
recipients of technology transfer licenses to maximize
commercialization potential; and
``(VI) conducting outreach to small business concerns as
potential licensees of federally funded research and
technology, and providing technology transfer services to
such small business concerns.

``(iii) Selection process and applications.--Qualifying
institutions seeking a grant under this subsection shall
submit an application to a Federal agency required by
subparagraph (A) to participate in this program at such time,
in such manner, and containing such information as the agency
may require. The application shall include, at a minimum--

``(I) a description of innovative approaches to technology
transfer, technology development, and commercial readiness
that have the potential to increase or accelerate technology
transfer outcomes and can be adopted by other qualifying
institutions, or a demonstration of proven technology
transfer and commercialization strategies, or a plan to
implement proven technology transfer and commercialization
strategies, that can achieve greater commercialization of
federally funded research and technologies with program
funding;
``(II) a description of how the qualifying institution will
contribute to local and regional economic development
efforts; and
``(III) a plan for sustainability beyond the duration of
the funding award.

``(iv) Program oversight boards.--

``(I) In general.--Successful proposals shall include a
plan to assemble a Program Oversight Board, the members of
which shall have technical, scientific, or business expertise
three-fifths of whom shall be drawn from industry, start-up
companies, venture capital or other equity investment
mechanism, technical enterprises, financial institutions, and
business development organizations with a track record of
success in commercializing innovations. Proposals may use
oversight boards in existence on the date of the enactment of
the Howard P. `Buck' McKeon National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2015 that meet the requirements of this
subclause.
``(II) Program oversight boards responsibilities.--Program
Oversight Boards shall--

``(aa) establish award programs for individual projects;
``(bb) provide rigorous evaluation of project applications;
``(cc) determine which projects should receive awards, in
accordance with guidelines established under subparagraph
(C)(ii);
``(dd) establish milestones and associated award amounts
for projects that reach milestones;
``(ee) determine whether awarded projects are reaching
milestones; and
``(ff) develop a process to reallocate outstanding award
amounts from projects that are not reaching milestones to
other projects with more potential.

``(III) Conflict of interest.--Program Oversight Boards
shall be composed of members who do not have a conflict of
interest. Boards shall adopt conflict of interest policies to
ensure relevant relationships are disclosed and proper
recusal procedures are in place.

``(C) Grant and award amounts.--
``(i) Grant amounts.--Each Federal agency required by
subparagraph (A) to carry out a grant program may make grants
up to $3,000,000 to a qualifying institution.
``(ii) Award amounts.--Each qualifying institution that
receives a grant under subparagraph (B) shall provide awards
for individual projects of not more than $100,000, to be
provided in phased amounts, based on reaching the milestones
established by the qualifying institution's Program Oversight
Board.
``(D) Authorized expenditures for innovative approaches to
technology transfer grant program.--
``(i) Percentage.--The percentage of the extramural budget
for research, or research and development, each Federal
agency required by subsection (n) to establish an STTR
program shall expend on the Innovative Approaches to
Technology Transfer Grant Program shall be--

``(I) 0.05 percent for each of fiscal years 2014 and 2015;
and
``(II) 0.1 percent for each of fiscal years 2016 and 2017.

``(ii) Treatment of expenditures.--Any portion of the
extramural budget expended by a Federal agency on the
Innovative Approaches to Technology Transfer Grant Program
shall apply towards the agency's expenditure requirements
under subsection (n).
``(2) Program evaluation and data collection and
dissemination.--
``(A) Evaluation plan and data collection.--Each Federal
agency required by paragraph (1)(A) to establish an
Innovative Approaches to Technology Transfer Grant Program
shall develop a program evaluation plan and collect annually
such information from grantees as is necessary to assess the
Program. Program evaluation plans shall require the
collection of data aimed at identifying outcomes resulting
from the transfer of technology with assistance from the
Innovative Approaches to Technology Transfer Grant Program.
Such data may include--
``(i) specific follow-on funding identified or obtained,
including follow-on funding sources, such as Federal sources
or private sources, within 3 years of the completion of the
award;
``(ii) number of projects which, within 5 years of
receiving an award under paragraph (1), result in a license
to a start-up company or an established company with
sufficient resources for effective commercialization;
``(iii) the number of invention disclosures received,
United States patent applications filed, and United States
patents issued within 5 years of the award;
``(iv) number of projects receiving a grant under paragraph
(1) that secure Phase I or Phase II SBIR or STTR awards;
``(v) available information on revenue, sales or other
measures of products that have been commercialized as a
result of projects awarded under paragraph (1), within 5
years of the award;
``(vi) number and location of jobs created resulting from
projects awarded under paragraph (1); and
``(vii) other data as deemed appropriate by a Federal
agency required by this subparagraph to develop a program
evaluation plan.
``(B) Evaluative report to congress.--The head of each
Federal agency that participates in the Innovative Approaches
to Technology Transfer Grant Program shall submit to the
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee
on Small Business of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the
Senate an evaluative report regarding the activities of the
program. The report shall include--
``(i) a detailed description of the implementation of the
program;
``(ii) a detailed description of the grantee selection
process;
``(iii) an accounting of the funds used in the program; and
``(iv) a summary of the data collected under subparagraph
(A).
``(C) Data dissemination.--For the purposes of program
transparency and dissemination of best practices, the
Administrator shall include on the public database under
subsection (k)(1) information on the Innovative Approaches to
Technology Transfer Grant Program, including--
``(i) the program evaluation plan required under
subparagraph (A);
``(ii) a list of recipients by State of awards under
paragraph (1); and
``(iii) information on the use of grants under paragraph
(1) by recipient institutions.''.

Amendment No. 80 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

Page 370, after line 23, insert the following:

SEC. 1082. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF USED
MILITARY EQUIPMENT TO FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL
AGENCIES.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Secretary of Defense should make every reasonable effort,
by not later than one year after the date on which a piece of
eligible equipment returns to the United States, to transfer
such eligible equipment to a Federal, State, or local agency
in accordance with subsections (b) and (c) of section 2576a
of title 10, United States Code.
(b) Preference.--In considering applications for the
transfer of eligible equipment under section 2576a of title
10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense may give a
preference to Federal, State, and local agencies that plan to
use such eligible equipment primarily for the purpose of
strengthening border security along the international border
between the United States and Mexico.
(c) Eligible Equipment.--For purposes of this section, the
term ``eligible equipment'' means equipment of the Department
of Defense that--
(1) was used in Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi
Freedom, or Operation New Dawn;
(2) the Secretary of Defense determines would be suitable
for use by a Federal, State, or local agency in law
enforcement activities, including--
(A) intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance equipment;
(B) night-vision goggles; and
(C) tactical wheeled vehicles; and
(3) the Secretary determines is excess to military
requirements.

Amendment No. 83 Offered by Mr. Thompson of California

At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:

SEC. 827. REQUIREMENT TO BUY AMERICAN FLAGS FROM DOMESTIC
SOURCES.

Section 2533a(b) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) A flag of the United States of America (within the
meaning of chapter 1 of title 4).''.

[[Page H4766]]

Amendment No. 84 Offered by Mr. Fortenberry of Nebraska

At the end of subtitle A of title IX, add the following new
section:

SEC. 910. REPORT RELATED TO NUCLEAR FORCES, DETERRENCE,
NONPROLIFERATION, AND TERRORISM.

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report discussing how the
Department of Defense will manage its mission with respect to
issues related to nuclear forces, deterrence,
nonproliferation, and terrorism.

Amendment No. 85 Offered by Mr. Nugent of Florida

At the end of title IX, add the following new section:

SEC. 923. MODIFICATIONS TO REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCOUNTING FOR
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES LISTED AS MISSING.

(a) Designation of Officer.--Section 1501(a) of title 10,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Personnel''
and inserting ``Persons'';
(2) by striking paragraph (2);
(3) by designating the second sentence of paragraph (1) as
paragraph (2); and
(4) by striking the first sentence of paragraph (1) and
inserting the following:
``(A) The Secretary of Defense shall designate a single
organization within the Department of Defense to have
responsibility for Department of Defense matters relating to
missing persons, including accounting for missing persons and
persons whose remains have not been recovered from the
conflict in which they were lost.
``(B) The organization designated under this paragraph
shall be a Defense Agency or other entity of the Department
of Defense outside the military departments and is referred
to in this chapter as the `designated Defense Agency'.
``(C) The head of the organization designated under this
paragraph is referred to in this chapter as the `designated
Agency Director'.''.''.
(b) Responsibilities.--Paragraph (2) of such section, as
designated by subsection (a)(3), is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``the official designated under this paragraph shall
include--'' and inserting ``the designated Agency Director
shall include the following:''
(2) by capitalizing the first letter of the first word of
each of subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D);
(3) by striking the semicolon at the end of subparagraph
(A) and inserting a period;
(4) in subparagraph (B)--
(A) by inserting ``responsibility for'' after ``as well as
the''; and
(B) by striking ``; and'' at the end and inserting a
period; and
(5) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) The establishment of a means for communication
between officials of the designated Defense Agency and family
members of missing persons, veterans service organizations,
concerned citizens, and the public on the Department's
efforts to account for missing persons, including a readily
available means for communication of their views and
recommendations to the designated Agency Director.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further
amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``the official designated
under paragraphs (1) and (2)'' and inserting ``the designated
Agency Director''; and
(2) in paragraphs (4) and (5), by striking ``The designated
official'' and inserting ``The designated Agency Director''.
(d) Resources.--Such section is further amended by striking
paragraph (6).
(e) Public-private Partnerships and Other Forms of
Support.--Chapter 76 of such title is amended by inserting
after section 1501 the following new section:

``Sec. 1501a. Public-private partnerships; other forms of
support

``(a) Public-private Partnerships.--The Secretary of
Defense may enter into arrangements known as public-private
partnerships with appropriate entities outside the Government
for the purposes of facilitating the activities of the
designated Defense Agency. The Secretary may only partner
with foreign governments or foreign entities with the
concurrence of the Secretary of State. Any such arrangement
shall be entered into in accordance with authorities provided
under this section or any other authority otherwise available
to the Secretary. Regulations prescribed under subsection
(e)(1) shall include provisions for the establishment and
implementation of such partnerships.
``(b) Acceptance of Voluntary Personal Services.--The
Secretary of Defense may accept voluntary services to
facilitate accounting for missing persons in the same manner
as the Secretary of a military department may accept such
services under section 1588(a)(9) of this title.
``(c) Solicitation of Gifts.--Under regulations prescribed
under this chapter, the Secretary may solicit from any person
or public or private entity, for the use and benefit of the
activities of the designated Defense Agency, a gift of
information and data, books, manuscripts, other documents,
and artifacts.
``(d) Use of Department of Defense Personal Property.--The
Secretary may allow a private entity to use, at no cost,
personal property of the Department of Defense to assist the
entity in supporting the activities of the designated Defense
Agency.
``(e) Regulations.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe
regulations to implement this section.
``(2) Limitation.--Such regulations shall provide that
solicitation of a gift, acceptance of a gift (including a
gift of services), or use of a gift under this section may
not occur if the nature or circumstances of the solicitation,
acceptance, or use would compromise the integrity, or the
appearance of integrity, of any program of the Department of
Defense or any individual involved in such program.''.
(f) Section 1505 Conforming Amendments.--Section 1505(c) of
such title is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the office established
under section 1501 of this title'' and inserting ``the
designated Agency Director''; and
(2) in paragraphs (2) and (3), by striking ``head of the
office established under section 1501 of this title'' and
inserting ``designated Agency Director''.
(g) Section 1509 Amendments.--Section 1509 of such title is
amended--
(1) by striking ``preenactment'' in the section heading;
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Process'';
(B) in paragraph (1), by striking ``POW/MIA accounting
community'' and inserting ``through the designated Agency
Director'';
(C) by striking paragraph (2); and
(D) by adding at the end the following new paragraph (2):
``(2)(A) The Secretary shall assign or detail to the
designated Defense Agency on a full-time basis a senior
medical examiner from the personnel of the Armed Forces
Medical Examiner System. The primary duties of the medical
examiner so assigned or detailed shall include the
identification of remains in support of the function of the
designated Agency Director to account for unaccounted for
persons covered by subsection (a).
``(B) In carrying out functions under this chapter, the
medical examiner so assigned or detailed shall report to the
designated Agency Director.
``(C) The medical examiner so assigned or detailed shall--
``(i) exercise scientific identification authority;
``(ii) establish identification and laboratory policy
consistent with the Armed Forces Medical Examiner System; and
``(iii) advise the designated Agency Director on forensic
science disciplines.
``(D) Nothing in this chapter shall be interpreted as
affecting the authority of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner
under section 1471 of this title.''.
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) by inserting ``; Centralized Database'' in the
subsection heading after ``Files''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) The Secretary of Defense shall establish and maintain
a single centralized database and case management system
containing information on all missing persons for whom a file
has been established under this subsection. The database and
case management system shall be accessible to all elements of
the Department of Defense involved in the search, recovery,
identification, and communications phases of the program
established by this section.''; and
(4) in subsection (f)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``establishing and''; and
(ii) by striking ``Secretary of Defense shall coordinate''
and inserting ``designated Agency Director shall ensure
coordination'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by inserting ``staff'' after ``National Security
Council''; and
(ii) by striking ``POW/MIA accounting community''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) In carrying out the program, the designated Agency
Director shall coordinate all external communications and
events associated with the program.''.
(h) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Cross-reference correction.--Section 1513(1) of such
title is amended by striking ``subsection (b)'' in the last
sentence and inserting ``subsection (c)''.
(2) Table of sections.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 76 of such title is amended--
(A) by inserting after the item relating to section 1501
the following new item:
``1501a. Public-private partnerships; other forms of
support.''; and
(B) in the item relating to section 1509, by striking
``preenactment''.

Amendment No. 87 Offered by Mr. Burgess of Texas

Add at the end of subtitle A of title X the following new
section:

SEC. 1005. REPORT ON AUDITABLE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report ranking all
military departments and Defense Agencies in order of how
advanced they are in achieving auditable financial statements
as required

[[Page H4767]]

by law. The report should not include information otherwise
available in other reports to Congress.

Amendment No. 88 Offered by Mr. Takano of California

At the end of subtitle A of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1005. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTING AUDIT REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS.

Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
report on the barriers to implementing audit reporting
requirements contained in section 1003 of Public Law 111-84
and recommendations to ensure reporting deadlines are met.

Amendment No. 89 Offered by Mr. Miller of Florida

At the end of subtitle C of title X, insert the following:

SEC. 1027. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR CERTAIN PERMITTING
ACTIVITIES UNDER THE SUNKEN MILITARY CRAFT ACT.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
may be used to issue a regulation for permitting activities
set forth in section 1403 of the Ronald W. Reagan National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law
108-375; 118 Stat. 2907; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).

