[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 116 (Tuesday, July 11, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3912-S3914]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        ARMS SALES NOTIFICATION

  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control 
Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain 
proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, 
the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be 
reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the 
notification of proposed sales shall be sent to

[[Page S3913]]

the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
  In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant 
information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to 
have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. 
If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is 
available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations 
Committee, room SD-423.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                  Defense Security


                                           Cooperation Agency,

                                                    Arlington, VA.
     Hon. Bob Corker,
     Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Pursuant to the reporting requirements 
     of Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, as 
     amended, we are forwarding herewith Transmittal No. 17-25, 
     concerning the Army's proposed Letter(s) of Offer and 
     Acceptance to the Government of the Netherlands for defense 
     articles and services estimated to cost $34 million. After 
     this letter is delivered to your office, we plan to issue a 
     news release to notify the public of this proposed sale.
           Sincerely,

                                                  Greg Kausner

                                    (For J.W. Rixey, Vice Admiral,
                                                   USN, Director).


                         Transmittal No. 17-25

     Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to 
         Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, as 
         amended
       (i) Prospective Purchaser: The Government of the 
     Netherlands.
       (ii) Total Estimated Value:
       Major Defense Equipment * $30 million.
       Other $4 million.
       Total $34 million.
       (iii) Description and Quantity or Quantities of Articles or 
     Services under Consideration for Purchase:
       Foreign Military Sales (FMS) case NE-B-WFV, implemented in 
     June 2013, was below congressional notification threshold at 
     $26.3M ($20M in MDE) and included one hundred and eighty 
     (180) AGM-114R Hellfire II Missiles and twenty-four (24) 
     M36E8 Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM). The Netherlands 
     has requested the case be amended to include an additional 
     seventy (70) AGM-114R Hellfire II missiles. This amendment 
     will push the current case above the MDE notification 
     threshold and thus requires notification of the entire case.
       Maior Defense Equipment (MDE):
       Two hundred fifty (250) AGM-114R Hellfire II Missiles, 
     Twenty-four (24) M36E8 Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM).
       Non-MDE includes:
       Hellfire missile cutaway model, AGM-114R missile spare 
     parts, a Launcher Test Station (LTS), LTS spares, two (2) 
     maintenance support devices, integrated logistics support 
     tools, M299 launcher software upgrade and testing, aircrew 
     familiarization training, launcher test station training, 
     unclassified publications, technical assistance, AN/AWM-101A 
     software, CATM spare parts and related support services, and 
     other related elements of logistics and program support.
       (iv) Military Department: Army.
       (v) Prior Related Cases, if any: NE-B-WFV.
       (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, Offered, or Agreed 
     to be Paid: None.
       (vii) Sensitivity of Technology Contained in the Defense 
     Article or Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: See Attached 
     Annex.
       (viii) Date Report Delivered to Congress: July 11, 2017.
       *As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control 
     Act.


