Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 7 - NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011

[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9509-9697]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on

[[Page 9510]]

the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 5136.

{time} 1255

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 5136) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, with
Mr. Pastor of Arizona in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from
California (Mr. McKeon) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Today, we as a Congress perform a duty in compliance with the
Constitution of the United States. Article I, section 8 states that
Congress shall have the power to provide for the common defense and
general welfare of the United States. It also provides for and
maintaining a Navy and making all rules for the government and
regulation of land and naval forces.
So today I rise in support of H.R. 5136, the National Defense
Authorization Act for fiscal year 2011. I'm pleased to be joined here
today with my friend, my colleague, the ranking member, Buck McKeon.
Buck's been a true partner in this effort to bring forward a bipartisan
bill that addresses the national security needs of our country.
The committee passed the Defense Authorization Bill by a vote of 59-
0.
Our Nation's been at war for nearly a decade. Our troops are worn,
and their families are tired, and the Nation recognizes their
sacrifices. The bill addresses many of the concerns that they've
raised.
I'm proud that this bill is a result of the committee's engagement
with the military community and our citizens to determine what issues
were important to them as we developed the programs and policies that
are included in this bill.
This bill authorizes $567 billion in budget authority for the
Department of Defense and the national security programs of the
Department of Energy. The bill also authorizes $159 billion to support
ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan during fiscal year
2011. These amendments are essentially equal to the President's budget
request for items in the jurisdiction of the Armed Services Committee.
H.R. 5136 continues Congress' deep commitment to supporting U.S.
servicemembers and their families and to provide the necessary
resources to keep America safe. The bill provides our military
personnel a 1.9 percent pay raise, which is an increase of a half a
percent above the President's request.
The bill also includes a number of initiatives to support military
families, including extending health care coverage to adult dependent
children up to the age of 26. We also have the single most
comprehensive legislative proposal to address sexual assault in the
military.
The bill also fully funds the President's budget request for military
training, equipment, maintenance and the facilities upkeep, which
continues the committee's efforts to address readiness shortfalls that
have developed over previous years.

{time} 1300

The bill provides an increase of $12 billion above the fiscal year
2010 budget for operations and maintenance, including $345 million to
fully fund the first increment of construction necessary to modernize
Department of Defense schools. There is 13.6 billion for training of an
all active-duty Reserve force to increase readiness; an increase of
$500 million for day-to-day operations of Army bases, which is a direct
impact on our soldiers. It also provides an increase of $700 million
above the administration's budget to address the equipment shortfalls
on National Guard and Reserve units.
The war in Afghanistan is a critical mission that is essential to our
national security. To ensure that our strategies in both Iraq and
Afghanistan are effective and achieve the intended goals within well-
defined timelines, the bill requires the President to assess U.S.
efforts and regularly report on progress, including providing timelines
by which he plans to achieve his goals.
It also extends the authorization of the Pakistan Counterinsurgency
Fund through fiscal year 2011 to allow commanders to help Pakistan
quickly and more effectively go after terrorist safe havens. The bill
also provides $1.6 billion for Coalition Support Funds to reimburse
nations that are providing logistical, military, and other support to
our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On Iraq, the bill upholds Congress's responsibility to provide
oversight to the process of drawing down the mountain of material
purchased, transported, and built up in Iraq at tremendous expense to
the taxpayer.
In the area of nonproliferation, the bill continues our focus on
keeping weapons of mass destruction and related materials out of the
hands of terrorists and strengthens our nonproliferation programs and
activities. The bill increases funding for the Department of Energy's
nonproliferation programs and adds funding to continue the
administration's plan to secure and remove all known vulnerable nuclear
materials that could be used for weapons.
There are other good things in this bill, which my colleagues will
cover.
I want to recognize the members of the Armed Services Committee for
their contributions in making this bill one of the best that the
committee has put forward in recent years.
I also, Mr. Chair, want to brag about the wonderful staff that we
have on the Armed Services Committee. They make it all work well.
Mr. Chair, our committee has been and will continue to be strong
proponents of our Nation's security and the people that it defends. We
will continue to do what is right and necessary to ensure that our
country is safe and secure. We must continue to work with the President
to ensure that our citizens are safe and our Nation's security is
paramount.
I urge my colleagues to support our troops and their families and
vote for the defense authorization bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, as legislators, we meet once again to address the wide
range of important national security activities undertaken by the
Department of Defense and the Department of Energy. We all take our
legislative responsibilities very seriously. This is especially true
during a time of war. And it's always true of my good friend and
colleague, our Armed Services Committee chairman, Ike Skelton.
As a result of Chairman Skelton's tireless efforts to put forward
this bill, our committee reported out the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 last Wednesday. The vote was
unanimous, 59-0. Consistent with the longstanding bipartisan practice
of the Armed Services Committee, this bill reflects our committee's
continued strong support for the brave men and women of the United
States Armed Forces.
The defense authorization bill authorizes $567 billion in budget
authority for the fiscal year 2011 base budget of the Department of
Defense and national security programs of the Department of Energy, and
it authorizes $139 billion in funding to support operations in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the global war on terrorism.
This bill does an admirable job in dealing with some of our greatest
national security challenges. Addressing the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan, H.R. 1536 authorizes the fiscal year 2011 overseas
contingency operations. With respect to Afghanistan, this bill updates
reporting requirements, including asking for the conditions and
criteria that will be used to measure progress, instead of allowing the
ticking Washington political clock to determine our end state.
I am very pleased that the chairman and our colleagues on the
committee