Amendment No. 90 Offered by Mr. Ross of Florida

At the end of subtitle D of title X, insert the following:

SEC. 1034. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FUNDS FOR RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES FOR INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT
GUANTANAMO.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or
otherwise available to the Department of Defense may be used
to provide additional or upgraded recreational facilities for
individuals detained at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Amendment No. 91 Offered by Mr. Bridenstine of Oklahoma

Page 300, line 12, strike ``None of the'' and insert ``Not
more than 50 percent of the''.
Page 301, line 2, insert before the period the following:
``until the date that is 30 days after the date on which the
Secretary delivers the certification required by subsection
(a) to the congressional defense committees''.

Amendment No. 98 Offered by Mr. Braley of Iowa

Add at the end of subtitle F of title X the following:

SEC. 1065. REPORT ON LONG-TERM COSTS OF OPERATION IRAQI
FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM.

(a) Report Requirement.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the President, with
contributions from the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
State, and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall submit to
Congress a report containing an estimate of previous costs of
Operation New Dawn (the successor contingency operation to
Operation Iraqi Freedom) and the long-term costs of Operation
Enduring Freedom for a scenario, determined by the President
and based on current contingency operation and withdrawal
plans, that takes into account expected force levels and the
expected length of time that members of the Armed Forces will
be deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.
(b) Estimates to Be Used in Preparation of Report.--In
preparing the report required by subsection (a), the
President shall make estimates and projections through at
least fiscal year 2024, adjust any dollar amounts
appropriately for inflation, and take into account and
specify each of the following:
(1) The total number of members of the Armed Forces
expected to be deployed in support of Operation Enduring
Freedom, including--
(A) the number of members of the Armed Forces actually
deployed in Southwest Asia in support of Operation Enduring
Freedom;
(B) the number of members of reserve components of the
Armed Forces called or ordered to active duty in the United
States for the purpose of training for eventual deployment in
Southwest Asia, backfilling for deployed troops, or
supporting other Department of Defense missions directly or
indirectly related to Operation Enduring Freedom; and
(C) the break-down of deployments of members of the regular
and reserve components and activation of members of the
reserve components.
(2) The number of members of the Armed Forces, including
members of the reserve components, who have previously served
in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn, or
Operation Enduring Freedom and who are expected to serve
multiple deployments.
(3) The number of contractors and private military security
firms that have been used and are expected to be used during
the course of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn,
and Operation Enduring Freedom.
(4) The number of veterans currently suffering and expected
to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic
brain injury, or other mental injuries.
(5) The number of veterans currently in need of and
expected to be in need of prosthetic care and treatment
because of amputations incurred during service in support of
Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn, or Operation
Enduring Freedom.
(6) The current number of pending Department of Veterans
Affairs claims from veterans of military service in Iraq and
Afghanistan, and the total number of such veterans expected
to seek disability compensation from the Department of
Veterans Affairs.
(7) The total number of members of the Armed Forces who
have been killed or wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan, including
noncombat casualties, the total number of members expected to
suffer injuries in Afghanistan, and the total number of
members expected to be killed in Afghanistan, including
noncombat casualties.
(8) The amount of funds previously appropriated for the
Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the
Department of Veterans Affairs for costs related to Operation
Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn, and Operation Enduring
Freedom, including an account of the amount of funding from
regular Department of Defense, Department of State, and
Department of Veterans Affairs budgets that has gone and will
go to costs associated with such operations.
(9) Previous, current, and future operational expenditures
associated with Operation Enduring Freedom and, when
applicable, Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn,
including--
(A) funding for combat operations;
(B) deploying, transporting, feeding, and housing members
of the Armed Forces (including fuel costs);
(C) activation and deployment of members of the reserve
components of the Armed Forces;
(D) equipping and training of Iraqi and Afghani forces;
(E) purchasing, upgrading, and repairing weapons,
munitions, and other equipment consumed or used in Operation
Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn, or Operation Enduring
Freedom; and
(F) payments to other countries for logistical assistance
in support of such operations.
(10) Past, current, and future costs of entering into
contracts with private military security firms and other
contractors for the provision of goods and services
associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn,
and Operation Enduring Freedom.
(11) Average annual cost for each member of the Armed
Forces deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom,
including room and board, equipment and body armor,
transportation of troops and equipment (including fuel
costs), and operational costs.
(12) Current and future cost of combat-related special pays
and benefits, including reenlistment bonuses.
(13) Current and future cost of calling or ordering members
of the reserve components to active duty in support of
Operation Enduring Freedom.
(14) Current and future cost for reconstruction, embassy
operations and construction, and foreign aid programs for
Iraq and Afghanistan.
(15) Current and future cost of bases and other
infrastructure to support members of the Armed Forces serving
in Afghanistan.
(16) Current and future cost of providing health care for
veterans who served in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom,
Operation New Dawn, or Operation Enduring Freedom,
including--
(A) the cost of mental health treatment for veterans
suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic
brain injury, and other mental problems as a result of such
service; and
(B) the cost of lifetime prosthetics care and treatment for
veterans suffering from amputations as a result of such
service.
(17) Current and future cost of providing Department of
Veterans Affairs disability benefits for the lifetime of
veterans who incur disabilities while serving in support of
Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation New Dawn, or Operation
Enduring Freedom.
(18) Current and future cost of providing survivors'
benefits to survivors of members of the Armed Forces killed
while serving in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom,
Operation New Dawn, or Operation Enduring Freedom.
(19) Cost of bringing members of the Armed Forces and
equipment back to the United States upon the conclusion of
Operation Enduring Freedom, including the cost of
demobilization, transportation costs (including fuel costs),
providing transition services for members of the Armed Forces
transitioning from active duty to veteran status,
transporting equipment, weapons, and munitions (including
fuel costs), and an estimate of the value of equipment that
will be left behind.
(20) Cost to restore the military and military equipment,
including the equipment of the reserve components, to full
strength after the conclusion of Operation Enduring Freedom.
(21) Amount of money borrowed to pay for Operation Iraqi
Freedom, Operation New Dawn, and Operation Enduring Freedom,
and the sources of that money.
(22) Interest on money borrowed, including interest for
money already borrowed and anticipated interest payments on
future borrowing, for Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation New
Dawn, and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Amendment No. 107 Offered by Mr. Butterfield of North Carolina

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following new
section:

[[Page H4768]]

SEC. 1082. METHODS FOR VALIDATING CERTAIN SERVICE CONSIDERED
TO BE ACTIVE SERVICE BY THE SECRETARY OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS.

(a) In General.--For the purposes of verifying that an
individual performed service under honorable conditions that
satisfies the requirements of a coastwise merchant seaman who
is recognized pursuant to section 401 of the GI Bill
Improvement Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-202; 38 U.S.C. 106
note) as having performed active duty service for the
purposes described in subsection (c)(1), the Secretary of
Homeland Security shall accept the following:
(1) In the case of an individual who served on a coastwise
merchant vessel seeking such recognition for whom no
applicable Coast Guard shipping or discharge form, ship
logbook, merchant mariner's document or Z-card, or other
official employment record is available, the Secretary shall
provide such recognition on the basis of applicable Social
Security Administration records submitted for or by the
individual, together with validated testimony given by the
individual or the primary next of kin of the individual that
the individual performed such service during the period
beginning on December 7, 1941, and ending on December 31,
1946.
(2) In the case of an individual who served on a coastwise
merchant vessel seeking such recognition for whom the
applicable Coast Guard shipping or discharge form, ship
logbook, merchant mariner's document or Z-card, or other
official employment record has been destroyed or otherwise
become unavailable by reason of any action committed by a
person responsible for the control and maintenance of such
form, logbook, or record, the Secretary shall accept other
official documentation demonstrating that the individual
performed such service during period beginning on December 7,
1941, and ending on December 31, 1946.
(3) For the purpose of determining whether to recognize
service allegedly performed during the period beginning on
December 7, 1941, and ending on December 31, 1946, the
Secretary shall recognize masters of seagoing vessels or
other officers in command of similarly organized groups as
agents of the United States who were authorized to document
any individual for purposes of hiring the individual to
perform service in the merchant marine or discharging an
individual from such service.
(b) Treatment of Other Documentation.--Other documentation
accepted by the Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to
subsection (a)(2) shall satisfy all requirements for
eligibility of service during the period beginning on
December 7, 1941, and ending on December 31, 1946.
(c) Benefits Allowed.--
(1) Burial benefits eligibility.--Service of an individual
that is considered active duty pursuant to subsection (a)
shall be considered as active duty service with respect to
providing burial benefits under chapters 23 and 24 of title
38, United States Code, to the individual.
(2) Medals, ribbons, and decorations.--An individual whose
service is recognized as active duty pursuant to subsection
(a) may be awarded an appropriate medal, ribbon, or other
military decoration based on such service.
(3) Status of veteran.--An individual whose service is
recognized as active duty pursuant to subsection (a) shall be
honored as a veteran but shall not be entitled by reason of
such recognized service to any benefit that is not described
in this subsection.
(d) Determination of Coastwise Merchant Seaman.--The
Secretary of Homeland Security shall verify that an
individual performed service under honorable conditions that
satisfies the requirements of a coastwise merchant seaman
pursuant to this section without regard to the sex, age, or
disability of the individual during the period in which the
individual served as such a coastwise merchant seaman.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``coastwise merchant seaman'' means a mariner
that served on a tug boat, towboat, or seagoing barge that
transported war materials to and from ports located in the
territorial seas of the United States in support of the war
effort during the period beginning December 7, 1941, and
ending December 31, 1946.
(2) The term ``primary next of kin'' with respect to an
individual seeking recognition for service under this section
means the closest living relative of the individual who was
alive during the period of such service.
(f) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 90 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Amendment No. 108 Offered by Mr. Lewis of Georgia

At the end of title X, add the following new section:

SEC. 10__. COST OF WARS.

The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service and the Director
of the Bureau of Economic Analysis, shall post on the public
Web site of the Department of Defense the costs, including
the relevant legacy costs, to each American taxpayer of each
of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Amendment No. 109 Offered by Mr. Lynch of Massachusetts

At the end of title X, insert the following:

SEC. 1046. OBSERVANCE OF VETERANS DAY.

(a) Two Minutes of Silence.--Chapter 1 of title 36, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:

``Sec. 145. Veterans Day

``The President shall issue each year a proclamation
calling on the people of the United States to observe two
minutes of silence on Veterans Day in honor of the service
and sacrifice of veterans throughout the history of the
Nation, beginning at--
``(1) 3:11 pm Atlantic standard time;
``(2) 2:11 pm eastern standard time;
``(3) 1:11 pm central standard time;
``(4) 12:11 pm mountain standard time;
``(5) 11:11 am Pacific standard time;
``(6) 10:11 am Alaska standard time; and
``(7) 9:11 am Hawaii-Aleutian standard time.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
1 of title 36, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following new item:

``145. Veterans Day.''.

Amendment No. 111 Offered by Mr. Schiff of California

At the end of title X, add the following new section:

SEC. 10_. FINDINGS; SENSE OF CONGRESS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Vietnam Veterans Memorial continues to be a popular
and important place of reflection and healing for a
generation.
(2) The simple inscriptions of the names of the Nation's
dead bear mute testimony to the sacrifice of more than 58,000
Americans, serving as a deep source of comfort and pride for
the families of those who were lost.
(3) 74 sailors were lost aboard the USS Frank E. Evans,
which sank after colliding with the HMAS Melbourne on June 3,
1969, during a Southeast Asia Treaty Organization exercise
just outside the designated combat zone.
(4) The Frank Evans had been providing support fire for
combat operations in Vietnam before the exercise that
resulted in the accident and was scheduled to return after
the exercise.
(5) The families of the 74 men lost aboard the USS Frank E.
Evans have been fighting for decades to have their loved ones
added to the Memorial.
(6) Exceptions have been granted to inscribe the names on
the Vietnam Veterans Memorial for other servicemembers who
were killed outside of the designated combat zone, including
in 1983 when President Ronald Reagan ordered that 68 Marines
who died on a flight outside the combat zone be added to the
wall.
(7) Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, in a letter dated
December 15, 2010, expressed support for the addition of the
74 names of the men lost aboard the USS Frank E. Evans to the
Vietnam Veterans Memorial.
(8) The heroism and sacrifice should never go unrecognized
because of an arbitrary line on a map.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Secretary of Defense should order that the names of the
74 military personnel lost aboard the USS Frank E. Evans on
June 3, 1969, be added to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Amendment No. 116 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

At the appropriate place in subtitle B of title XII, insert
the following:

SEC. _. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF UNITED STATES EFFORTS TO
DISRUPT, DISMANTLE, AND DEFEAT AL-QAEDA, ITS
AFFILIATED GROUPS, ASSOCIATED GROUPS, AND
ADHERENTS.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) al-Qaeda, its affiliated groups, associated groups, and
adherents continue to pose a significant threat to United
States national security interests;
(2) al-Qaeda continues to evolve and reorganize to adapt to
United States counterterrorism measures; and
(3) al-Qaeda has become more decentralized and less
hierarchical over the past decade.
(b) Independent Assessment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall provide for
the conduct of an independent assessment of the United States
efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaeda, including
its affiliated groups, associated groups, and adherents since
May 2, 2011.
(2) Elements.--The assessment required by paragraph (1)
shall include the following:
(A) An assessment of al-Qaeda core's relationship with any
and all affiliated groups, associated groups, and adherents.
(B) An assessment of the aims, objectives, and capabilities
of al-Qaeda core and any and all affiliated groups,
associated groups, and adherents.
(C) An assessment of the Administration's efforts to combat
al-Qaeda core and any and all affiliated groups, associated
groups, and adherents.
(D) An assessment of the Authorization for Use of Military
Force (Public Law 107-40) and its relevance to the current
structure and objectives of al-Qaeda core, its affiliated
groups, associated groups, and adherents.
(E) A comprehensive order of battle for al-Qaeda core, its
affiliated groups, associated groups, and adherents.
(3) Report.--
(A) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the entity selected for the
conduct of the assessment required by paragraph (1) shall
provide to the Secretary and the appropriate committees of
Congress a report containing its findings as a result of the
assessment.
(B) Form.--The report shall be submitted in unclassified
form, but may include a classified annex.

[[Page H4769]]

(c) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate committees of Congress''
means--
(1) the congressional defense committees;
(2) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Select
Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and
(3) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of
Representatives.