                          POLICY JUSTIFICATION

       Government of the Netherlands--AGM-114R Hellfire Missiles

       The Government of the Netherlands has requested the 
     possible sale of an additional seventy (70) AGM-114R Hellfire 
     II missiles to a previously implemented case for Hellfire 
     missiles. The original FMS case, valued at $26.3M, included 
     one hundred and eighty (180) AGM-114R Hellfire II Missiles 
     and twenty-four (24) M36E8 Captive Air Training Missiles 
     (CATM) with various support elements. Therefore, this case is 
     for a total of two hundred fifty (250) AGM-114R Hellfire II 
     Missiles, twenty-four (24) M36E8 CATMs, to include Hellfire 
     missile cutaway model, AGM-114R missile spare parts, a 
     Launcher Test Station (LTS), LTS spares, two (2) maintenance 
     support devices, integrated logistics support tools, M299 
     launcher software upgrade and testing, aircrew 
     familiarization training, launcher test station training, 
     unclassified publications, technical assistance, AN/AWM-101A 
     software, CATM spare parts and related support services, and 
     other related elements of logistics and program support. The 
     estimated total case value is $34 million.
       This proposed sale will enhance the foreign policy and 
     national security objectives of the United States by helping 
     to improve the security of the Netherlands which has been, 
     and continues to be an important force for political 
     stability and economic progress in Europe. It is vital to the 
     U.S. national interests to assist the Netherlands to develop 
     and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability.
       The proposed sale will improve the Netherlands' capability 
     to meet current and future threats and will be employed on 
     the Netherlands' AH-64D Apache helicopters. The Netherlands 
     will use this capability to strengthen its homeland defense, 
     deter regional threats, and provide direct support to 
     coalition operations. The Netherlands will have no difficulty 
     absorbing these missiles into its armed forces.
       The proposed sale of these missiles will not alter the 
     basic military balance in the region.
       The principal contractor will be Lockheed Martin. The 
     purchaser typically requests offsets. Any offset agreement 
     will be defined in negotiations between the purchaser and the 
     contractor.
       Implementation of this proposed sale will not require the 
     assignment of any additional U.S. Government personnel or 
     contractor representatives to the Netherlands.
       There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness 
     as a result of this proposed sale.


                         Transmittal No. 17-25

     Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to 
         Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act

                           Annex Item No. vii

       (vii) Sensitivity of Technology:
       1. AGM-114R: The AGM-114R is used against heavy and light 
     armored targets, thin skinned vehicles, urban structures, 
     bunkers, caves and personnel. The missile is Inertial 
     Measurement Unit (IMU) based, with a variable delay fuse, 
     improved safety and reliability. The highest level for 
     release of the AGM-114R is SECRET. Software and firmware 
     documentation (e.g., Data Processing, Software Requirements, 
     Source Code, Algorithms) are not authorized for disclosure. 
     The highest level of classified information that could be 
     disclosed by a proposed sale or by testing of the end item is 
     up to and including SECRET. The highest level that must be 
     disclosed for production, maintenance, or training is up to 
     and including SECRET. Vulnerability data, countermeasures, 
     vulnerability/susceptibility analyses, and threat definitions 
     are classified SECRET or CONFIDENTIAL. Detailed information 
     to include discussions, reports and studies of system 
     capabilities, vulnerabilities and limitations that leads to 
     conclusions on specific tactics or other counter-
     countermeasures (CCM) are not authorized for disclosure. 
     Reverse engineering could reveal SECRET information.
       2. If a technologically advanced adversary were to obtain 
     knowledge of the specific hardware and software elements, the 
     information could be used to develop countermeasures which 
     might reduce weapons systems effectiveness or be used in the 
     development of a system with similar or advanced 
     capabilities.
       3. A determination has been made that the Government of the 
     Netherlands can provide substantially the same degree of 
     protection for the sensitive technology being released as the 
     U.S. Government. This proposed sale is necessary to the 
     furtherance of the U.S. foreign policy and national security 
     objectives outlined in the policy justification.
       4. All defense articles and services listed in this 
     transmittal are authorized for release and export to the 
     Government of the Netherlands.

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, on June 29, 2017, the Agriculture 
Committee reported by voice vote the fourth authorization of the 
Pesticide Registration Improvement Act, more commonly known as PRIA.
  For nearly 20 years, PRIA has served as an example of bipartisanship, 
bringing together a wide range of stakeholders in support of a 
commonsense fee for service programs within the EPA's Office of 
Pesticides Programs.
  PRIA provides certainty for registrants; much needed resources to the 
EPA to ensure regulatory examinations related to human health and 
environmental safety risks are done properly; and PRIA also provides 
vital funds for pesticide safety training and information to our 
Nation's farmworkers.
  Unfortunately, after several years of carefully revising and 
finalizing an updated Worker Protection Standard, the EPA decided last 
month to delay key elements of worker protections, including the much 
needed revisions to the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule.
  Without strong and timely farmworker protections, PRIA simply does 
not make sense for some stakeholders who are a part of the coalition. 
The funds from PRIA allocated to farmworker protection should be 
meaningful resources that complement strong, effective protections and 
should not be undermined by changes to EPA's Worker Protection Standard 
and the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule that would weaken 
farmworker protections.
  Therefore, I strongly oppose any future efforts by the EPA to delay 
or amend the worker protection rules that the Agency finalized in 
November 2015 and January 2017, respectively,