[[Page 9511]]

joined us in ensuring that lifesaving combat enablers such as force
protection, medical evacuation, and intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance capabilities are deployed in time to fully support the
30,000 additional troops scheduled to arrive in Afghanistan by this
summer.
Building on the Acquisition Reform Act this body passed in April,
this legislation takes a number of important steps on major weapons
programs. We strongly believe that a $110 billion noncompetitive, sole
source, 25-year contract should not be permitted. Therefore, we
strongly support the inclusion of funding to complete development of
the F-136 competitive engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.
As a Nation, we owe more than our gratitude to the brave men and
women in uniform and their families, past and present, for the
sacrifices they make and have made to protect our freedom. We are
pleased that this legislation includes a pay raise which is half a
percentage point above the President's request.
A major disappointment is that once again the committee and House
leadership were unable to find the mandatory spending offsets needed to
eliminate the widow's tax, a tax that occurs because survivors must
forfeit most or all of their Survivor Benefit Plan annuity to receive
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation. Nor were we able to provide for
concurrent receipt of military disability retired pay and VA disability
pay, as proposed by the President. I know that Chairman Skelton has
attempted to find the offsets, but so far, despite this House approving
trillions in spending that is not offset, this body has been unable or
unwilling to find the means to support widows and disabled veterans.
One of the areas where there is disagreement between the aisles is
detainee policy. We need to keep terrorists off our soil, not fight to
get them here. We are disappointed that the bill does not prohibit the
transfer of Guantanamo Bay detainees to U.S. soil.
Finally, for the last 8 years, we have asked our men and women of the
Armed Forces and their families to make repeated sacrifices while
serving this Nation. They have unhesitatingly and selflessly responded
in a magnificent manner, without hesitation putting mission and Nation
ahead of self and family. Now the proponents of repealing Don't Ask,
Don't Tell want to rush a vote to the floor that disrupts the process
that was put in place earlier this year to give the troops the
opportunity to make their view known on this most important issue.
After making the continuous sacrifice of fighting two wars over the
course of 8 years, the men and women of our military deserve to be
heard. Congress acting first is the equivalent to turning to our men
and women in uniform and their families and saying your opinion, your
views do not count.
Yesterday I spoke to and received letters from all four service
chiefs. I will include copies of those letters in the Record. Let me
read a couple of excerpts, Mr. Chairman.
General Schwartz, the Air Force Chief of Staff, writes, ``I believe
it is important, a matter of keeping faith with those currently serving
in the Armed Forces, that the Secretary of Defense commissioned review
be completed before there is any legislation to repeal the Don't Ask,
Don't Tell law. Such action sends an important signal to our airmen and
families that their opinion matters.''
General Casey, the Army Chief of Staff, writes, ``I believe that
repealing the law before the completion of the review will be seen by
the men and women of the Army as a reversal of our commitment to hear
their views before moving forward.'' Similar views are expressed by
Admiral Roughead and General Conway.
Mr. Chairman, I planned on addressing this matter in detail when we
debate Mr. Murphy's amendment. Unfortunately, the leadership deemed
this debate, this issue so critical to the morale and welfare of our
military worthy of only 10 minutes of debate. Ten minutes. The repeal
of Don't Ask, Don't Tell will get as much time for debate today as the
manager's amendment. This is an outrage.
I'd like to make one last point. If this body were to adopt Mr.
Murphy's amendment, then this House would breach the trust of 2.5
million men and women in uniform and their families by saying to them
that their voices don't count. We owe our military personnel better.
In order to allow this House the time it needs to hear from our
military forces through the process that was set up earlier this year,
and their families, before we make a decision, I would encourage
Members to vote against the Don't Ask, Don't Tell compromise and
against final passage if my Democratic colleagues refuse to wait to
hear from our troops.
As in years past, I believe that this legislation reflects many of
the Armed Services Committee's priorities in supporting our Nation's
dedicated and courageous servicemembers. I thank Chairman Skelton for
putting together an excellent bill and helping us to stay focused on
delivering a bill that protects, sustains, and builds our forces. I
support H.R. 5136 as passed by the House Armed Services Committee.
We never, in the committee, in our markup, we never held a full
committee hearing on Don't Ask, Don't Tell. We never included it or
discussed it in our debate in the Armed Services Committee.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to improve H.R. 5136.

Secretary of Defense,

Washington, DC, April 30, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing in response to your letter
of April 28 requesting my views on the advisability of
legislative action to repeal the so-called ``Don't Ask Don't
Tell'' statute prior to the completion of the Department of
Defense review of this matter.
I believe in the strongest possible terms that the
Department must, prior to any legislative action, be allowed
the opportunity to conduct a thorough, objective, and
systematic assessment of the impact of such a policy change;
develop an attentive comprehensive implementation plan, and
provide the President and the Congress with the results of
this effort in order to ensure that this step is taken in the
most informed and effective manner. A critical element of
this effort is the need to systematically engage our forces,
their families, and the broader military community throughout
this process. Our military must be afforded the opportunity
to inform us of their concerns, insights, and suggestions if
we are to carry out this change successfully.
Therefore, I strongly oppose any legislation that seeks to
change this policy prior to the completion of this vital
assessment process. Further, I hope Congress will not do so,
as it would send a very damaging message to our men and women
in uniform that in essence their views, concerns, and
perspectives do not matter on an issue with such a direct
impact and consequence for them and their families.
Adm. Michael G. Mullen,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Robert M. Gates,
Secretary of Defense.
____

U.S. Army,

May 26, 2010.
Hon. John McCain,
Ranking Member, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator McCain: My views on the repeal of section 654
of Title 10, United States Code, have not changed since my
testimony. I continue to support the review and timeline
offered by Secretary Gates.
I remain convinced that it is critically important to get a
better understanding of where our Soldiers and Families are
on this issue, and what the impacts on readiness and unit
cohesion might be, so that I can provide informed military
advice to the President and the Congress.
I also believe that repealing the law before the completion
of the review will be seen by the men and women of the Army
as a reversal of our commitment to hear their views before
moving forward.
Sincerely,
George W. Casey, Jr.,
General, United States Army.
____