Amendment No. 135 Offered by Mr. Bridenstine of Oklahoma

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

SEC. 12_. REPORT ON COLLECTIVE AND NATIONAL SECURITY
IMPLICATIONS OF CENTRAL ASIAN AND SOUTH
CAUCASUS ENERGY DEVELOPMENT.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Assured access to stable energy supplies is an enduring
concern of both the United States and the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO).
(2) Adopted in Lisbon in November 2010, the new NATO
Strategic Concept declares that ``[s]ome NATO countries will
become more dependent on foreign energy suppliers and in some
cases, on foreign energy supply and distribution networks for
their energy needs''.
(3) The report required by section 1233 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law
112-81) reaffirmed the Strategic Concept's assessment of
growing energy dependence of some members of the NATO
alliance and also noted there is value in the assured access,
protection, and delivery of energy.
(4) Development of energy resources and transit routes in
the areas surrounding the Caspian Sea can diversify sources
of supply for members of the NATO alliance, particularly
those in Eastern Europe.
(b) Report.--
(1) Report.--Not later than 270 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, in
consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Energy, submit to the appropriate congressional committees a
detailed report on the implications of new energy resource
development and distribution networks, both planned and under
construction, in the areas surrounding the Caspian Sea for
energy security strategies of the United States and NATO.
(2) Elements.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall
include the following:
(A) An assessment of the dependence of NATO members on a
single oil or natural gas supplier or distribution network.
(B) An assessment of the potential of energy resources of
the areas surrounding the Caspian Sea to mitigate such
dependence on a single supplier or distribution network.
(C) Recommendations, if any, for ways in which the United
States can help support increased energy security for NATO
members.
(3) Submission of classified information.--The report under
this subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form, but
may contain a classified annex.
(c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and
(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments
en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the
minority, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I concur with the chairman that
we should pass the en bloc amendment. I have no speakers, so I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), my friend and colleague.
(Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SHIMKUS. Madam Chair, it is great to be here. I know it is at the
end of the debate.
First, let me thank Buck McKeon for doing a great job as the
chairman, and I know as Adam will do, will recognize his years of
service, and this is a great bill. Adam, thank you for your friendship
and support.
Part of this en bloc amendment is the Black Ribbon Day. I worked
really closely with Congressman Engel to make sure that it was vetted
and cleared.
The basic premise is the country has to understand the importance of
knowing the past to survive in the world of the present.
Shimkus is ethnically Lithuanian. I deal with the Baltic issues and
Eastern European causes, and the world has significantly changed, as I
said earlier in this debate, about the threat from Russia.
So the Black Ribbon Day recognizes the victims of communism and the
Holocaust and the gulags and the deportation and the Russification. So
when Vladimir Putin makes a claim protecting the Russian minority, it
is because what they did post-World War II was they removed forcefully
to Siberia ethnics and moved in Russians.
The world is not a safer place today. It is important for us to
remember the events of the past so we can defend the freedoms of the
future.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for including this in your en bloc amendment.
To my friend Adam from Washington State, thank you for your support.
I don't get a chance to talk about defense and NDAA. As you all know, I
served in the military. I have great respect for what you have done in
trying to strengthen the force and protect freedom. So thank you for
the work you do. It is just an honor to get a chance to work with both
of you.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en
bloc amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Chair, I would like to thank Chairman McKeon
for supporting my amendment and allowing it to come to the floor.
This Amendment requires the Secretary of Defense to get an
independent assessment of U.S. efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and
defeat al-Qaeda, its affiliates, and other associated groups.
Al-Qaeda continues to threaten the security of the U.S. and our
allies, both at home and abroad.
Our intelligence services and our military have scored some real
gains against al-Qaeda, but al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan is
still able to provide tactical and ideological direction to its
affiliates around the world.
Al-Qaeda has gone from ``on the verge of strategic defeat'' to a
serious and growing threat, depending on who you ask in the
Administration or intelligence services.
Today al-Qaeda controls more territory than ever. The fight against
al-Qaeda is far from over.
This amendment is necessary so we can have outside experts evaluate
this Administration's efforts against alQaeda and what we should do
about it.
Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Chair, first, I would like to thank Chairman
McKeon for supporting my amendment and allowing it to come to the
floor.
The amendment is simple, it urges the Secretary of Defense to make a
reasonable effort to make excess intelligence surveillance and
reconnaissance equipment, night vision goggles, and tactical wheeled
vehicles returning from abroad available to State, Federal, and local
law enforcement agencies for the purpose of strengthening border
security along the international border between the United States and
Mexico.
This amendment is common sense--why not allow excess military
equipment to be used by state, local, and federal law enforcement for
border security?
Our border sheriffs say they are outmanned, outgunned and out-
financed by the drug cartels.
This is not a new idea. DOD already has a program for distribution of
surplus DOD equipment. This program has transferred 6 used Humvees to
Texas Border Sheriffs in 2010. The purpose of this amendment is to urge
DOD to make more equipment available through this existing program.
So let's put that veteran equipment to work on the border to help
fight the drug cartels. America has done our part over the past 10
years to bring safety and security to the people of Iraq and
Afghanistan, and now it is time to bring that same safety and security
to Americans living along our southern border.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 6 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, pursuant to House Resolution 590, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 6 consisting of amendment Nos. 92, 93, 94, 95,
96, 99, 101, 102, 103, 104, 115, 118, 119, 120, 121, 123, 124, 128,
136, 145, and 155 printed in part A of House Report No. 113-460,
offered by Mr. McKeon of California:

[[Page H4770]]

AMENDMENT NO. 92 OFFERED BY MR. NUNES OF CALIFORNIA

Page 302, line 22, add the following after the period:
``Such assessment shall address the efficacy of Lajes Air
Force Base modifying its United States Air Force mission to
support a permanent force structure for the United States
Special Operations Command, the United States Africa Command,
and other overseas United States forces in both the European
and African regions, at a force structure at or above the
force structure at such Air Force Base as of October 1,
2013.''
Page 302, strike line 23 and all that follows through page
303, line 7, and insert the following:
(2) The Secretary of Defense includes in the Assessment
under paragraph (1) an analysis of how, with respect to the
use and force structure of the Lajes Air Force Base, the
United States is honoring the goals of the U.S.-Portugal
Permanent Bilateral Commission, particularly how the
systematic reduction in force structure at such Air Force
Base is within the goals of the commission and the bilateral
cooperation between the 2 countries in the fight against
terrorism.
(3) The Secretary briefs the congressional defense
committees regarding the results of the Assessment under
paragraph (1).

AMENDMENT NO. 93 OFFERED BY MR. SESSIONS OF TEXAS

At the end of subtitle E of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1051. MODIFICATIONS TO OH-58D KIOWA WARRIOR HELICOPTERS.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 2244A of title 10,
United States Code, the Secretary of the Army may implement
engineering change proposals on OH-58D Kiowa Warrior
helicopters.
(b) Manner of Modifications.--The Secretary shall carry out
subsection (a) in a manner that ensures--
(1) the safety and survivability of the crews of the OH-58D
Kiowa Warrior helicopters by expeditiously replacing or
integrating, or both, the mast-mounted sight engineering
change proposals to the current OH-58D fleet;
(2) the safety of flight; and
(3) that the minimum requirements of the commanders of the
combatant commands are met.
(c) Engineering Change Proposals Defined.--In this section,
the term ``engineering change proposals'' means, with respect
to OH-58D helicopters, engineering changes relating to the
following:
(1) Mast mounted sight laser pointer.
(2) Two-card system processor.
(3) Diode pump laser.

AMENDMENT NO. 94 OFFERED BY MR. BROUN OF GEORGIA

At the appropriate place in subtitle E of title X, insert
the following new section:

SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON USE OF DRONES TO KILL UNITED STATES
CITIZENS.

(a) Prohibition.--No officer or employee of, or detailee or
contractor to, the Department of Defense may use a drone to
kill a citizen of the United States.
(b) Exception.--The prohibition under subsection (a) shall
not apply to the use of a drone to kill an individual who is
actively engaged in combat against the United States.
(c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to create any authority, or expand any existing
authority, for the Federal Government to kill any person.
(d) Drone Defined.--In this section, the term ``drone''
means an unmanned aircraft (as defined in section 331 of the
FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 40101
note)).

AMENDMENT NO. 95 OFFERED BY MR. PALAZZO OF MISSISSIPPI

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

SEC. 1065. REPORT ON FORCE STRUCTURE LAYDOWN OF TACTICAL
AIRLIFT ASSETS.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the strategic laydown of tactical airlift forces following
the withdrawal of combat forces from Afghanistan is cause for
concern.
(b) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on
the five-year plan of the Secretary for the force structure
laydown of the tactical airlift.
(c) Limitation; Report.--The Secretary of the Air Force
shall brief the congressional defense committees prior to
implementing any movements.

AMENDMENT NO. 96 OFFERED BY MR. SCHWEIKERT OF ARIZONA

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

SEC. 1065. REPORT ON THERMAL INJURY PREVENTION.

The Director of the United States Army Tank Automotive
Research, Development, and Engineering Center shall submit to
the congressional defense committees a report addressing
thermal injury prevention needs to improve occupant centric
survivability systems for combat and tactical vehicles
against over matching ballistic threat.

AMENDMENT NO. 99 OFFERED BY MR. COLE OF OKLAHOMA

Page 340, line 11, insert ``either'' after ``is''.
Page 340, line 14, insert ``, or participating in the
Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety program or other
activities of similar nature conducted by the Department of
Homeland Security,'' before ``to allow''.
Page 340, beginning on line 16, strike ``test range
program'' and insert in its place ``a program''.
Page 341, beginning on line 5, strike ``test range''.

AMENDMENT NO. 101 OFFERED BY MR. GIBSON OF NEW YORK

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1082. REVIEW OF OPERATION OF CERTAIN SHIPS DURING THE
VIETNAM ERA.

(a) Review Required.--By not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall review the logs of each ship under the authority of the
Secretary of the Navy that is known to have operated in the
waters near Vietnam during the Vietnam Era (as that term is
defined in section 101(29) of title 38, United States Code)
to determine--
(1) whether each such ship operated in the territorial
waters of the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning
on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975; and
(2) for each such ship that so operated--
(A) the date or dates when the ship so operated; and
(B) the distance from the shore of the location where the
ship operated that was the closest proximity to shore.
(b) Provision of Information to the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs.--Upon a determination that any such ship so
operated, the Secretary of Defense shall provide such
determination, together with the information described in
subsection (a)(2) about the ship, to the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs.
(c) Public Availability of Information.--The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs shall make publicly available all
unclassified information provided to the Secretary under
subsection (b).

AMENDMENT NO. 102 OFFERED BY MR. LATTA OF OHIO

At the end of title X, add the following:

SEC. 10__. SENSE OF CONGRESS RECOGNIZING THE 70TH ANNIVERSARY
OF THE ALLIED AMPHIBIOUS LANDING ON D-DAY, JUNE
6, 1944, AT NORMANDY, FRANCE.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) June 6, 2014, marks the 70th anniversary of the Allied
assault at Normandy, France, by American, British, and
Canadian troops, which was known as Operation Overlord.
(2) Before Operation Overlord, the German Army still
occupied France and the Nazi government still had access to
the raw materials and industrial capacity of Western Europe.
(3) The naval assault phase on Normandy was code-named
``Neptune'', and the June 6th assault date is referred to as
D-Day to denote the day on which the combat attack was
initiated.
(4) The D-Day landing was the largest single amphibious
assault in history, consisting of approximately 31,000
members of the United States Armed Forces, 153,000 members of
the Allied Expeditionary Force, 5,000 naval vessels, and more
than 11,000 sorties by Allied aircraft.
(5) Soldiers of 6 divisions (3 American, 2 British, and 1
Canadian) stormed ashore in 5 main landing areas on beaches
in Normandy, which were code-named ``Utah'', ``Omaha'',
``Gold'', ``Juno'', and ``Sword''.
(6) Of the approximately 10,000 Allied casualties incurred
on the first day of the landing, more than 6,000 casualties
were members of the United States Armed Forces.
(7) The age of the remaining World War II veterans and the
gradual disappearance of any living memory of World War II
and the Normandy landings make it necessary to increase
activities intended to pass on the history of these events,
particularly to younger generations.
(8) The young people of Normandy and the United States have
displayed unprecedented commitment to and involvement in
celebrating the veterans of the Normandy landings and the
freedom that they brought with them in 1944.
(9) The significant material remains of the Normandy
landing, such as shipwrecks and various items of military
equipment found both on the Normandy beaches and at the
bottom of the sea in French territorial waters, bear witness
to the remarkable material resources used by the Allied Armed
Forces to execute the Normandy landings.
(10) 5 Normandy beaches and a number of sites on the
Normandy coast, including Pointe du Hoc, were the scene of
the Normandy landings, and constitute both now and for all
time a unique piece of humanity's world heritage, and a
symbol of peace and freedom, whose unspoilt nature,
integrity, and authenticity must be protected at all costs.
(11) The world owes a debt of gratitude to the members of
the ``greatest generation'' who assumed the task of freeing
the world from Nazi and Fascist regimes and restoring liberty
to Europe.
(b) Sense of Congress.--Congress--
(1) recognizes the 70th anniversary of the Allied
amphibious landing on D-Day, June 6, 1944, at Normandy,
France, during World War II;
(2) expresses gratitude and appreciation to the members of
the United States Armed Forces who participated in the D-Day
operations;
(3) thanks the young people of Normandy and the United
States for their involvement in recognizing and celebrating
the 70th Anniversary of the Normandy landings with the

[[Page H4771]]

aim of making future generations aware of the acts of heroism
and sacrifice performed by the Allied forces;
(4) recognizes the efforts of the Government of France and
the people of Normandy to preserve, for future generations,
the unique world heritage represented by the Normandy beaches
and the sunken material remains of the Normandy landing, by
inscribing them on the United Nations Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage
List; and
(5) requests the President to issue a proclamation calling
on the people of the United States to observe the anniversary
with appropriate ceremonies and programs to honor the
sacrifices of their fellow countrymen to liberate Europe.

AMENDMENT NO. 103 OFFERED BY MR. POSEY OF FLORIDA

At the end of title X, add the following:

SEC. 10__. TRANSPORTATION OF SUPPLIES TO MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES FROM NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 20 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 402 the following
new section:

``Sec. 403. Transportation of supplies from nonprofit
organizations

``(a) Authorization of Transportation.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, and subject to subsection (b), the
Secretary of Defense may transport to any country, without
charge, supplies that have been furnished by a nonprofit
organization and that are intended for distribution to
members of the armed forces. Such supplies may be transported
only on a space available basis.
``(b) Limitations.--(1) The Secretary may not transport
supplies under subsection (a) unless the Secretary determines
that--
``(A) the transportation of the supplies is consistent with
the policies of the United States;
``(B) the supplies are suitable for distribution to members
of the armed forces and are in usable condition;
``(C) there is a legitimate need for the supplies by the
members of the armed forces for whom they are intended; and
``(D) adequate arrangements have been made for the
distribution and use of the supplies.
``(2) Procedures.--The Secretary shall establish procedures
for making the determinations required under paragraph (1).
Such procedures shall include inspection of supplies before
acceptance for transport.
``(3) Preparation.--It shall be the responsibility of the
nonprofit organization requesting the transport of supplies
under this section to ensure that the supplies are suitable
for transport.
``(c) Distribution.--Supplies transported under this
section may be distributed by the United States Government or
a nonprofit organization.
``(d) Definition of Nonprofit Organization.--In this
section, the term `nonprofit organization' means an
organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a)
of such Code.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 20 of such title is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 402 the following new
item:

``403. Transportation of supplies from nonprofit organizations.''.