[[Page S3914]]

without undertaking a negotiated rulemaking, which must include all 
relevant stakeholders, to ensure that all voices are heard.
  I hope the EPA will take a cue from our recent bipartisan and 
consensus-based committee action on PRIA and proceed in a similar 
fashion should they decide that any delays or adjustments to the Worker 
Protection Standards or the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule 
are necessary.
  Should the Trump EPA dismiss the concerns of farmworkers and 
environmental advocates, I fear that last month's committee vote may 
unfortunately be the last bipartisan PRIA reauthorization that this 
panel is able to report out. I hope that is not the case, and I know 
other members of the committee share my concerns on the matter.
  Once again, I want to thank Senator Roberts for his leadership. I am 
glad we were able to move forward in a bipartisan and consensus manner 
to reauthorize PRIA last month.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, the ranking member 
of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, for 
engaging in this important discussion.
  I am proud to stand before my colleagues in the U.S. Senate to 
discuss some of the bipartisan work that we have accomplished through 
regular order at the Agriculture Committee specifically with regard to 
H.R. 1029, the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 
2017, or PRIA 4.
  PRIA, while technical in nature, is critically important with 
assisting both EPA in carrying out administrative functions and 
industry that relies upon timely, science-based pesticide registration 
decisions to get products on the market and in the hands of farmers, 
ranchers, and other consumers.
  PRIA, historically, has received widespread support from a diverse 
coalition of stakeholders, including members of the pesticide 
registrant community--both agricultural and nonagricultural uses, 
labor, and environmental advocates, which has contributed to Congress's 
ability to pass reauthorizations swiftly and by unanimous consent. With 
the Widespread support of the PRIA coalition, as illustrated by a 
coalition letter addressed to our committee on June 29, 2017, which 
expresses support of the amendment to H.R. 1029 and urges swift action, 
this effort should be no different.
  Our committee held a hearing earlier this year to review this issue 
in an open and transparent manner. As we have heard time and time 
again, farmers and ranchers want regulatory certainty. EPA and 
registrants who rely on PRIA to get new products on the market and in 
the hands of farmers, ranchers, and other consumers want certainty.
  My colleague raises an issue that has historically been outside the 
scope of the technical, fee-based registration process of PRIA. I 
certainly understand the concerns that have been raised by some groups 
with regard to certain actions EPA is considering with regard to the 
Worker Protection Standard and the Certification of Pesticide 
Applicators rules. My hope is that EPA and the relevant stakeholders 
can constructively discuss areas of concern related to these issues 
within the framework of our Federal regulatory process without 
jeopardizing PRIA.
  Current authority for PRIA expires at the end of this fiscal year. 
With that deadline in mind, our recent committee action is timely and 
necessary to get PRIA updated.
  Should PRIA's authority lapse, pesticide registration will not be 
available for a wide range of crops that rely on innovative and new 
solutions for pest protection, and a lapse will have a negative impact 
on the products requiring registration that are used to protect public 
health and ensure public safety.
  It is important that we get PRIA across the finish line not only to 
provide certainty to the industry but to also provide new products to 
growers for crop protection and to consumers to protect public health, 
and the timely reauthorization provides resources to ensure safety 
education components are maintained.
  I thank my colleague Senator Stabenow and other members of the 
Agriculture Committee for working with me on this issue together and in 
a bipartisan manner. I look forward to working with Senator Stabenow 
and the coalition in support of this legislation to get this bill 
across the Senate floor as quickly as possible and ultimately enacted 
into law.

                          ____________________