Department of the Air Force,

Office of the Chief of Staff,

[[Page 9512]]

the HASC at the AF Posture hearing on 23 February 2010, my
position remains that DOD should conduct a review that
carefully investigates and evaluates the facts and
circumstances, the potential implications, the possible
complications, and potential mitigations to repealing this
law.
I believe it is important, a matter of keeping faith with
those currently serving in the Armed Forces, that the
Secretary of Defense commissioned review be completed before
there is any legislation to repeal the DA/DT law. Such action
allows me to provide the best military advice to the
President, and sends an important signal to our Airmen and
their families that their opinion matters. To do otherwise,
in my view, would be presumptive and would reflect an intent
to act before all relevant factors are assessed, digested and
understood.
Sincerely,

Norton A. Schwartz,

General, USAF,
Chief of Staff.
____

May 25, 2010.
Hon. John McCain,
Ranking Member, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator McCain: During testimony, I spoke of the
confidence I had as a Service Chief in the DoD Working Group
that Secretary Gates laid out in the wake of President
Obama's guidance on ``Don't Ask--Don't Tell.'' I felt that an
organized and systematic approach on such an important issue
was precisely the way to develop ``best military advice'' for
the Service Chiefs to offer the President.
Further, the value of surveying the thoughts of Marines and
their families is that it signals to my Marines that their
opinions matter.
I encourage the Congress to let the process the Secretary
of Defense created to run its course. Collectively, we must
make logical and pragmatic decisions about the long-term
policies of our Armed Forces--which so effectively defend
this great Nation.
Very Respectfully,
James T. Conway,
General, U.S. Marine Corps,
Commandant of the Marine Corps.
____

May 26, 2010.
Hon. Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. McKeon: As a follow-up to our phone call today,
the following represents my personal views about the proposed
amendment concerning section 654 of title 10, United States
Code.
I testified in February about the importance of the
comprehensive review that began in March and is now well
underway within the Department of Defense. We need this
review to fully assess our force and carefully examine
potential impacts of a change in the law. I have spoken with
Sailors and fellow flag officers alike about the importance
of conducting the review in a thoughtful and deliberate
manner. Our Sailors and their families need to clearly
understand that their voices will be heard as part of the
review process, and I need their input to develop and provide
my best military advice.
I share the view of Secretary Gates that the best approach
would be to complete the DOD review before there is any
legislation to change the law. My concern is that legislative
changes at this point, regardless of the precise language
used, may cause confusion on the status of the law in the
Fleet and disrupt the review process itself by leading
Sailors to question whether their input matters. Obtaining
the views and opinions of the force and assessing them in
light of the issues involved will be complicated by a
shifting legislative backdrop and its associated debate.
Sincerely,
G. Roughead,
Admiral, U.S. Navy.

I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend, my
colleague, the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Air and
Land Forces, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of
the National Defense Authorization Act for 2011.
I want to first thank the chairman of the committee, Mr. Skelton, for
his outstanding leadership of this committee. He has once again put
together a bill that reflects the priorities that should be in place
for national defense: first and foremost, support our troops. I know
nobody on that committee cares more about that issue than Mr. Skelton.
He has once again made sure that this bill reflects that. It gives them
a higher pay raise than was recommended by the Department of Defense
and, across the board, makes sure that our troops and our families get
the support they need to continue to do the amazing job that they are
doing of defending this country. It is a great privilege to serve on
this committee with Mr. Skelton and with Mr. McKeon and to have the
responsibility for supporting our troops who have served us so well. I
thank him for his great leadership and for this bill.
On the Air and Land Subcommittee, I want to thank Mr. Bartlett, the
ranking member on the committee. We have truly worked together in a
very bipartisan fashion on this bill. That's one of the great things
about being on the Armed Services Committee. We have a lot that we
disagree on on a partisan basis in this body, but on the Armed Services
Committee we work in a bipartisan way to make sure that we have a
defense bill that protects our national security and supports our
troops. And Mr. Bartlett certainly upholds that standard, and it's been
a great pleasure working with him.
On our subcommittee, our top priority is to support our soldiers and
airmen in the fight they are now fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. We
want to make sure that they have the equipment they need to fulfill the
mission that we have asked them to do. Towards that end, we have $3.9
billion in the bill to upgrade and improve our helicopters, which are
so critical to the mission that they are fighting; $3.4 billion to
fully fund the MRAP, the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles that
have done such an amazing job at improving the survivability of our
troops when hit by IEDs; $3.4 billion for the JIEDDO account, which
continues to find more and better ways to protect our troops from
improvised explosive devices; $3.7 billion to fund intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance, which is critical to make sure that
our troops get the information they need when they need it to be in the
best position to protect themselves on the battlefield; a billion
dollars for new Strykers, a vehicle that has been critical for our
combat infantry brigades and their ability to be maneuverable enough to
survive in the fight.
We are making sure in this bill that our troops in the field get the
equipment they need to fulfill the mission we have asked them to do. We
also set aside an additional $700 million in this bill for the Army and
Air Force Guard and Reserve equipment accounts. As we all know, Guard
and Reserve members have been asked to do far more than they ever have
in the history of this country. They are stressed and strained, and
their equipment is being used at a far greater pace than anyone
anticipated. We want to make sure that they have the funds available to
replenish that equipment and make sure that they get the training they
need so that they are able to do the job here in the U.S. we ask them
to do, and also the job that we ask them to do in Afghanistan and Iraq.

{time} 1315

We are also concerned in this bill and continue to be concerned about
our procurement and acquisition process. We passed acquisition reform
again under Chairman Skelton's great leadership, but we have a fair
number of programs, certainly the Joint Strike Fighter, future combat
systems that have not delivered on time and on budget. We have to make
sure that we get every penny that we spend, and it is spent efficiently
and effectively. We need to continue to work to make sure the programs
that we procure meet that standard.
That is why I, too, along with Mr. McKeon, am strongly supportive of
the second engine program. And it has been our committee's position for
a long time to support that program. We believe that it is an efficient
use of taxpayer dollars.
So I thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for your great leadership. I
believe this bill gives us a very strong national security.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Bartlett). He's the ranking member on the Air and Land
Subcommittee of the committee.
Mr. BARTLETT. I would like to thank our Armed Forces Committee
Chairman Skelton, Ranking Member McKeon, Committee chair Smith, and all
of our colleagues for their contributions to this Defense Authorization
Bill.