AMENDMENT NO. 104 OFFERED BY MR. POSEY OF FLORIDA

At the end of subtitle G of title X insert the following
new section:

SEC. 1082. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON AIR FORCE FLIGHT TRAINING
AIRCRAFT.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The Air Force uses the T-1A aircraft to train Air Force
pilots to operate tanker and transport aircraft.
(2) The Air Force is seeking a replacement aircraft for the
T-1A which is experiencing obsolescence issues and high
costs.
(3) An effective way to mitigate the T-1A's cost,
obsolescence, and complexity issues until a permanent
replacement aircraft enters service, is to utilize
contractor-owned, contractor-operated modern aircraft in the
very light jet category.
(4) Conducting very light jet training via a contractor-
owned, contractor-operated contract vehicle could provide
increased flexibility and reduce unnecessary ownership costs.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Secretary of the Air Force should formally assess the
operational feasibility, costs, potential savings, and
readiness implications of utilizing contractor-owned,
contractor-operated, very light jet aircraft for interim
flight instruction until a permanent replacement for the T-1A
enters service.

AMENDMENT NO. 115 OFFERED BY MR. CICILLINE OF RHODE ISLAND

In section 1216(b), add at the end the following:
(5) A description of efforts of the Secretary of Defense
and the Secretary of State to engage United States
manufacturers in procurement opportunities related to
equipping the ANSF.

AMENDMENT NO. 118 OFFERED BY MRS. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA

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

SEC. _. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The people of Afghanistan have taken the lead in
providing for the security of their country and the
successful elections are a positive step in the self-
determination of the future of Afghanistan.
(2) However, no country can be successful in the long-term
if a majority of its population is not included in the
dialogue and decision-making of such country.
(3) The women of Afghanistan have made historic strides in
the last several years and the elections prove that the women
need and have a right to have a voice in the future of
Afghanistan.
(4) To that end, the women of Afghanistan are vital to the
development of Afghanistan and the national security of
Afghanistan;
(5) Women are needed to serve Afghanistan in the Afghan
National Security Forces (ANSF), not just for the future
standing of women in society, but for cultural reasons.
(6) Therefore, it is important that Afghanistan move
forward in increasing the number of women in the ANSF with
the current facilities and capacity to meet the requirements
Afghanistan has proposed to achieve.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the allocation of $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2014 for
the ANSF should be prioritized for the recruitment,
retention, and training of women in the ANSF;
(2) current facilities to support women in the ANSF should
be fully utilized before additional infrastructure is
constructed;
(3) the Government of Afghanistan should ensure that the
fund provided prioritize efforts to increase the number of
women serving in the ANSF, as proposed in the Master
Ministerial Development Plan for Afghan National Army (ANA)
Gender Integration;
(4) as part of such plan, the conversion of the 13,000
women that were trained to support the elections is an
important step in increasing the number of women in the ANSF;
(5) the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan's
report, ``A Way to Go: An Update on Implementation of the Law
on Elimination of Violence Against Women in Afghanistan'',
should be integrated into efforts to enable women to serve in
the ANSF; and
(6) the United States should continue to advocate for the
rights and participation of women in Afghanistan in all
levels of government and society.

AMENDMENT NO. 119 OFFERED BY MR. JOHNSON OF GEORGIA

At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 12_. LIMITATION ON FUNDS TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT MILITARY
INSTALLATIONS OR BASES IN AFGHANISTAN.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
may be obligated or expended by the United States Government
to establish any military installation or base for the
purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United
States Armed Forces in Afghanistan.

AMENDMENT NO. 120 OFFERED BY MR. NOLAN OF MINNESOTA

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

SEC. _. REVIEW PROCESS FOR USE OF UNITED STATES FUNDS FOR
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN AFGHANISTAN THAT
CANNOT BE PHYSICALLY ACCESSED BY UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN PERSONNEL.

(a) Prohibition.--
(1) In general.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act may be obligated or expended for a
construction project in Afghanistan in excess of $500,000
that cannot be audited and physically inspected by authorized
United States Government civilian personnel or their
designated representatives, in accordance generally-accepted
auditing guidelines.
(2) Applicability.--Paragraph (1) shall apply only with
respect to a project that is initiated on or after the date
of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Waiver.--The prohibition in subsection (a) may be
waived with respect to a project if not less than 15 days
prior to the obligation of funds for the project, the agency
responsible for such funds submits to the relevant
authorizing committees a plan outlining how the agency will
monitor the use of the funds--
(1) to ensure the funds are used for the specific purposes
for which the funds are intended; and
(2) to mitigate waste, fraud, and abuse.

AMENDMENT NO. 121 OFFERED BY MS. TSONGAS OF MASSACHUSETTS

At the appropriate place in subtitle B of title XII, insert
the following:

SEC. _. ACTIONS TO SUPPORT HUMAN RIGHTS, PARTICIPATION,
PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE, EXISTING FRAMEWORKS,
AND SECURITY AND MOBILITY WITH RESPECT TO WOMEN
AND GIRLS IN AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
promoting women's meaningful inclusion and participation in
conflict prevention, management, and resolution, as well as
in post-conflict relief and recovery, advances core United
States national interests of peace, national security,
economic and social development, and international
cooperation.
(b) Statement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United
States--
(1) to promote and support the security of women and girls
in conflict-affected and post-conflict regions and ensure
their protection from sexual and gender-based violence;
(2) to promote and support the security of women and girls
in Afghanistan during the

[[Page H4772]]

security transition process and recognize that promoting
security for Afghan women and girls must remain a priority of
United States foreign policy; and
(3) to maintain and improve the gains of women and girls in
Afghanistan made since 2002, including in terms of their
political participation and integration in security forces.
(c) Actions Required.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretary of State and the Administrator of the
United States Agency for International Development, shall
take such actions as may be necessary to ensure the
indicators of success of the security transition process and
establishment of an independent Afghanistan as described in
paragraph (2) are achieved.
(2) Indicators of success.--The indicators of success
referred to in paragraph (1) are the following:
(A) Support for human rights of women and girls in
Afghanistan.
(B) Participation of women in Afghanistan at all levels of
decision-making and governance in Afghanistan.
(C) Strategic integration of women in the Afghan National
Security Forces.
(D) Support for initiatives to prevent sexual and gender-
based violence, including implementation of Afghanistan's
Elimination of Violence Against Women law and support for the
Ministry of Interior's Family Response Units in the Afghan
National Police.
(E) Support for existing frameworks, including the National
Action Plan for the Women of Afghanistan, the Afghanistan
National Development Strategy, and the Tokyo Mutual
Accountability Framework.
(F) Recognition of the ability of women in Afghanistan to
move freely and securely throughout Afghanistan.
(d) Report.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of State, and the Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development shall jointly
submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report
on efforts by the United States Government to support the
human rights, participation, prevention of violence, existing
frameworks, and security and mobility with respect to women
and girls in Afghanistan.
(2) Appropriate congressional committees defined.--In this
subsection, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(A) the congressional defense committees; and
(B) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and
the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives.

amendment no. 123 offered by ms. delauro of connecticut

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

SEC. 1228. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO ENTER INTO
CONTRACTS OR AGREEMENTS WITH ROSOBORONEXPORT.

(a) Prohibition.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated for the Department of Defense for fiscal year
2015 may be used to enter into a contract (or subcontract at
any tier under such a contract), memorandum of understanding,
or cooperative agreement with, to make a grant to, or to
provide a loan or loan guarantee to Rosoboronexport.
(b) National Security Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of
Defense may waive the applicability of subsection (a) if the
Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of State and
the Director of National Intelligence, certifies in writing
to the congressional defense committees, to the best of the
Secretary's knowledge, the following:
(1) Rosoboronexport has ceased the transfer of lethal
military equipment to, and the maintenance of existing lethal
military equipment for, the Government of the Syrian Arab
Republic.
(2) The armed forces of the Russian Federation have
withdrawn from Crimea, other than armed forces present on
military bases subject to agreements in force between the
Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of
Ukraine.
(3) The Government of the Russian Federation has withdrawn
substantially all of the armed forces of the Russian
Federation from the immediate vicinity of the eastern border
of Ukraine.
(4) Agents of the Russian Federation have ceased taking
active measures to destabilize the control of the Government
of Ukraine over eastern Ukraine.
(c) Department of Defense Inspector General Review.--
(1) In general.--The Inspector General of the Department of
Defense shall conduct a review of any action involving
Rosoboronexport with respect to which a waiver is issued by
the Secretary of Defense pursuant to subsection (b).
(2) Elements.--A review conducted under paragraph (1) shall
assess the accuracy of the factual and legal conclusions made
by the Secretary of Defense in the waiver covered by the
review, including--
(A) whether there is any viable alternative to
Rosoboronexport for carrying out the functions for which
funds will be obligated;
(B) whether the Secretary has previously used an
alternative vendor for carrying out the same functions
regarding the military equipment in question, and what vendor
was previously used;
(C) whether other explanations for the issuance of the
waiver are supportable; and
(D) any other matter with respect to the waiver the
Inspector General considers appropriate.
(3) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date on which
a waiver is issued by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to
subsection (b), the Inspector General shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report containing the
results of the review conducted under paragraph (1) with
respect to such waiver.

amendment 124 offered by mr. engel of new york

At the end of subtitle C of title XII of division A, add
the following:

SEC. _. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO CERTAIN DEFENSE TRANSFERS TO
THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

(a) Statement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United
States to oppose the transfer of defense articles or defense
services (as defined in the Arms Export Control Act) from any
country that is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) to, or on behalf of, the Russian
Federation, during any period in which the Russian Federation
forcibly occupies the territory of Ukraine or of a NATO
member country.
(b) NATO Policy.--The President shall use the voice and
vote of the United States in NATO to seek the adoption of a
policy by NATO that is consistent with the policy of the
United States specified in subsection (a).
(c) Identification of Certain Defense Transfers.--
(1) In general.--The President shall direct the appropriate
departments and agencies of the United States to monitor all
transfers of defense articles or defense services from NATO
member countries to the Russian Federation and identify those
transfers that are contrary to the policy of the United
States specified in subsection (a).
(2) Report.--
(A) In general.--The President shall submit a written
report to the chairmen and ranking members of the appropriate
committees of Congress within 5 days of the receipt of
information indicating that a transfer described in paragraph
(1) has occurred.
(B) Form.--The report required under subparagraph (A) may
be submitted in classified form.
(C) Appropriate committees of congress defined.--In this
paragraph, the term ``appropriate committees of Congress''
means--
(i) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Relations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence
of the Senate; and
(ii) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, and the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence of the House of Representatives.
(d) Licensing Policy for Certain Defense Transfers.--
(1) In general.--If a NATO member country transfers, or
allows a transfer by a person subject to its national
jurisdiction of, a defense article or defense service on or
after the date of the enactment of this Act that is contrary
to the policy of the United States specified in subsection
(a) and is identified pursuant to subsection (c), an
application for a license or other authorization required
under the Arms Export Control Act for the transfer of any
defense article or service to, or on behalf of, that NATO
member country shall be subject to a presumption of denial.
(2) Effective period.--A presumption of denial shall apply
to an application for a license or other authorization under
paragraph (1) only during a period in which the Russian
Federation forcibly occupies the territory of Ukraine or of a
NATO member country.
(3) Amendment to itar.--Not later than 30 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State
shall amend the International Trafficking in Arms Regulations
for purposes of implementing this subsection.

amendment no. 128 offered by mr. gibson of new york

At the appropriate place in subtitle E of title XII of
division A, add the following:

SEC. _. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the
use of force against Syria or Iran.

amendment no. 136 offered by mr. engel of new york

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

SEC. 1266. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Protecting cultural property abroad is a vital part of
United States cultural diplomacy, showing the respect of the
United States for other cultures and the common heritage of
humanity.
(2) Cultural property abroad has been lost, damaged, or
destroyed due to political instability, armed conflict,
natural disasters, and other threats.
(3) In Egypt, political instability has led to the
ransacking of its museums, resulting in the destruction of
countless ancient artifacts that will forever leave gaps in
humanity's knowledge of the ancient Egyptian civilization.
(4) In Syria, the ongoing civil war has resulted in the
shelling of medieval cities, damage to World Heritage Sites,
and the looting of museums and archaeological sites.
Archaeological and historic sites and artifacts in Syria date
back more than six millennia, and include some of the
earliest examples of writing.

[[Page H4773]]

(5) In Mali, the Al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group Ansar
Dine destroyed tombs and shrines in the ancient city of
Timbuktu, once a major center for Islamic learning and
scholarship in the 15th and 16th centuries, and threatened
collections of ancient manuscripts.
(6) In Afghanistan, the Taliban decreed that the Bamiyan
Buddhas, ancient statues carved into a cliff side in central
Afghanistan, were to be destroyed. In 2001 the Taliban
carried out their threat and destroyed the statues, leading
to worldwide condemnation.
(7) In Iraq, after the fall of Saddam Hussein, thieves
looted the Iraq Museum in Bagdad, resulting in the loss of
approximately 15,000 items. These included ancient amulets,
sculptures, ivories, and cylinder seals. Many of these items
remain unrecovered.
(8) The destruction of these and other cultural properties
represents an irreparable loss to humanity's common cultural
heritage, and therefore to all Americans.
(9) The Armed Forces have played important roles in
preserving and protecting cultural property. On June 23,
1943, President Franklin D. Roosevelt established the
American Commission for the Protection and Salvage of
Artistic and Historic Monuments in War Areas to provide
expert advice to the military on the protection of cultural
property. The Commission formed Monuments, Fine Arts, and
Archives (MFAA) teams which became part of the Civil Affairs
Division of Military Government Section of the Allied armies.
The individuals serving in the MFAA were known as the
``Monuments Men'' and have been credited with securing,
cataloguing, and returning hundreds of thousands works of art
stolen by the Nazis during World War II.
(10) The U.S. Committee of the Blue Shield was founded in
2006 to support the implementation of the 1954 Hague
Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the
Event of Armed Conflict, and to coordinate with the Armed
Forces, other branches of the United States Government, and
other cultural heritage nongovernmental organizations in
preserving cultural property abroad threatened by political
instability, armed conflict, or natural or other disasters.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Armed Forces play an important role in preserving
and protecting cultural property in countries at risk of
destruction due to political instability, armed conflict, or
natural or other disasters; and
(2) the United States must protect cultural property abroad
pursuant to its obligations under the 1954 Hague Convention
for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed
Conflict and customary international law in all conflicts to
which the United States is a party.
(c) Report on Activities of the Department of Defense in
Regards to Protecting Cultural Property Abroad.--The
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees and the Committee on Foreign Relations of
the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House
of Representatives a report on efforts of the Department of
Defense to protect cultural property abroad, including
activities undertaken pursuant to the 1954 Hague Convention
for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed
Conflict, other cultural protection statutes, and
international agreements, including--
(1) directives, policies, and regulations the Department
has instituted to protect cultural property abroad at risk of
destruction due to political instability, armed conflict, or
natural or other disasters;
(2) actions the Armed Forces have taken to protect cultural
property abroad, including efforts made to avoid damage, to
the extent possible, to cultural property through
construction activities, training to ensure deploying
military personnel are able to identify, avoid, and protect
cultural property abroad, and other efforts made to inform
military personnel about the protection of cultural property
as part of the law of war; and
(3) the status and number of specialist personnel in the
Armed Forces assigned to secure respect for cultural property
abroad and to cooperate with civilian authorities responsible
for safeguarding cultural property abroad, as required by
existing treaty obligations under Article 7 of the 1954 Hague
Convention.

amendment no. 145 offered by mr. turner of ohio

At the end of subtitle D of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1636. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR REMOVAL OR
CONSOLIDATION OF DUAL-CAPABLE AIRCRAFT FROM
EUROPE.

(a) Limitation.--
(1) In general.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2015 for the Department of Defense may be used
for the removal or consolidation of dual-capable aircraft
from the area of responsibility of the United States European
Command until the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with
the Secretary of State, certifies to the appropriate
congressional committees that--
(A) the armed forces of the Russian Federation are no
longer illegally occupying Ukrainian territory;
(B) the Russian Federation is no longer violating the INF
Treaty; and
(C) the Russian Federation is in compliance with the CFE
Treaty and has lifted its suspension of Russian observance of
its treaty obligations.
(2) Exception.--The limitation in paragraph (1) shall not
apply in instances where a dual-capable aircraft is being
replaced by an F-35 aircraft.
(b) Waiver.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the
limitation in subsection (a)(1) if--
(1) the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
Secretary of State, submits to the appropriate congressional
committees--
(A) a notification that such a waiver is in the national
security interest of the United States and a description of
the national security interest covered by the waiver;
(B) certification that such consolidation is consistent
with the policy established in the NATO Deterrence and
Defense Posture Review of 2012 concerning reciprocal non-
strategic nuclear weapons reductions by the Russian
Federation; and
(C) a report, in unclassified form, explaining why the
Secretary of Defense cannot make the certification under
subsection (a)(1); and
(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed following the date on
which the Secretary of Defense submits the information in the
report under paragraph (1)(C).
(c) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall provide a
report on the cost and burden sharing arrangements of
forward-deployed nuclear weapons in place with the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization and its members and any
recommendations for changes to these arrangements.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``CFE Treaty'' means the Treaty on
Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, signed at Paris November
19, 1990, and entered into force July 17, 1992.
(2) The ``dual-capable aircraft'' means tactical fighter
aircraft that can perform both conventional and nuclear
missions.
(3) The term ``INF Treaty'' means the Treaty Between the
United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and
Shorter-Range Missiles, commonly referred to as the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed at
Washington December 8, 1987 and entered into force June 1,
1988.

amendment no. 155 offered by mr. larsen of washington

At the end of subtitle C of title XXXI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 3134. PLAN FOR VERIFICATION AND MONITORING OF
PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND FISSILE
MATERIAL.

(a) Plan.--The President, in consultation with the
Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary
of Energy, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the
Director of National Intelligence, shall develop an
interagency plan for verification and monitoring relating to
the potential proliferation of nuclear weapons, components of
such weapons, and fissile material.
(b) Elements.--The plan developed under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) An interagency plan and road map for verification and
monitoring, with respect to policy, operations, and research,
development, testing, and evaluation, including--
(A) identifying requirements (including funding
requirements) for such verification and monitoring; and
(B) identifying and integrating roles, responsibilities,
and planning for such verification and monitoring.
(2) An engagement plan for building cooperation and
transparency to improve inspections and monitoring.
(3) A research and development program to--
(A) improve monitoring, detection, and in-field inspection
and analysis capabilities, including persistent surveillance,
remote monitoring, rapid analysis of large data sets,
including open-source data; and
(B) coordinate technical and operational requirements early
in the process.
(4) Engagement of relevant departments and agencies of the
Federal Government and the military departments (including
the Open Source Center and the U.S. Atomic Energy Detection
System), national laboratories, industry, and academia.
(c) Submission.--
(1) In general.--Not later than September 1, 2015, the
President shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees the plan developed under subsection (a).
(2) Appropriate congressional committees defined.--In this
subsection, the term appropriate congressional committees
means the following:
(A) The congressional defense committees.
(B) The Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and
the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House
of Representatives.
(C) The Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and
the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives.
(D) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Homeland Security
of the House of Representatives.
(E) The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the
House of Representatives.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the

[[Page H4774]]

gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

{time} 2130

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I urge the Committee to adopt the amendments
en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the
minority.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I concur. We should adopt the
en bloc amendments.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en
bloc amendments.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ENGEL. Madam Chair, this en bloc includes two of my amendments.
The first amendment provides an incentive for NATO member countries to
align their policies on defense exports to Russia with the restrictions
that the United States has imposed.
As of March 1st, the United States stopped approving licenses of
munitions and dual-use items to Russia if they would be used by the
Russian military. The U.S. restrictions would apply to any defense
items of other countries if they contain U.S. components.
While several European governments have imposed restrictions similar
to ours, neither NATO nor the European Union has moved to restrict
defense exports to Russia that are not covered by the U.S.
restrictions.
This raises the disturbing prospect that a NATO member could transfer
military items to Russia during this dangerous period when Russia
forcibly occupies Ukrainian territory in Crimea or, worse, could seize
territory in the Baltics, the Balkans or elsewhere in Eastern Europe.
The risk is real. For example, France has a contract to provide
Russia with two Mistral-class helicopter assault ships, the first one
to be delivered as early as this October. These warships would
significantly strengthen Russia's ability to launch an amphibious
attack.
Under my amendment, if a NATO member country transfers significant
defense items to Russia, inconsistent with the restrictions that the
U.S. has imposed, then there would be a ``presumption of denial'' for
applications to export U.S. defense items to that NATO country. This
policy would be in effect during any period when Russia either occupies
Ukrainian territory or the territory of a NATO member.
A ``presumption of denial'' is a well-established concept in U.S.
export controls. It provides sufficient flexibility to the Executive
Branch to approve defense transfers, if the presumption of denial is
over-ridden by U.S. security interests.
If NATO countries continue to arm Russia at this dangerous time, we
have to ask ourselves: ``what kind of alliance is NATO?'' My amendment
is not a sanction, but it is a warning to our NATO allies that we have
to stand together against Russian aggression, or risk arming a country
that might become an adversary.
The en bloc also includes my amendment requiring the Secretary of
Defense to do a one-time report on activities of the Department of
Defense with regards to protecting cultural property abroad, including
activities undertaken pursuant to the 1954 Hague Convention for the
Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.
War is inherently destructive, and all too often it results in the
ruin of irreplaceable artifacts, monuments, and archeological sites.
In Egypt, political instability has led to the ransacking of its
museums and destruction of countless ancient artifacts that will
forever leave gaps in humanity's knowledge of the ancient Egyptian
civilization.
In Syria, the ongoing civil war has resulted in the shelling of
medieval cities, damage to World Heritage Sites, and the looting of
museums and archaeological sites. Historic sites and artifacts in Syria
date back more than six millennia and include some of the earliest
examples of writing.
In Mali, the Al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist group Ansar Dine destroyed
tombs and shrines in the ancient city of Timbuktu--once a major center
for Islamic learning and scholarship in the 15th and 16th centuries--
and threatened collections of ancient manuscripts.
In Afghanistan, the Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas, ancient
statues carved into a cliff, leading to worldwide condemnation.
In Iraq, after the fall of Saddam Hussein, thieves looted the Iraq
Museum in Bagdad, resulting in the loss of approximately 15,000 items.
These included ancient amulets, sculptures, ivories, and cylinder
seals. Many of these items remain unrecovered.
Threats to cultural property are not new. Just as Adolf Hitler and
the Nazis aimed to eliminate entire groups of people from the planet,
they also sought to erase culture by stealing or destroying Europe's
great works of art and other cultural property.
Protecting cultural property abroad is a vital part of United States
cultural diplomacy, showing the respect of the United States for other
cultures and the common heritage of humanity.
The Armed Forces have played and continue to play an important role
in preserving and protecting cultural property in countries at risk of
destruction due to political instability, armed conflict, or natural or
other disasters.
On June 23, 1943, President Franklin D. Roosevelt established the
American Commission for the Protection and Salvage of Artistic and
Historic Monuments in War Areas to provide expert advice to the
military on the protection of cultural property. The Commission formed
Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives (MFAA) teams which became part of
the Civil Affairs Division of Military Government Section of the Allied
armies. The individuals serving in the MFAA were known as the
``Monuments Men'' and have been credited with securing, cataloguing,
and returning hundreds of thousands works of art stolen by the Nazis
during World War II.
The amendment included in the en bloc requires the Secretary of
Defense to do a one-time report on all Department of Defense activities
related to the protection of cultural property abroad--including those
taken pursuant to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of
Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.
This report will not only highlight the Defense Department's critical
role in protecting cultural property and sites, but will also help us
determine what more the United States can do to ensure that priceless
work produced over the ages will remain with us for generations to
come.
I thank the managers for including both of my amendments in the en
bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 7 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 590, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 7 consisting of amendment Nos. 57, 65, 67,
106, 114, 117, 126, 127, 129, 131, 132, 134, 137, 142, 149, 150, 151,
152, 153, 154, 158, 159, and 162 printed in part A of House Report No.
113-460, offered by Mr. McKeon of California:

amendment no. 57 offered by mr. gingrey of georgia

At the end of title V, add the following new section:

SEC. 5__. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING PRESERVATION OF SECOND
AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY
PERSONNEL STATIONED OR RESIDING IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms
shall not be infringed.
(2) Approximately 40,000 servicemen and women across all
branches of the Armed Forces either live in or are stationed
on active duty within the Washington, D.C., metropolitan
area. Unless these individuals are granted a waiver as
serving in a law enforcement role, they are subject to the
District of Columbia's onerous and highly restrictive laws on
the possession of firearms.
(3) Military personnel, despite being extensively trained
in the proper and safe use of firearms, are therefore
deprived by the laws of the District of Columbia of handguns,
rifles, and shotguns that are commonly kept by law-abiding
persons throughout the United States for sporting use and for
lawful defense of their persons, homes, businesses, and
families.
(4) The District of Columbia has one of the highest per
capita murder rates in the Nation, which may be attributed in
part to previous local laws prohibiting possession of
firearms by law-abiding persons who would have otherwise been
able to defend themselves and their loved ones in their own
homes and businesses.
(5) The Gun Control Act of 1968 (as amended by the Firearms
Owners' Protection Act) and the Brady Handgun Violence
Prevention Act provide comprehensive Federal regulations
applicable in the District of Columbia as elsewhere. In
addition, existing District of Columbia criminal laws punish
possession and illegal use of firearms by violent criminals
and felons. Consequently, there is no need for local laws
that only affect and disarm law-abiding citizens.
(6) On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court of the United
States in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller held
that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to
possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, and thus
ruled that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and
requirements that rifles and shotguns in the home be kept
unloaded and disassembled or outfitted with a trigger lock to
be unconstitutional.

[[Page H4775]]

(7) On July 16, 2008, the District of Columbia enacted the
Firearms Control Emergency Amendment Act of 2008 (D.C. Act
17-422; 55 DCR 8237), which places onerous restrictions on
the ability of law-abiding citizens from possessing firearms,
thus violating the spirit by which the Supreme Court of the
United States ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller.
(8) On February 26, 2009, the United States Senate adopted
an amendment on a bipartisan vote of 62-36 by Senator John
Ensign to S. 160, the District of Columbia House Voting
Rights Act of 2009, which would fully restore Second
Amendment rights to the citizens of the District of Columbia.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
active duty military personnel who are stationed or residing
in the District of Columbia should be permitted to exercise
fully their rights under the Second Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States and therefore should be
exempt from the District of Columbia's restrictions on the
possession of firearms.

amendment no. 65 offered by mr. larson of connecticut

At the end of subtitle A of title VII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 703. BEHAVIORAL HEALTH TREATMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL
DISABILITIES UNDER THE TRICARE PROGRAM.

(a) Behavioral Health Treatment of Developmental
Disabilities Under TRICARE.--Section 1077 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(g)(1) Subject to paragraph (4), in providing health care
under subsection (a), the treatment of developmental
disabilities (as defined by section 102(8) of the
Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act
of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 15002(8))), including autism spectrum
disorder, shall include behavioral health treatment,
including applied behavior analysis, when prescribed by a
physician or psychologist.
``(2) In carrying out this subsection, the Secretary shall
ensure that--
``(A) except as provided by subparagraph (B), behavioral
health treatment is provided pursuant to this subsection--
``(i) in the case of such treatment provided in a State
that requires licensing or certification of applied
behavioral analysts by State law, by an individual who is
licensed or certified to practice applied behavioral analysis
in accordance with the laws of the State; or
``(ii) in the case of such treatment provided in a State
other than a State described in clause (i), by an individual
who is licensed or certified by a State or an accredited
national certification board; and
``(B) applied behavior analysis or other behavioral health
treatment may be provided by an employee, contractor, or
trainee of a person described in subparagraph (A) if the
employee, contractor, or trainee meets minimum
qualifications, training, and supervision requirements as set
forth in applicable State law, by an appropriate accredited
national certification board, or by the Secretary.
``(3)(A) This subsection shall not apply to a medicare
eligible beneficiary (as defined in section 1111(b) of this
title).
``(B) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as
limiting or otherwise affecting the benefits provided to a
covered beneficiary under--
``(i) this chapter;
``(ii) title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395 et seq.); or
``(iii) any other law.
``(4) In addition to the requirement under section
1100(c)(1) of this title, with respect to retired members of
the Coast Guard, the Commissioned Corps of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or the Commissioned
Corps of the Public Health Service, or dependents of any such
retired members, treatment shall be provided under this
subsection in a fiscal year only to the extent that amounts
are specifically provided in advance in appropriations Acts
for the Defense Health Program Account for the provision of
such treatment for such fiscal year.''.
(b) Funding Matters.--
(1) In general.--Section 1100 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
(B) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection (c):
``(c) Behavioral Health Treatment of Developmental
Disabilities.--(1) Funds for treatment under section 1077(g)
of this title may be derived only from the Defense Health
Program Account. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
such funds may not be reimbursed from any account that would
otherwise provide funds for the treatment of retired members
of the Coast Guard, the Commissioned Corps of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or the Commissioned
Corps of the Public Health Service, or dependents of any such
retired members.
``(2) As provided for in paragraph (4) of section 1077(g),
with respect to retired members of the Coast Guard, the
Commissioned Corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, or the Commissioned Corps of the Public
Health Service, or dependents of any such retired members,
treatment under such section shall be provided in a fiscal
year only to the extent that amounts are specifically
provided in advance in appropriations Acts for the Defense
Health Program Account for the provision of such treatment
for such fiscal year.''.
(2) Increase and offset.--
(A) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 1405 for the Defense Health Program,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4501, for Private Sector Care is hereby increased by
$20,000,000.
(B) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 4301 for operation and maintenance,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4301, for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (Line 270)
is hereby reduced by $20,000,000.
(c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
amounts should be appropriated for behavioral health
treatment of TRICARE beneficiaries, pursuant to the
amendments made by this section, in a manner to ensure the
appropriate and equitable access to such treatment by all
such beneficiaries.

amendment no. 67 offered by mr. jones of north carolina

At the end of subtitle C of title VII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 729. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON USE OF HYPERBARIC OXYGEN
THERAPY TO TREAT TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY AND
POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress
disorder are the signature injuries of the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
(2) Post-traumatic stress disorder is prevalent throughout
the regular component of the Armed Forces.
(3) For example, with respect to Camp Lejeune, North
Carolina, which has a base population of 41,753 active duty
personnel, including 38,020 marines and 3,533 sailors--
(A) 6,616 patients with a principal diagnosis of post-
traumatic stress disorder had at least one visit for post-
traumatic stress disorder between February 2013 and April
2014; and
(B) the Naval Hospital Camp Lejeune, which had a total of
approximately 600,000 outpatient visits during 2013, recorded
15,043 outpatient visits for which post-traumatic stress
disorder was the primary reason for the visit between
February 2013 and April 2014.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) hyperbaric oxygen therapy is a medical treatment that
can be used to treat active duty members of the Armed Forces
for traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder
if--
(A) such treatment is prescribed by a military medical
doctor; and
(B) a hyperbaric chamber that is owned by the Department of
Defense and cleared for clinical use is locally available;
and
(2) the Secretary of Defense should increase awareness
among members of the Armed Forces, including military medical
doctors, of hyperbaric oxygen therapy to treat traumatic
brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder.