[[Page 9513]]

This bill was voted out of committee by unanimous vote because it
maintains our objectives of balancing the health and capability of the
current force with the needs of future capability. And I also want to
thank, really thank the staff for their professionalism, dedication,
and extraordinary hard work this year.
As an engineer with 20 patents, 20 years of experience with military
R&D programs, and 17 years in the Armed Services Committee, I can
assure you that the Defense Department's own data provides the proof
that Congress must continue to approve the alternative engine for the
Joint Strike Fighter which will ultimately lead 95 percent of all of
fighting aircraft. The competition is crucial for our national security
and that of our allies because the original engine awarded under a
noncompetitive contract is 21 months behind schedule, and according to
GAO is estimated to be $2 billion over budget. That's a 52 percent
increase and one of the main reasons with redundancy the committee
overwhelmingly supports continued funding of the competitive engine.
The Department asked Congress to permit the issue of a sole-source
contract for over $100 billion for thousands of engines over the life
of this program. I owe it to the American people and warfighters to
object to something this irresponsible.
And, Mr. Chairman, I urge support of H.R. 5136 as approved
unanimously by the Armed Service Committee, but a vote for the Don't
Ask, Don't Tell amendment abdicates our Constitutional authority over
military policy and gives this authority to the President and unelected
executive branch leaders. Congress has yielded far too much of its
Constitutional authority to the executive and judiciary. Therefore, if
this amendment passes, I cannot support this bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, my
friend from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), the distinguished chairman of the
Subcommittee on Readiness.
Mr. ORTIZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, let me thank you for your
leadership that you bring to the committee and being able to get the
committee to work together. Mr. McKeon as well.
I rise in support of H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization
Act for fiscal year 2011. The bill before us today continues efforts
begun last year to address readiness shortfalls.
It supports the President's request for increased training funding
for all of the active duty forces and provides funding to continue
reset of equipment damaged or worn out through 9 years of continuous
combat operations. The bill authorizes $20 billion for military
construction and $168 billion for operation and maintenance, a $12
billion increase in O&M. This funding is needed over the amount
authorized last year in the defense budget.
To reduce budgetary risk to readiness in areas where the services
identified shortfalls, the bill includes additional funding for Navy
ship depot maintenance; Army Reserve depot maintenance; contract and
performance management; Army base operating services and trainee
barracks construction; Guard and Reserve construction; energy
conservation and renewable energy projects; and day-to-day facilities
maintenance and repair.
Our combatant commanders should not have to wait years to have the
right infrastructure to support wartime operations. This bill provides
the tools that the Department needs to ensure that General Petraeus has
the right facilities at the right location at the right time.
The bill also supports the Readiness and Environmental Protection
Initiative, which ensures the long-term viability of military testing
and training ranges by protecting them from encroachment.
The bill provides provisions related to benefits for DOD civilians
who are deployed to combat zones. These provisions are very important
because Federal civilian employees are increasingly providing important
support in contingency operations.
The bill supports the President's request for a much-needed
reinvestment in Army training and readiness. Increases in funding for
all Army components, along with a drawdown from Iraq, should begin to
put the Army on a path to restoring its readiness posture.
The bill sustains the Navy's course correction of flying-hour funding
to meet operational requirements. To ensure the sea services can attain
fleet air training goals, the bill includes $185 million in additional
funding for naval training and aircraft depot maintenance.
The bill contains additional funding for Air Force accounts critical
to supporting emergent missions and taking care of an aging aircraft
fleet.
Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill, and I ask my colleagues to support
it.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Akin), the ranking member of the Seapower Subcommittee.
Mr. AKIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5136--that's the
National Defense Authorization Act--which we have before us at this
time, and it was approved unanimously by Republicans and Democrats on
the House Armed Services Committee. And we believe overall a proper
balance has been struck on this bill.
I was personally concerned about some problems with our missile
defense system, but I made several amendments looking to get a little
more information from the administration on these programs. Those were
adopted.
In addition, we were concerned about the department's assessment even
in the most rosy scenario that we are short on strike fighters. And I
was pleased that we are able to add some additional F-18s to the budget
to at least, in a small way, mitigate that particular problem.
I would be remiss, though, if I were to stand here and say that
everything is well. As much as I support this bill, it is possible to
mess up any good thing. And the idea of repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell
at the last minute with an amendment that doesn't even come out of our
committee, that has, at the most, 10 minutes to debate and has more
far-reaching implications for defense than almost any single item in
this bill is the height of folly.
Approaching Memorial Day weekend, for us to try to slide this little
fellow in, this little political gimme to some vocal but very small
interest group over the interests of our sons and daughters who serve
in the service, in spite of the objections of the military leadership,
starting with the Secretary of Defense coming down the chain of
commanders saying, Give us time to figure out, what does it mean to
repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
The current policy says that if you're gay and you want to serve in
the military, that's fine, but don't let it get in the way of the
mission. If we take that out, what does it mean? We need time, and we
don't need some fast little political fix to mess up an otherwise good
bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), who's the
chairman of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill as it passed
committee, and in particular of the Sea Power and Expeditionary Forces
section of the bill.
Under the leadership of Chairman Ike Skelton, the fleet has grown by
seven ships since he became chairman to a total of 286. I guess it's in
the direction, however slowly, of the 313 ships that CNO wishes to
have. It also takes some far-reaching steps, one of which is directing
the CNO that in the future, that in order to go to the fleet, he may
only retire two ships for every three ships we commission. I think this
is very important language. This is the third CNO who has said he
wanted 313 ships, but ironically, they keep submitting budgets to
Congress that actually shrink their fleet rather than grow it.
So I want to thank Chairman Skelton for working with us on that, my
colleagues, on directive language that actually keeps some of those
great vessels that would go to someone else's fleet in our fleet a bit
longer.

[[Page 9514]]

Specifically the bill takes many steps to continue the work of the
world's greatest Navy and the world's greatest Marine Corps. It
authorizes the construction of nine battle-force vessels and one
auxiliary oceanographic research vessel, along with 214 aircraft for
the Navy and Marine Corps. It authorizes $5.1 billion to construct two
Virginia-class submarines--the first time Congress has ever authorized
two Virginia-class submarines; $950 million for the first increment of
funding of the Marine Corp's amphibious assault vessel LHA-7; $3
billion to fully fund two DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers to work
off of the Navy's surface fleet and the centerpiece of our Nation's
missile defense; $1.5 billion to fully fund two littoral combat ships;
$180.7 million to fund one Joint High Speed Vessel for the Navy; $380
million to fully fund the remaining construction costs for the first of
the class maritime landing platform vessel for the Marine Corps; $3.3
billion for 30 F-18 Superhornet strike fighters, as well as 12 EA-18
Growler expeditionary electronic-warfare aircraft.
That will make a total of 186 of these fine aircraft built on
Chairman Skelton's watch. $4.1 billion for 20 Navy and Marine Corps F-
35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft; $4.6 billion for 180 Marine Corps
rotary-winged aircraft; $359 million for the Maritime Administration of
the Department of Transportation, including $100 million for the
Merchant Marine Academy.
The bill strongly supports funding for our Overseas Contingency
Operations, authorizing $3.4 billion to build the life saving Mine
Resistant Vehicles. This is on top of the $16.4 billion under Chairman
Skelton's watch that was allocated in 2007 for a total of 16,000 of
these vehicles that have been built as we continue to build 1,000 of
them a month to protect our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.
For Marine Corps programs, this bill fully authorizes the $3.1
billion for a request for Marine Corps procurement, with an additional
$126 million for unfunded requirements that will protect our Marines.
Mr. Chairman, I fully support the bill as recommended by the
committee.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. TAYLOR. I also want to thank my colleague Mr. Akin for all of his
help on this and all of the Seapower Subcommittee, and in particular I
want to commend our great staff: Ms. Jenness Simler, Captain Will Ebbs,
Heath Bope, Jesse Tolleson, and Liz Drummond.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Since 2007, the House Armed Services Committee under
Chairman Ike Skelton has continued to grow our nation's air,
land and sea forces to address the threats facing the United
States from both foreign nations and terrorist organizations.
Chairman Skelton's predecessor, Duncan Hunter, deserves
credit for leading House Armed Service Committee member's
efforts to provide up-armored Humvees, Improvised Explosive
Device (IEDs) Jammers, and other initiatives to counter the
IED threat in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, the game
changing improvement in the IED effort was the rapid
development and fielding of the Mine Resistant Ambush
Protected Vehicle (MRAP) that occurred under the leadership
of Chairman Ike Skelton, The actions of the Democratic
majority speak much louder than words when it comes to our
national defense.
The Mississippi National Guard's 155th Heavy Brigade Combat
Team returned home to Mississippi in March 2010 after
completing their second tour of duty in Iraq. During their
deployment they encountered more than 80 attacks from IEDs
without suffering any fatalities or serious injuries compared
to their 2005 deployment where they suffered 28 fatalities
from lED attacks. During their most recent deployment, their
unit was equipped with MRAPs. Prior to 2007, the demand for
MRAP's was ignored for four straight years by Secretary of
Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. The Republican majority in Congress
did not prod Secretary Rumsfeld to build these vehicles at
the rate our forward deployed commanders were requesting.
In 2004 military officials in Iraq began requesting MRAPs
from the Pentagon to counter the enemy's most successful
means of attack--the IED. At the time, 60% of U.S. fatalities
in Iraq were the direct result of IED attacks. Secretary
Rumsfeld and top leaders at the Pentagon originally ignored
these requests from the forward deployed commanders to make
fielding MRAPs a priority. By the end of 2006 the Department
of Defense's (DoD) established requirement for MRAPs for the
Iraq war effort was an absurdly low amount--4000 vehicles.
Before MRAPs were available in Iraq or Afghanistan,
military patrols were conducted in up-armored Humvees. The
enemy quickly discovered this vehicles vulnerability to
under-bottom explosions. Since Secretary Rumsfeld had refused
to provide MRAPs despite the requests coming from the theater
of combat, the result of continuing to use up-armored Humvees
was unnecessary American injuries and deaths. The MRAP is
designed with a ``V'' shaped bottom that provides an
effective defense against bottom exploding IEDs by forcing
the impact of the explosion away from the bottom of the
vehicle, unlike the Humvees.
When I became Chairman of the Seapower and Expeditionary
Forces Subcommittee in January 2007, under the new Democratic
majority, the very first hearing I chaired focused on the
need to rapidly get MRAPs to our troops in Iraq. I worked
with Chairman Skelton and my colleagues on the Armed Services
Committee to provide an additional $16.4 billion in 2007 for
procurement, building and transporting 15,374 MRAPs to Iraq.
This effort continues today, and we currently have
approximately 16,000 MRAPs in Iraq and Afghanistan. We also
continue to work with DOD on providing vehicles that provide
the same type of protection as the MRAP but are more suitable
for the hazardous terrain and conditions in Afghanistan.
There are approximately 2300 of these vehicles in operational
units in Afghanistan, with 6,800 working their way through
the pipeline to get to the theater of combat. We continue to
produce about 1000 of these life saving vehicles a month.
For years the House Armed Services Committee has voiced
concerns over the concurrent and high-risk development of the
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which in turn, has caused a
several years delay in its operational fielding. Because of
this issue, coupled with the planned F/A-18 production line
drawdown, our Naval Air Forces face a significant strike-
fighter shortfall peaking at over 250 aircraft in 2017.
Realizing this significant issue over the last two years, the
committee has added 17 F/A-18s to the Department's request to
help mitigate the shortfall. The Committee, under Chairman
Skelton's leadership, also included candid language within
the FY11 NDAA report stating that ``barring a complete
reversal'' of the F-35 program failures, the Committee
expects the Navy to ``continue production of F/A-18s to
prevent our naval airpower from losing significance in our
nation's arsenal,''
I have made the commitment to my colleagues on the
Committee and to Chairman Skelton to get our shipbuilding
back on track. The United States Navy's goal is to maintain a
313 ship fleet capable of transporting troops around the
world, providing support for military operations, along with
a global U.S. presence. The Navy's fleet is currently at 286
ships, Starting in 2003, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
shifted our defense needs primarily to the Army, the National
Guard and our Reserves. During this time, the Navy's
shipbuilding program went stagnant, lacked direction, and had
no plan in place to reach the Navy's stated goal of a 313
ship fleet.
This all changed starting in 2007. The Armed Services
Committee began addressing the Navy's acquisition reform
process, the cost overruns as a result of Secretary
Rumsfeld's outsourcing of shipbuilding to contractors and
lead system integrators. We have provided the Navy real goals
to meet each year in order to build the Navy back to a 313
ship fleet.
This reformation includes a proposed authorization of 10
ships in this year's National Defense Authorization Act. We
have worked to bring the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) back
under control. These ships had been previously authorized,
but the program spun wildly out of control. It got to the
point where the contractors wanted $600 million for a ship
they originally said could be built for $220 million in
fiscal year 2005. This cost increase prevented the Navy from
building the amount of LCS' originally approved by Congress
which seriously affected the Navy's ability of reaching its
goal of a 313 ship fleet.
Chairman Skelton and the Democratic majority also prevented
another costly over run from occurring by capping the DDG
1000 program at three ships at approximately $3 billion per
ship. This program was running billions of dollars over
budget. By capping this program at three ships, we allowed
the Navy to shift funds into a much more successful
shipbuilding program--the DDG 51 program. This maximizes the
Navy's budget by providing them with a ship that has a proven
track record for success and providing the funds to a proven
shipbuilding program that has already produced 58 ships for
the United States Navy,
The Navy has also received authorization for 15 ships not
including the additional 10 ships in the proposed FY 2011
NDAA, to be built from fiscal years 2009 through 2011, Since
2007, the Navy's fleet has grown by 7 ships to 286 ships.
Prior to this, the Navy's fleet was the smallest it has been
since the 19th century at 279 ships. The progress made by the
Navy's shipbuilding program is the direct result of a clear
and consistent plan and