AMENDMENT NO. 106 OFFERED BY MR. WHITFIELD OF KENTUCKY

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1082. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ADVISORY
BOARD ON TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND WORKER HEALTH.

It is the sense of Congress that the President should
establish an Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker
Health, as described in the report of the Comptroller General
of the United States titled ``Energy Employees Compensation:
Additional Independent Oversight and Transparency Would
Improve Program's Credibility'', numbered GAO-10-302, to--
(1) advise the President concerning the review and approval
of the Department of Labor site exposure matrix;
(2) conduct periodic peer reviews of, and approve, medical
guidance for part E claims examiners with respect to the
weighing of a claimant's medical evidence;
(3) obtain periodic expert review of evidentiary
requirements for part B claims related to lung disease
regardless of approval;
(4) provide oversight over industrial hygienists,
Department of Labor staff physicians, and Department of
Labor's consulting physicians and their reports to ensure
quality, objectivity, and consistency; and
(5) coordinate exchanges of data and findings with the
Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health to the extent
necessary (under section 3624 the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42
U.S.C. 7384o).

AMENDMENT NO. 114 OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA

Page 384, line 21, strike ``and''.
Page 385, line 2, strike the period at the end and insert
``; and''.
Page 385, after line 2, add the following:
(3) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following:
``(C) That Pakistan is not using its military or any funds
or equipment provided by the United States to persecute
minority groups for their legitimate and nonviolent political
and religious beliefs, including the Balochi, Sindhi, and
Hazara ethnic groups and minority religious groups, including
Christian, Hundu, and Ahmadiyya Muslim.''.

[[Page H4776]]

AMENDMENT NO. 117 OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA

At the end of subtitle B of title XII of division A, add
the following:

SEC. _. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO DR. SHAKIL AFRIDI.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The attacks of September 11, 2001, killed approximately
3,000 people, most of whom were Americans, but also included
hundreds of individuals with foreign citizenships, nearly 350
New York Fire Department personnel, and about 50 law
enforcement officers.
(2) Downed United Airlines flight 93 was reportedly
intended, under the control of the al-Qaeda high-jackers, to
crash into the White House or the Capitol in an attempt to
kill the President of the United States or Members of the
United States Congress.
(3) The September 11, 2001, attacks were largely planned
and carried out by the al-Qaeda terrorist network led by
Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al Zawahiri, after which
Osama bin Laden enjoyed safe haven in Pakistan from where he
continued to plot deadly attacks against the United States
and the world.
(4) The United States has obligated nearly $30 billion
between 2002 and 2014 in United States taxpayer money for
security and economic aid to Pakistan.
(5) The United States very generously and swiftly responded
to the 2005 Kashmir Earthquake in Pakistan with more than
$200 million in emergency aid and the support of several
United States military aircraft, approximately 1,000 United
States military personnel, including medical specialists,
thousands of tents, blankets, water containers and a variety
of other emergency equipment.
(6) The United States again generously and swiftly
contributed approximately $150 million in emergency aid to
Pakistan following the 2010 Pakistan flood, in addition to
the service of nearly twenty United States military
helicopters, their flight crews, and other resources to
assist the Pakistan Army's relief efforts.
(7) The United States continues to work tirelessly to
support Pakistan's economic development, including millions
of dollars allocated towards the development of Pakistan's
energy infrastructure, health services and education system.
(8) The United States and Pakistan continue to have many
critical shared interests, both economic and security
related, which could be the foundation for a positive and
mutually beneficial partnership.
(9) Dr. Shakil Afridi, a Pakistani physician, is a hero to
whom the people of the United States, Pakistan and the world
owe a debt of gratitude for his help in finally locating
Osama bin Laden before more innocent American, Pakistani and
other lives were lost to this terrorist leader.
(10) Pakistan, the United States and the international
community had failed for nearly 10 years following attacks of
September 11, 2001, to locate and bring Osama bin Laden, who
continued to kill innocent civilians in the Middle East,
Asia, Europe, Africa and the United States, to justice
without the help of Dr. Afridi.
(11) The Government of Pakistan's imprisonment of Dr.
Afridi presents a serious and growing impediment to the
United States' bilateral relations with Pakistan.
(12) The Government of Pakistan has leveled and allowed
baseless charges against Dr. Afridi in a politically
motivated, spurious legal process.
(13) Dr. Afridi is currently imprisoned by the Government
of Pakistan, a deplorable and unconscionable situation which
calls into question Pakistan's actual commitment to
countering terrorism and undermines the notion that Pakistan
is a true ally in the struggle against terrorism.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
Dr. Shakil Afridi is an international hero and that the
Government of Pakistan should release him immediately from
prison.

AMENDMENT NO. 126 OFFERED BY MS. ROS-LEHTINEN OF FLORIDA

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1259. COMBATING CRIME THROUGH INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES.

The Secretary of Defense is authorized to deploy assets,
personnel, and resources to the Joint Interagency Task Force
South, in coordination with SOUTHCOM, to combat the following
by supplying sufficient intelligence capabilities:
(1) Transnational criminal organizations.
(2) Drug trafficking.
(3) Bulk shipments of narcotics or currency.
(4) Narco-terrorism.
(5) Human trafficking.
(6) The Iranian presence in the Western Hemisphere.

AMENDMENT NO. 127 OFFERED BY MS. ROS-LEHTINEN OF FLORIDA

At the end of subtitle E of title XII of division A, add
the following:

SEC. _. STATEMENT OF POLICY.

It shall be the policy of the United States to undertake a
whole-of-government approach to bolster regional cooperation
with countries throughout the Western Hemisphere, with the
exception of Cuba, to counter narcotics trafficking and
illicit activities in the Western Hemisphere.

AMENDMENT NO. 129 OFFERED BY MR. GOSAR OF ARIZONA

At the appropriate place in subtitle E of title XII, insert
the following:

SEC. _. DECLARATION OF POLICY REGARDING ISRAEL'S LAWFUL
EXERCISE OF SELF-DEFENSE.

Congress declares that it is the policy of the United
States to fully support Israel's lawful exercise of self-
defense, including actions to halt regional aggression.

AMENDMENT NO. 131 OFFERED BY MR. ROSKAM OF ILLINOIS

At the end of subtitle E of title XII of division A, add
the following new section:

SEC. 12_. STATEMENT OF POLICY AND REPORT ON THE INHERENT
RIGHT OF ISRAEL TO SELF-DEFENSE.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation
Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) established the policy
of the United States to support the inherent right of Israel
to self-defense.
(2) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation
Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) expressed the sense of
Congress that the Government of the United States should
transfer to the Government of Israel defense articles and
defense services such as air refueling tankers, missile
defense capabilities, and specialized munitions.
(3) The inherent right of Israel to self-defense
necessarily includes the possession and maintenance by Israel
of an independent capability to remove existential threats to
its security and defend its vital national interests.
(b) Policy of the United States.--It is the policy of the
United States to take all necessary steps to ensure that
Israel possesses and maintains an independent capability to
remove existential threats to its security and defend its
vital national interests.
(c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
air refueling tankers and advanced bunker-buster munitions
should immediately be transferred to Israel to ensure our
democratic ally has an independent capability to remove any
existential threat posed by the Iranian nuclear program and
defend its vital national interests.
(d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and every 180 days thereafter for a
period not to exceed four years, the President shall submit
to the House and Senate Armed Services committees, the House
Foreign Affairs Committee, the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, and the House and Senate Appropriations committees
a report that--
(1) identifies all aerial refueling platforms, bunker-
buster munitions, and other capabilities and platforms that
would contribute significantly to the maintenance by Israel
of a robust independent capability to remove existential
security threats, including nuclear and ballistic missile
facilities in Iran, and defend its vital national interests;
(2) assesses the availability for sale or transfer of items
necessary to acquire the capabilities and platforms described
in paragraph (1) as well as the legal authorities available
for making such transfers; and
(3) describes the steps the President is taking to
immediately transfer the items described in paragraph (1)
pursuant to the policy described in subsection (b).

amendment no. 132 offered by mr. franks of arizona

Add at the end of subtitle F of title XII of division A the
following:

SEC. 1266. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON NIGERIA AND BOKO HARAM.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) In recent years, Boko Haram has furthered violence and
instability in Nigeria and bordering countries.
(2) The terrorist group known as ``Boko Haram,'' which
translates to ``Western education is forbidden,'' perpetrates
violent attacks in Nigeria and has grown in strength and
sophistication since its founding in 2002.
(3) Boko Haram kidnapped over 200 female students on April
14, 2014, killed over 50 male students on February 25, 2014,
and continues to violently attack innocent civilians
throughout Nigeria.
(4) Boko Haram has previously attacked Western interests,
bombing the United Nations building in Abuja on August 26,
2011, and was affiliated with taking Western hostages in
Bauchi on February 16, 2013, and later killing seven
hostages.
(5) As stated by United States Ambassador to Nigeria
Terrence P. McCulley in 2012, the threat of Boko Haram is
growing: ``We`ve seen an increase in sophistication, we've
seen increased lethality. We saw at least a part of the group
has decided it's in their interest to attack the
international community.''.
(6) In June 2012, the Department of State added three
leaders of Boko Haram, Abubakar Shekau, Abubakar Adam Kambar,
and Khalid al-Barnawi, to the Specially Designated Global
Terrorist list.
(7) In November 2013, the Department of State designated
Boko Haram and its splinter group, Ansaru, as Foreign
Terrorist Organizations.
(8) Boko Haram shares the ideological designs of al Qaeda,
and has made public pledges of support to Osama bin Laden,
al-Qaeda, and al-Shabaab.
(9) Boko Haram poses a broader threat to interests in
Nigeria, the Sahel, Europe, and the United States.
(b) Sense of Congress.--In light of the findings specified
in subsection (a), it is the

[[Page H4777]]

sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense should--
(1) take appropriate action with allies and partners of the
United States to fight Boko Haram's violence and ideology;
(2) partner with Nigeria's regional neighbors to counter
Boko Haram's cross-border activity and respond to emerging
threats; and
(3) develop a long-term, interagency strategy to combat
Boko Haram and Ansaru, reassess United States assistance to
Nigeria, and brief Congress on this strategy.

amendment no. 134 offered by mr. shimkus of illinois

At the end of subtitle F of title XII insert the following
new section:

SEC. 1266. RECOGNITION OF VICTIMS OF SOVIET COMMUNIST AND
NAZI REGIMES.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) On August 13, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and
Prime Minister Winston Churchill issued a joint declaration
``of certain common principles in the national policies of
their respective countries on which they based their hopes
for a better future for the world'' and ``the right of all
peoples to choose the form of government under which they
will live and self government restored to those who have been
forcibly deprived of them'' and that the people of countries
may live in freedom.
(2) The United States Government has actively advocated for
and continues to support the principles of the United Nations
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations
General Assembly resolution 260 (III) of December 9, 1948.
(3) Captive Nations Week, signed into law by President
Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1959, raised public awareness of the
oppression of nations under the control of Communist and
other nondemocratic governments.
(4) The European Parliament resolution on European
conscience and totalitarianism of April 2, 2009, and the
``Black Ribbon Day'' resolution adopted by the Parliament of
Canada on November 30, 2009, establish a day of remembrance
for victims of Communist and Nazi regimes to remember and
commemorate their victims.
(5) The extreme forms of totalitarian rule practiced by the
Soviet Communist and Nazi regimes led to premeditated and
vast crimes committed against millions of human beings and
their basic and inalienable rights on a scale unseen before
in history.
(6) Fleeing the Nazi and Soviet Communist crimes, hundreds
of thousands of people sought and found refuge in the United
States.
(7) August 23 would be an appropriate date to designate as
``Black Ribbon Day'' to remember and never forget the terror
millions of citizens in Central and Eastern Europe
experienced for more than 40 years by ruthless military,
economic, and political repression of the people through
arbitrary executions, mass arrests, deportations, the
suppression of free speech, confiscation of private property,
and the destruction of cultural and moral identity and civil
society, all of which deprived the vast majority of the
peoples of Central and Eastern Europe of their basic human
rights and dignity, separating them from the democratic world
by means of the Iron Curtain and the Berlin Wall.
(8) The memories of Europe's tragic past cannot be
forgotten in order to honor the victims, condemn the
perpetrators, and lay the foundation for reconciliation based
on truth and remembrance.
(b) Recognition.--Congress supports the designation of
``Black Ribbon Day'' to recognize the victims of Soviet
Communist and Nazi regimes.

amendment no. 137 offered by ms. kelly of illinois

At the end of title XII, insert the following:

SEC. __. REPORT RELATING TO RESCUE EFFORTS IN NIGERIAN
KIDNAPPING.

Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Secretary of State, shall transmit to Congress a report on
the findings of U.S. military personnel assisting in the
search and rescue efforts of the more than 200 girls and
young women who were abducted from the Government Secondary
School in Chibok, Nigeria by Boko Haram. Such report shall
include--
(1) the location, health, and safety of the abducted girls,
to the extent such information is ascertainable;
(2) recommendations on what the Nigerian government can do
to protect the girls and similarly situated girls moving
forward;
(3) an assessment of the threat of Boko Haram to Nigeria
and other countries in the region;
(4) information regarding efforts by the Department of
Defense and Department of State to build the capacity of the
Nigerian security forces to combat the threat of Boko Haram;
(5) information regarding efforts underway to address
poverty and governance in Nigeria to improve the stability of
that nation; and
(6) an assessment of the efforts of the government of
Nigeria to address security challenges and the willingness of
that government to cooperate with the efforts of the United
States, including efforts to address human rights abuses by
the security forces of the government of Nigeria.

amendment no. 142 offered by mr. pompeo of kansas

At the end of subtitle C of title XVI, insert the following
new section:

SEC. 1622. DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE CERTIFICATION
WITH RESPECT TO THE MISSION ANALYSIS FOR CYBER
OPERATIONS OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

Section 933 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 127 Stat. 830) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``before the submittal
of'' and all that follows and inserting ``or 2015 before the
Secretary submits the report required by subsection (d) and
the Director of National Intelligence submits a certification
described in subsection (g).''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``and the Director of National Intelligence submits
a certification described in subsection (g).''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(g) Director of National Intelligence Certification.--The
Director of National Intelligence shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a certification that the
recommendations of the report required under subsection (d)
are consistent with the cyber operations capability needs of
the United States.''.

amendment no. 149 offered by mr. foster of illinois

At the end of subtitle E of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1643. STUDY ON TESTING PROGRAM OF GROUND-BASED MIDCOURSE
MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall enter into an
arrangement with the Institute for Defense Analyses under
which the Institute shall carry out a study on the testing
program of the ground based midcourse missile defense system.
(b) Elements.--The study under subsection (a) shall include
the following:
(1) An assessment of whether the testing program described
in subsection (a) has established, as of the date of the
study, that the ground-based midcourse missile defense system
will perform reliably and effectively under realistic
operational conditions, including an explanation of the
degree of confidence supporting such assessment.
(2) An assessment of whether the currently planned testing
program, if implemented, is sufficient to establish that the
ground-based midcourse missile defense system will perform
both reliably and effectively against current and plausible
near- and medium-term ballistic missile threats under
realistic operational conditions, and if any gaps are
identified, an evaluation of what improvements could be made
to the testing program to achieve reasonable confidence that
the system would be reliable and effective under realistic
operational conditions.
(3) Any necessary recommendations to improve the
effectiveness and reliability of the ground-based midcourse
missile defense system.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report containing the
study.

amendment no. 150 offered by mr. sablan of northern mariana islands

In title XXIII, insert after section 2303 the following new
section (and redesignate subsequent sections accordingly):

SEC. 2304. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN
FISCAL YEAR 2014 PROJECT.

In the case of the authorization contained in the table in
section 2301(a) of the Military Construction Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (division B of Public Law 113-66;
127 Stat. 992) relating to Saipan for the construction of a
maintenance facility, a hazardous cargo pad, or an airport
storage facility in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Secretary of the Air Force may carry out such
construction at any suitable location in the Northern Mariana
Islands.

amendment no. 151 offered by ms. castor of florida

At the end of subtitle A of title XXVIII, insert the
following new section:

SEC. 2805. REPORT ON PREVALENCE OF BLACK MOLD IN BUILDINGS
LOCATED ON MILITARY INSTALLATIONS.

(a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall report
to Congress on the prevalence of black mold in buildings
located on military installations.
(b) Action Required.--Based on the report required under
subsection (a), buildings identified in such report as
containing black mold shall be added to the appropriate
branch's construction priority list for building replacement
or renovation.

amendment no. 152 offered by ms. bordallo of guam

At the end of subtitle C of title XXVIII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 2832. ESTABLISHMENT OF SURFACE DANGER ZONE, RITIDIAN
UNIT, GUAM NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.

(a) Agreement to Establish.--In order to accommodate the
operation of a live-fire training range complex on Andersen
Air Force Base-Northwest Field and the management of the
adjacent Ritidian Unit of the Guam National Wildlife Refuge,
the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Interior,
notwithstanding the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of

[[Page H4778]]

1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), may enter into an agreement
providing for the establishment and operation of a surface
danger zone which overlays the Ritidian Unit or such portion
thereof as the Secretaries consider necessary.
(b) Elements of Agreement.--The agreement to establish a
surface danger zone over all or a portion of the Ritidian
Unit of the Guam National Wildlife Refuge shall include--
(1) measures to maintain the purposes of the Refuge; and
(2) as appropriate, measures, funded by the Secretary of
the Navy from funds appropriated after the date of enactment
of this Act and otherwise available to the Secretary, for the
following purposes:
(A) Relocation and reconstruction of structures and
facilities of the Refuge in existence as of the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(B) Mitigation of impacts to wildlife species present on
the Refuge or to be reintroduced in the future in accordance
with applicable laws.
(C) Use of Department of Defense personnel to undertake
conservation activities within the Ritidian Unit normally
performed by Department of the Interior personnel, including
habitat maintenance, maintaining the boundary fence, and
conducting the brown tree snake eradication program.
(D) Openings and closures of the surface danger zone to the
public as may be necessary.

amendment no. 153 offered by mr. hastings of washington

At the end of subtitle E of title XXVIII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 2867. ENSURING PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SUMMIT OF
RATTLESNAKE MOUNTAIN IN THE HANFORD REACH
NATIONAL MONUMENT.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting as
the administrator of land owned by the Office of
Environmental Management of the Department of Energy known as
the ``Hanford Reach National Monument'', shall provide public
access to the summit of Rattlesnake Mountain in the Hanford
Reach National Monument for educational, recreational,
historical, scientific, cultural, and other purposes,
including--
(1) motor vehicle access; and
(2) pedestrian and other nonmotorized access.
(b) Cooperative Agreements.--The Secretary of the Interior
may enter into cooperative agreements to facilitate access to
the summit of Rattlesnake Mountain--
(1) with the Secretary of Energy, the State of Washington,
or any local government agency or other interested persons,
for guided tours, including guided motorized tours to the
summit of Rattlesnake Mountain; and
(2) with the Secretary of Energy, and with the State of
Washington or any local government agency or other interested
persons, to maintain the access road to the summit of
Rattlesnake Mountain.

amendment no. 154 offered by mr. hastings of washington

Page 649, after line 10, insert the following new
subsection (and redesignate the subsequent subsection
accordingly):

(d) Exclusion of Certain Options.--
(1) In general.--The study under subsection (b)(1) and the
report under subsection (c)(1) shall not include any
assessment or discussion of options that involve moving
plutonium to a State where the Federal Government--
(A) is not meeting all legally binding deadlines and
milestones required under the Tri-Party Agreement and the
Consent Decree;
(B) has provided notification that any element of the Tri-
Party Agreement or the Consent Decree is at risk of being
breached; or
(C) is in dispute resolution with the State regarding the
Tri-Party Agreement or the Consent Decree.
(2) Definitions.--In this subsection:
(A) The term ``Tri-Party Agreement'' means the
comprehensive cleanup and compliance agreement between the
Secretary of Energy, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the State of Washington entered into
on May 15, 1989.
(B) The term ``Consent Decree'' means the legal agreement
between the Secretary of Energy and the State of Washington
finalized in 2010.

amendment no. 158 offered by mr. graves of missouri

At the end of title X, add the following:

Subtitle H--National Commission on the Future of the Army

SEC. 1091. NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE FUTURE OF THE ARMY.

(a) Establishment.--There is established the National
Commission on the Future of the Army (in this subtitle
referred to as the ``Commission'').
(b) Membership.--
(1) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of eight
members, of whom--
(A) four shall be appointed by the President;
(B) one shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee
on Armed Services of the Senate;
(C) one shall be appointed by the Ranking Member of the
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
(D) one shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives; and
(E) one shall be appointed by the Ranking Member of the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
(2) Appointment date.--The appointments of the members of
the Commission shall be made not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(3) Effect of lack of appointment by appointment date.--If
one or more appointments under subparagraph (A) of paragraph
(1) is not made by the appointment date specified in
paragraph (2), the authority to make such appointment or
appointments shall expire, and the number of members of the
Commission shall be reduced by the number equal to the number
of appointments so not made. If an appointment under
subparagraph (B), (C), (D), or (E) of paragraph (1) is not
made by the appointment date specified in paragraph (2), the
authority to make an appointment under such subparagraph
shall expire, and the number of members of the Commission
shall be reduced by the number equal to the number otherwise
appointable under such subparagraph.
(4) Expertise.--In making appointments under this
subsection, consideration should be given to individuals with
expertise in reserve forces policy.
(c) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be
appointed for the life of the Commission. Any vacancy in the
Commission shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled
in the same manner as the original appointment.
(d) Chair and Vice Chair.--The Commission shall select a
Chair and Vice Chair from among its members.
(e) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 30 days after the date
on which all members of the Commission have been appointed,
the Commission shall hold its initial meeting.
(f) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet at the call of the
Chair.
(g) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission
shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may
hold hearings.
(h) Administrative and Procedural Authorities.--The
following provisions of law do not apply to the Commission:
(1) Section 3161 of title 5, United States Code.
(2) The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).

SEC. 1092. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.

(a) Study on Structure of the Army.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall undertake a
comprehensive study of the structure of the Army, and policy
assumptions related to the size and force mixture of the
Army, to--
(A) determine the proper size and force mixture of the
regular component of the Army and the reserve components of
the Army, and
(B) make recommendations on how the structure should be
modified to best fulfill current and anticipated mission
requirements for the Army in a manner consistent with
available resources and anticipated future resources.
(2) Considerations.--In undertaking the study required by
subsection (a), the Commission shall give particular
consideration to the following:
(A) An evaluation and identification of a structure for the
Army that--
(i) has the depth and scalability to meet current and
anticipated requirements of the combatant commands;
(ii) achieves a cost-efficiency balance between the regular
and reserve components of the Army, taking advantage of the
unique strengths and capabilities of each, with a particular
focus on fully burdened and lifecycle cost of Army personnel;
(iii) ensures that the regular and reserve components of
the Army have the capacity needed to support current and
anticipated homeland defense and disaster assistance missions
in the United States;
(iv) provides for sufficient numbers of regular members of
the Army to provide a base of trained personnel from which
the personnel of the reserve components of the Army could be
recruited; and
(v) maximizes and appropriately balances affordability,
efficiency, effectiveness, capability, and readiness.
(B) An evaluation and identification of force generation
policies for the Army with respect to size and force mixture
in order to best fulfill current and anticipated mission
requirements for the Army in a manner consistent with
available resources and anticipated future resources,
including policies in connection with--
(i) readiness;
(ii) training;
(iii) equipment;
(iv) personnel; and
(v) maintenance of the reserve components in an operational
state in order to maintain the level of expertise and
experience developed since September 11, 2001.
(b) Final Report.--Not later than February 1, 2016, the
Commission shall submit to the President and the
congressional defense committees a report setting forth a
detailed statement of the findings and conclusions of the
Commission as a result of the study required by subsection
(a), together with its recommendations for such legislation
and administrative actions as the Commission considers
appropriate in light of the results of the study.

SEC. 1093. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.

(a) Hearings.--The Commission shall hold such hearings, sit
and act at such times and places, take such testimony, and
receive such evidence as the Commission considers advisable
to carry out its duties under this Act.

[[Page H4779]]

(b) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Commission may
secure directly from any Federal department or agency such
information as the Commission considers necessary to carry
out its duties under this Act. Upon request of the Chair of
the Commission, the head of such department or agency shall
furnish such information to the Commission.
(c) Postal Services.--The Commission may use the United
States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions
as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
(d) Gifts.--The Commission may accept, use, and dispose of
gifts or donations of services or property.

SEC. 1094. COMMISSION PERSONNEL MATTERS.

(a) Compensation of Members.--Each member of the Commission
who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government
shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily equivalent
of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level IV of
the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United
States Code, for each day (including travel time) during
which such member is engaged in the performance of the duties
of the Commission. All members of the Commission who are
officers or employees of the United States shall serve
without compensation in addition to that received for their
services as officers or employees of the United States.
(b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall
be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies
under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States
Code, while away from their homes or regular places of
business in the performance of services for the Commission.
(c) Staff.--
(1) In general.--The Chair of the Commission may, without
regard to the civil service laws and regulations, appoint and
terminate an executive director and such other additional
personnel as may be necessary to enable the Commission to
perform its duties. The employment of an executive director
shall be subject to confirmation by the Commission.
(2) Compensation.--The Chair of the Commission may fix the
compensation of the executive director and other personnel
without regard to chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53
of title 5, United States Code, relating to classification of
positions and General Schedule pay rates, except that the
rate of pay for the executive director and other personnel
may not exceed the rate payable for level V of the Executive
Schedule under section 5316 of such title.
(c) Detail of Government Employees.--Any Federal Government
employee may be detailed to the Commission without
reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption
or loss of civil service status or privilege.
(d) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.--
The Chair of the Commission may procure temporary and
intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not
exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay
prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under
section 5316 of such title.

SEC. 1095. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.

The Commission shall terminate 90 days after the date on
which the Commission submits its final report under section
1092(b).

SEC. 1096. FUNDING.

Amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2015
and available for operation and maintenance for the Army may
be available for the activities of the Commission under this
subtitle.

amendment no. 159 offered by mr. franks of arizona

At the end of subtitle E of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1643. BUDGET INCREASE FOR AEGIS BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE.

(a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 101 for procurement, Defense-wide, as
specified in the corresponding funding table in section 4101,
for Aegis BMD (Line 030) is hereby increased by $99,000,000.
(b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D--
(1) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in section
101 for aircraft procurement, Army, as specified in the
corresponding funding table in section 4101, for Aerial
Common Sensor (Line 003) is hereby reduced by $75,300,000;
and
(2) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in section
101 for procurement, Marine Corps, as specified in the
corresponding funding table in section 4101, for RQ-21 UAS
(line 023) is hereby reduced by $23,700,000.

amendment no. 162 offered by mr. young of indiana

At the end of subtitle B of title XXVIII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 28__. INDEMNIFICATION OF TRANSFEREES OF PROPERTY AT
MILITARY INSTALLATIONS CLOSED SINCE OCTOBER 24,
1988, THAT REMAIN UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

Section 330(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 2687
note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``paragraph (3)'' and inserting ``paragraph
(4)''; and
(B) by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph
(3)'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs
(3) and (4), respectively;
(3) in paragraph (4), as redesignated, by striking
``paragraph (2) contributed to any such release or threatened
release, paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``paragraph (3)
contributed to any such release or threatened release,
paragraph (1) or (2)''; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph (2):
``(2) The responsibility of the Secretary of Defense to
hold harmless, defend, and indemnify in full certain persons
and entities described in paragraph (3) also applies with
respect to any military installation (or portion thereof)
that--
``(A) was closed during the period beginning on October 24,
1988, and ending on the date of the enactment of this
paragraph, other than pursuant to a base closure law; and
``(B) remains under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Defense as of the date of the enactment of this paragraph.''.