[[Page 9515]]

new leadership at the Department of the Navy. It is by no
means a coincidence that the fleet has grown and continues to
grow under Chairman Skelton's leadership during this
Democratically controlled Congress.
While men and women in the United States military continue
to be put in harms way in Iraq and Afghanistan we must
continue providing them the real support necessary to allow
them to successfully carry out their mission. It is clear
that the House Armed Services Committee under Chairman
Skelton, has provided much more than mere words or rhetoric
and has acted loudly to ensure that the Department of Defense
and our men and women fighting overseas constantly have what
they need to succeed in protecting and defending the United
States of America.
Gene Taylor,
Member of Congress.

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Forbes), the ranking member on the Readiness
Subcommittee.
Mr. FORBES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to stand in
strong support of this bill as recommended. I would also like to
express my sincere appreciation for Chairman Skelton, Ranking Member
McKeon, and the chairman of our Readiness Subcommittee and my good
friend from Texas, Mr. Ortiz.
Creating legislation of this magnitude and of critical importance to
the defense of this Nation is no easy task, and I appreciate their
leadership and their hard work in crafting a solid bipartisan bill.
Mr. Chairman, our Founding Fathers knew that our freedoms were so
precious that they were worth protecting and worth defending. They also
knew, as we know today, that one of the realities of having these
freedoms is that there will always be individuals who want to rob them
from us. Throughout the course of our Nation's history, we have seen
this to be true. Today is no different. Recent attempts in Times
Square, New York City, and on passenger airlines on Christmas Day are
stark reminders that there are terrorist organizations that are
actively trying to kill American citizens.
Mr. Chairman, we need to keep terrorists off U.S. soil, not provide
means for any administration to bring them here. And while the
committee did not support an amendment that would have prevented the
transfer of any Guantanamo Bay detainee to U.S. soil, I do want to take
a moment to highlight one provision that I am very glad is included in
the mark. This provision requires an inventory and analysis of the
modeling and simulation tools used by the Department of Defense during
the development of the annual budget. This is a terrific first step in
making sure the department has the right tools to ensure that the
readiness needs of commanders will be reflected in the budget. By
starting with funding priorities in support of commanders out in the
field, we will make sure we are providing what is required to defend
America.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I thank all of the Members of this
committee for their hard work in preparing this bill. I strongly
encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 5136--provided it's not
destroyed with the adoption of political amendments that could
negatively impact the readiness of our troops, such as the removal of
the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy before the military has concluded its
impact on our readiness.

{time} 1330

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to my friend, my
colleague, a former marine, and the distinguished chairman of the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, the gentleman from
Arkansas, Dr. Snyder.
Mr. SNYDER. When the history of U.S. national security is written,
Secretary Gates' speech given at the end of 2007 at Kansas State will
be remembered. Yet as a new administration pursued these policies with
Secretary Gates kept on as Secretary of Defense, criticisms were heard,
criticisms with which I disagree.
An America confident in more than just its military strength is a
strong America. To remember our moral strength, not just our military
strength, is to build a strong America. To build a strengthened
diplomatic corps builds a strong America. Selling our products
internationally and not fearing competition builds a strong America.
Using our power to help other nations develop their economy, public
health systems, rule of law builds our national security.
Listening to nations like Bangladesh regarding what climate change
means to them strengthens us. Listening to the voices that want America
to be a beacon of human rights strengthens us. Yesterday's view that
only military strength makes us strong is indeed yesterday's view.
As we consider this very good defense bill, I applaud the
administration's incredibly successful efforts at killing and capturing
terrorists, but let us not forget our responsibilities to all aspects
of national power and strength.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Miller), the ranking member of the Terrorism Subcommittee.
Mr. MILLER of Florida. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I too rise in support of the defense authorization act for 2011 as it
was passed out of the full committee. I do think we have taken some
important steps on protecting those who work every day to protect the
people and protect those of us in the United States.
The language that we had inserted into this bill, one of the things
that it does is require the Department of Defense Inspector General to
investigate the alleged misconduct and practices of certain lawyers for
terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
Unanimously, the committee approved this amendment, whereby we have
said that these lawyers may very well have engaged in illegal actions
by seeking to ``out'' covert agents to the very terrorists that these
particular agents took off the battlefield.
If this indeed is true, I can't think of a more offensive,
unpatriotic and terrible act to be committed by the Americans that did
this against fellow Americans.
I also do stand with the ranking member in opposition to the repeal
of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I agree, we also need to allow the Department
of Defense to complete its study before we jump the gun to a rash,
premature decision, one that diverts our military's attention from its
true priorities. Those priorities are succeeding in Iraq and
Afghanistan, and also in keeping terrorists from harming Americans and
its citizens.
Unfortunately, if the Murphy amendment does pass and we do repeal
Don't Ask, Don't Tell, I will have to vote against H.R. 5136. But I
trust this body will reject the Murphy amendment and allow our forces
to remain focused on the task at hand--defending America.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to my friend, the
chair of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and
Capabilities, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez).
Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. I thank the chairman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today as a 14-year member of the House Armed
Services Committee and the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism,
Unconventional Threats and Capabilities to address probably what I
believe is one of the most important assets that we have for the
Department of Defense, the role of our small businesses in America.
My subcommittee, along with the full committee, has worked hard to
develop ways to expand opportunities for small businesses to get
defense procurements. For example, we wanted to repeal the Small
Business Competitive Demonstration Program. This would reinstitute the
use of small business set-asides for Federal procurements in certain
industry groups, assuring that these small businesses are awarded a
fair proportion of Department of Defense contracts.
The repeal of this program would not only have saved DOD money and
personnel but would have improved small business prime and
subcontracting opportunities.
Secondly, the Armed Services Committee was hoping to extend the Small
Business Innovation Research program by 1 year and to apply funding
toward technical assistance for that program

[[Page 9516]]

in order to strengthen the ability of small businesses to meet the
demands of DOD requirements.
It would have made perfect sense to move an extension within this
bill because over 50 percent of that program is with the Department of
Defense.
Also, there is a program called the Mentor-Protege Program. It pairs
up major DOD contractors with small businesses, and it helps to develop
a relationship with these small contractors to help them.
As you can see, these are good provisions for small businesses.
Unfortunately, none of these amendments were approved by the Rules
Committee because of the objections raised by the House Small Business
Committee on grounds of jurisdiction. I think everyone in this Chamber
will agree that small businesses are the backbone of many of our
districts and I know that this is true in the 47th Congressional
District of California.
I hope that in the very near future, the Committee on Small Business
will work with the Armed Services Committee to rapidly provide these
resources to our small businesses.
I rise today as a 14-year Member of the House Armed Services
Committee and the Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and
Unconventional Threats to address probably what I consider one of the
most important assets to the Department of Defense--the role of small
businesses.
My subcommittee along with the full committee has worked hard to
develop ways to expand opportunities for small businesses in defense
procurement.
Let me provide this chamber with a couple of amendments that would
have ultimately not only strengthened this bill and the Department but
would have also provided our country's small businesses with the
resources in order to thrive in the competitive world of DoD
contracting.
For example, we wanted to repeal the Small Business Competitive
Demonstration Program. This would re-institute the use of small
business set-asides for Federal procurements in certain industry
groups, assuring that these small businesses are awarded a fair
proportion of DoD contracts.
The repeal of this program would not only have saved DoD money--but
also personnel--while improving small business prime and subcontracting
opportunities.
Second, the Armed Services Committee was hoping to extend the Small
Business Innovation Research program by 1 year and apply funding toward
technical assistance for the program in order to strengthen the ability
of small businesses to meet the demands of DoD requirements.
Currently, 11 Federal agencies are involved in the SBIR Program where
DoD takes up 50 percent of the entire SBIR Program.
It would have made perfect sense to move such an extension within the
NDAA, because DoD has over 50 percent of the program.
Through this year's bill the Committee was also working towards
extending the DoD Mentor-Protege program by 5 years.
The Mentor-Protege program is a program that started with DoD in
1991.
This program pairs up major DoD contractors with small businesses and
helps develop a relationship where major contractors can provide
developmental assistance to small businesses and guide them to a point
where they can sustain themselves.
As you can see, all these provisions would have significantly
expanded and strengthened small business growth.
One of my subcommittee's major responsibilities is to provide and
expand resources for small businesses who want to do business with DoD.
Unfortunately, none of these amendments were approved by the Rules
Committee because of objections raised by the House Small Business
Committee on grounds of jurisdiction.
The FY2011 National Defense Authorization Act is a good piece of
legislation that addresses several of the Defense Department's most
important challenges, including:
The fight to interrupt the flow of violent extremists and the
ideological underpinnings of radicalization;
The development and deployment of innovative and critical
technologies;
Defending our homeland from attacks and managing the consequences of
catastrophic incidents including natural disasters;
Enhancing strategies and capabilities to counter irregular warfare
challenges;
And enhancing force protection policies governing Department of
Defense personnel.
And I believe none of these challenges can be met without the
innovation and technology of our small businesses.
I think everyone in this chamber will agree that small businesses are
the backbone of many of our districts; I know it is for the 47th
District of California.
I hope in the very near future the Committee on Small Businesses will
work with the Armed Services Committee to rapidly provide these
resources to our small businesses.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), the ranking member on the Military
Personnel Subcommittee.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. I thank the gentleman from California
for yielding.
As the ranking member of the Military Personnel Subcommittee, there
are a few issues I would like to highlight with regard to this year's
National Defense Authorization Act.
I am pleased the act adopted the Military Personnel Subcommittee mark
in full and adopted some important amendments. Of note in the mark was
a 1.9 percent basic pay raise for the military, as proposed in my bill,
H.R. 4427.
Concerning amendments, first is my amendment to ensure that the
Secretary of Defense retains sole authority over TRICARE, the
Department of Defense's health care system. This ensures that the
health care system of our servicemen and women and families will not be
overwhelmed in the health care takeover.
I do have concerns about a few other issues that are not in the NDAA.
First is the proposal that we would have allowed military personnel
retired with disabilities to receive both their full military
disability retirement pay and VA disability pay. The concurrent receipt
issue has been addressed numerous times by the committee led by
Congressman Jeff Miller of Florida, and while we have been making
inroads, there are still many veterans who need our help.
Additionally, it was not allowed to eliminate the widow's tax that
results because surviving spouses are required to forfeit their
survivor benefit pension annuity. This is a real burden to widows and
children of servicemembers.
I am also concerned about the retroactive retirement credit for Guard
and Reserve soldiers who served after 9/11. These soldiers have
answered the call to duty and deserve no less for their honorable
service than their active duty counterparts.
As we bring this act to the floor, it is important to keep the
servicemember in the forefront of our mind. It is crucial to consider
the repeal of the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. The service
chiefs, as represented by the fighting men and women of our country,
have again and again urged us not to change the law until they have
sufficient time to conduct their study.
We are a Nation at war, and, as such, we should follow the wishes of
our war fighters.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to my friend, the
distinguished chair of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to summarize the
Military Personnel Subcommittee portion of H.R. 5136, and I want to
thank Mr. Wilson and Chairman Skelton for their contributions and
certainly to our hardworking staff.
This bill continues to improve the quality of life for our
servicemembers, their families, and military survivors who carry such a
heavy burden for our country. Some of the highlights include continued
support for increased end strengths for the active Army and Navy, a 1.9
percent pay raise, increases