Modification to Amendment No. 134 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No.
134 be modified in the form I have placed at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:

The amendment as modified is as follows:
At the end of subtitle F of title XII insert the following
new section:

SEC. 1266. RECOGNITION OF VICTIMS OF SOVIET COMMUNIST AND
NAZI REGIMES.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) On August 13, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and
Prime Minister Winston Churchill issued a joint declaration
``of certain common principles in the national policies of
their respective countries on which they based their hopes
for a better future for the world'' and ``the right of all
peoples to choose the form of government under which they
will live and self government restored to those who have been
forcibly deprived of them'' and that the people of countries
may live in freedom.
(2) The United States Government has actively advocated for
and continues to support the principles of the United Nations
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations
General Assembly resolution 260 (III) of December 9, 1948.
(3) Captive Nations Week, signed into law by President
Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1959, raised public awareness of the
oppression of nations under the control of Communist and
other nondemocratic governments.
(4) The European Parliament resolution on European
conscience and totalitarianism of April 2, 2009, and the
``Black Ribbon Day'' resolution adopted by the Parliament of
Canada on November 30, 2009, establish a day of remembrance
for victims of Communist and Nazi regimes to remember and
commemorate their victims.
(5) On the 70th anniversary of the formal adoption by the
Nazi leadership of the ``Final Solution of the Jewish
Problem'', members of the European Parliament and the
national parliaments of the European Union rejected attempts
to obfuscate the Holocaust by persons who sought to diminish
the uniqueness of the Holocaust by deeming the Holocaust to
be equal, similar, or equivalent to Communism.
(6) Extreme forms of totalitarian rule have led to
premeditated and vast crimes committed against millions of
human beings and their basic and inalienable rights on a
scale unseen before in history.
(7) The Nazi regime committed mass genocide during the
Holocaust, killing millions of Jews, political opponents, and
minority populations.
(8) August 23 would be an appropriate date to designate as
``Black Ribbon Day'' to remember and never forget the terror
millions of citizens in Central and Eastern Europe
experienced for more than 40 years by ruthless military,
economic, and political repression of the people through
arbitrary executions, mass arrests, deportations, the
suppression of free speech, confiscation of private property,
and the destruction of cultural and moral identity and civil
society, all of which deprived the vast majority of the
peoples of Central and Eastern Europe of their basic human
rights and dignity, separating them from the democratic world
by means of the Iron Curtain and the Berlin Wall.
(9) The memories of Europe's tragic past cannot be
forgotten in order to honor the victims, condemn the
perpetrators, and lay the foundation for reconciliation based
on truth and remembrance.
(b) Recognition.--Congress supports the designation of
``Black Ribbon Day'' to recognize the victims of Soviet
Communist and Nazi regimes.

[[Page H4780]]

Modification to Amendment No. 159 Offered by Mr. McKeon

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No.
159 be modified in the form I have placed at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:

The amendment as modified is as follows:
At the end of subtitle E of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1643. BUDGET INCREASE FOR AEGIS BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE.

(a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 101 for procurement, Defense-wide, as
specified in the corresponding funding table in section 4101,
for Aegis BMD (Line 030) is hereby increased by $99,000,000.
(b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D--
(1) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in section
101 for aircraft procurement, Army, as specified in the
corresponding funding table in section 4101, for Aerial
Common Sensor (Line 003) is hereby reduced by $75,300,000;
and
(2) the amounts authorized to be appropriated in section
1405 for the Defense Health Program, as specified in the
corresponding funding table in section 4501, for operation
and maintenance pertaining to implementation of benefit
reform proposals, is hereby reduced by $23,700,000.

Mr. McKEON (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent
that the reading of the modification be dispensed with.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the modification?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments
en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the
minority.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Again, I concur in support for the en bloc amendments. This is the
last amendment, and I just want to say thank you again to Chairman
McKeon. I think it is right that this bill is named after him. As I
have said, he has done a fabulous job on our committee. I appreciate
his hard work and for, once again, putting together this product.
I also want to thank the staff. This is a very large bill. Lots of
amendments are offered both on the committee level and on the House
level. Staff has to pour through all of that and make sense of it and
keep us informed. They do an incredible job and an incredible service
to our country and to the men and women who serve in the military by
making sure that this bill gets done every year, so I very much
appreciate that.
I want to particularly recognize Debra Wada from the HASC staff, who
will soon be leaving us. She has been promoted to be the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. Debra has
served for 15 years as staff on this committee and as an invaluable
source of knowledge on personnel and on many, many other issues. It has
been great working with her. We congratulate her on her appointment and
wish her the best. Again, she is but one example of an absolutely
fantastic staff and of the great work that they do to put this product
together every single year.
So we thank you.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Young), my friend and colleague.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my
simple amendment to ensure fairness in how we treat military
installations after they are closed.
Most military installations are closed through the BRAC process. As
such, they are granted certain legal protections, including
indemnification from claims arising from environmental hazards created
by previous DOD operations. However, some installations can be closed
unilaterally by the Defense Secretary outside of the normal BRAC
process. In these instances, the facilities are not granted the same
protections. As it turns out, many former Army ammunition plants were
closed outside the normal procedure. As you might imagine, facilities
where chemicals for ammunition production were once mixed and discarded
tend to pose some risk to the environment, and yet, merely because of
the way they were closed down, cities and towns which later try to
redevelop that property must assume the risk for any lingering
environmental hazards.
My amendment would simply extend the same protection enjoyed by most
closed installations to all closed installations.
Two years ago, I offered a similar amendment that was added to the
House-passed NDAA, but it was not included in the Senate-passed version
nor was it included in the conference report. That version would have
retroactively applied this protection to properties which have already
been transferred.
I have heard the concerns from the DOD and from others about adding
this benefit on top of previously negotiated contracts. I am sensitive
to those concerns, so this updated language only applies to those
properties which are still under DOD's control today. I think this
adequately addresses those concerns, and it still ensures that there is
equity in how we handle these properties in the future.
I would like to thank the gentleman from California, Chairman McKeon,
for his work once again in putting together this NDAA. I would also
like to thank him and his staff for working with our office to draft
this amendment and include it as part of this amendment package.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry), my friend and colleague.
Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, I would like to thank Mr. Graves from
Missouri for taking the lead on this amendment, and I would like to
thank Chairman McKeon for including this amendment in this en bloc
package.
After 12 years of combat coming to a close and shifting security
priorities, a commission to evaluate Army force structure is, indeed,
appropriate. The Pentagon is still operating with assumptions, metrics
and policies from the early 2000s. What we need to be doing is looking
at shaping the force of the future. What the future missions and force
mixture between active-guard-reserve should be is a question that
should be thoroughly assessed.
To determine how the future of our total Army will be shaped for
decades to come, we should select the more comprehensive commission and
take the additional few months to do a comprehensive analysis with the
best personnel and minds available.
Madam Chairman, the security of the Nation depends upon it.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I think we are about done.
At this time, I would like to thank my partner. For 4 years, we have
had the opportunity of leading this committee, and I could not have had
a better person to be working with than Mr. Smith from Washington. He
is straightforward; he is honest; he is hardworking, and we just, I
think, have had a really good working relationship. I consider him--and
I will always consider him--a friend.
Likewise, I want to echo the things he said about the committee. I
want to thank them. We get all of the plaudits. People get up and thank
us and say we have done a great job, but it is these people behind us--
our committee, our staff--that make it easy to do this. I mean, we
could have been here until 1 or 2 o'clock this morning, but to make it
look kind of easy, kind of smooth, they have been working on it for
hours, for days, for weeks, and for months leading up to this point.
I don't know much more to say other than ``thank you.'' You are great
Americans.
People like to beat up on government workers. All I can say is that
they are not paid enough for what they do. They can't be paid enough.
They are patriots. They are dedicated to this work and to our men and
women in uniform and their families, and I thank them for that.
With that, Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en
bloc

[[Page H4781]]

amendments, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my
amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which
requires a report to Congress on the prevalence of black mold in
buildings located on military installations. Additionally, once the
report is complete, buildings identified as containing black mold shall
be added to the appropriate branch's construction priority list for
building replacement or renovations. I would like to thank Mr. Nugent
and Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for their support and
agreeing to include my language in an en bloc amendment.
Taking care of our troops is one of our country's top priorities.
After these brave men and women have put themselves in harm's way on
the battlefield, it is essential that we ensure once they are back on
base they are living and working in a safe nonhazardous environment. We
must root out dangerous health hazards--like black mold--on military
instillations to protect the health of military personnel on base.
One example of where this is an issue is at MacDill Air Force Base in
Tampa, Florida. MacDill is home to the 6th Air Mobility Wing and 39
Mission Teammates, including the United States Central Command, United
States Special Operations Command. MacDill is home to over 13,000
military and civilian personnel and approximately 170,000 retirees live
in the Tampa area and depend on the base for many necessary services.
Black mold has been found on the first floor of the Mission Support
Facility located on base. This building houses the mission support
squadron and the ID services. Employees working in the Mission Support
Facility supply all employees--military, civilian and contractor--and
veterans with their ID credentialing and they assist veterans with
additional paperwork that will help them obtain the benefits they have
earned during service. Imagine how many of our active duty personnel,
military retirees and civilians have visited this facility over the
years. The Defense Department must keep a critical eye out not only for
this facility at MacDill, but on all bases so we can maintain a high
standard for our military men and women.
In addition to being a health hazard, the mold in the Mission Support
Facility takes up valuable workspace and is cordoned off. Base
personnel are doing the best they can and they have found a way to
ensure that no service member or their family member has suffered, but
they should not have to.
As you may know, black mold thrives in indoor spaces where there is
moisture and humidity. As any tourist or native Floridian, like me, can
tell you, Florida is well known for its humidity. It likely is
happening at other bases located in humid areas. If we do not maintain
these facilities defense-wide, issues like black mold can lead to
expensive and harmful consequences down the road. We have seen examples
over the years of black mold being found in homes where military
families live and the horrendous stories centered around mold that came
out of Walter Reed less than 10 years ago. We need to make certain our
servicemembers, veterans, their families and civilians live and work in
a healthy environment and that is why I have introduced my amendment to
NDAA.
I would like to thank my friend and fellow Tampa Bay member,
Representative Rich Nugent, for his partnership on this amendment. His
tireless dedication to the men and women serving in the Armed Forces at
MacDill and around the globe are laudable. Active duty personnel and
veterans throughout the Tampa Bay area are fortunate to have such a
strong leader serving on the House Armed Services Committee and I am
fortunate to call him a colleague.
Madam Chair, again, I would like to thank Mr. Nugent, Chairman McKeon
and Ranking Member Smith for their hard work on this legislation and
for including my amendment en bloc. Protecting the health of our
servicesmembers and all individuals who work, live or visit any
military instillations is imperative. I urge my colleagues to support
my amendment.
Mr. BARLETTA. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the Graves Amendment
to the National Defense Authorization bill.
My home state of Pennsylvania is proud of its National Guard--the
fourth largest in the country and part of the fabric of our community.
We need the Guard--particularly in times of disaster.
After Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee in 2011, many of our
citizens simply would not have made it without the help of our National
Guard.
I support ensuring that the National Guard is appropriately protected
in any force restructuring.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment number
129 as part of en-bloc package 7. The overall intent of this amendment
is to address potential legal impediment of allowing a surface danger
zone (SDZ) over the Ritidian unit of the Guam National Wildlife Refuge.
My amendment would allow the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of
Interior to enter into agreement over the establishment of an SDZ over
the refuge. It would also outline areas that would need to be mitigated
if an SDZ were located over the Ritidian Unit. The amendment is similar
to compromise language developed by Navy and Fish and Wildlife Service
following an April 29, 2014 hearing in the House Committee on Natural
Resources on this bill.
I believe this amendment will keep the Navy and the Fish and Wildlife
Service talking about the potential impacts of a firing range on
Northwest Field. In fact, I believe this amendment is important to keep
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process on track so that
these two agencies can discuss potential mitigations should this
location ultimately be chosen as the location for a firing range on
Guam. The Navy has just commenced the draft supplemental environmental
impact statement hearings (SEIS) so there is ample time to review all
alternatives. The amendment does not prejudge the outcome of this NEPA
process, indeed it is intended to keep the process on track so we do
not suffer any unnecessary delays in the realignment of Marines from
Okinawa, Japan to Guam. As the Navy has testified and stated publicly,
without H.R. 4402 in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2015 the military build-up would likely suffer significant delays
and could significant consequences for our bilateral relationship with
Japan.
I fully respect and appreciate the Guam community's close engagement
on these issues and their participation during the draft SEIS public
meetings this past week. I was able to hear directly from our community
on this amendment over the past week, and community feedback is
absolutely critical to the process. It provides the Navy and other
stakeholders with important viewpoints to consider when final decisions
are made for the Record of Decision.
I would also like to underscore the importance of training to the
overall readiness of Marines in the Asia-Pacific region. This
importance is highlighted by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel in a
letter to Congress, stating a live-fire training range is critical to,
``maintain the military training and readiness of Marine Corps
personnel relocating to the island''. I have been and remain a staunch
advocate for the military build-up on Guam. I believe that this bill
keeps the process moving forward and ensures that we have no further
unnecessary delays. The bottom line and undeniable fact is that without
a live-fire training range on Guam, we will not have a military build-
up.
I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for agreeing to put this
amendment in en-bloc package 7 and urge its immediate adoption.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Chair, I rise to speak in favor of
my amendment, which directs the Department of the Interior to provide
the American public with reasonable motorized, non-motorized, and
pedestrian access to the summit of Rattlesnake Mountain, located in the
Hanford Reach National Monument. This 195,000-acre monument, designated
by President Clinton in 2000, is near the Hanford Nuclear Site and is
the only one in the continental United States managed by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Although administered by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the site itself remains under the ownership of the
Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management.
At 3,600 feet, Rattlesnake Mountain is the highest point in the
region, and it provides unparalleled views for miles around the
monument, including the Hanford Site, the Snake River, the Columbia
River, and the Yakima River. Unfortunately, it took the Fish and
Wildlife Service eight years to write a management plan that
effectively closed Rattlesnake Mountain to public access, despite the
vast majority of public comments favoring just the opposite.
After I first introduced this bill in 2010, the Fish and Wildlife
Service offered two public tours for selected individuals and then
suddenly reneged on the offer just days before the tours were to occur.
During a 2011 committee hearing on the bill, the Interior Department's
testimony suggested that the Fish and Wildlife Service supports tours
of Rattlesnake, but very carefully didn't go the extra step of ensuring
the Service would allow public access to the summit.
Finally, last summer, the Fish and Wildlife Service granted a few
dozen people the opportunity to access the Rattlesnake Mountain summit
over two tours. These were the first two public tours offered since the
monument was designated. The seats for the 2013 tours were snapped up
online in just 21 seconds of being made available.
This year, the Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing tours on six
days, and used a lottery system to distribute the tickets. While I
appreciate the Interior Department's tentative steps in recent years
toward allowing the public access to this area, it's clearly not
enough, and even the limited opportunities being offered now can be
reversed at any time.

[[Page H4782]]

My amendment is necessary to ensure reasonable and regular public
access can be guaranteed by law to the citizens of that area. This
language is supported by many stakeholders in the local area including
the Benton County Commissioners, the Tri-Cities Development Council
(TRIDEC), the Tri-City Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Tri-Cities
Visitor and Convention Bureau, and the Back Country Horsemen of
Washington.
I would also note that this amendment has passed this chamber
previously as stand-alone legislation. Last year, and in the previous
Congress, this body approved this language on strong bipartisan votes
with no votes in opposition.
I appreciate the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services
Committee and their staff for allowing this amendment to be adopted en
bloc today. Hopefully, this will move us closer to ensuring the
American people have access to special places on their public lands,
like Rattlesnake Mountain.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc, as
modified, offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The en bloc amendments, as modified, were agreed to.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Perry) having assumed the chair, Ms. Foxx, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4435) to
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities
of the Department of Defense and for military construction, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for
other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

____________________