[[Page 9517]]

to hostile fire pay and family separation allowance, new initiatives to
complement our Year of the Military Family, the authority for TRICARE
beneficiaries to extend health care coverage to dependents up to age
26, adoption of the full range of recommendations by the Defense Task
Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services, and authorization of
millions of dollars for Impact Aid.
While we couldn't accommodate all the requests that were brought
before the subcommittee, we were able to include many to address the
needs of our military. But, Mr. Chairman, there is still a policy, a
policy in place which no longer reflects the needs of our military.
We can correct that today through the Murphy amendment to repeal
Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The intent of this amendment is not to freeze
the DOD implementation review process or discount the findings of the
DOD's comprehensive working group on this subject. We support their
work and know how important their findings will be to the successful
repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
A fundamental piece of this will be the opinions of our
servicemembers. Congress sincerely values their point of view, and we
know DOD will work hard to address their concerns. But DOD's review and
the congressional action are not mutually exclusive.
We have heard that repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell will weaken unit
cohesion and, by extension, national security. But this policy is
forcing those in uniform to lie to their colleagues that weakens unit
cohesion. And it is firing personnel during two wars just because they
are gay that weakens national security.
As chairwoman of the Military Personnel Subcommittee, I know that our
military draws its strength from the integrity of our unified force.
Current law challenges this integrity by creating two realities within
the ranks. I urge my colleagues to look at this closely. I hope my
colleagues will stand on the right side of history and end Don't Ask,
Don't Tell.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Turner), the ranking member on the Strategic Forces
Subcommittee.
Mr. TURNER. I want to thank Ranking Member McKeon and also our chair,
Mr. Skelton, and the chair, Mr. Langevin, of our Subcommittee on
Strategic Forces.
I support the committee-passed version of H.R. 5136, and particularly
by the way that it strengthens our Nation's strategic forces. It
endorses an increase in funding for the modernization of our Nation's
nuclear deterrence capabilities, although this funding must be
sustained in the outyears.
It includes a $362 million increase in funding for missile defense,
which I strongly support, and holds the administration accountable for
deploying missile defenses in Europe to protect the United States and
our NATO allies. It establishes a sense of Congress that there would be
no limitations on U.S. missile defenses in Europe in the new START
treaty, despite Russian statements to the contrary.
There is an area, however, in which I am concerned in that the bill
does not go far enough to provide a sufficient hedge to protect the
United States from missile attack. The Phased Adaptive Approach for
missile defense in Europe is not planned to cover the U.S. homeland
until 2020, yet the ICBM threat from Iran to the U.S. could materialize
as early as 2015, according to the latest intelligence assessments.
Regrettably, an amendment I offered in full committee to address this
gap was rejected.
Another area which I support, I want to thank our chairman, Mr.
Skelton, for his support of the custody rights of our military parents.
This bill includes protection for the fundamental custody rights of
those military parents. Once again it highlights the need for a
baseline of child custody protections for our men and women in uniform,
and it also includes language that criticizes an unofficial DOD report
as an incomplete product that does not ascertain the full scope of this
problem.
Equally important in this bill is it strengthens the safety and
family rights for military personnel. I want to thank Chairwoman Davis
and Ranking Member Wilson for incorporating bipartisan language from
the Tsongas-Turner Defense STRONG Act that seeks to enhance sexual
assault protections as well as improving training requirements to
protect our members.
I thank my colleagues in the Armed Services Committee for their work
on the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act. It is certainly my hope
that we can retain the language passed by the committee so the House
can have a bipartisan report.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 4 of House Resolution
1404, and as the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, I request
that, during further consideration of H.R. 5136 in the Committee of the
Whole, and following consideration of amendment No. 4 printed in House
Report 111-498, the following amendments be considered: en bloc No. 1;
amendment No. 13; en bloc No. 2; en bloc No. 3.
The CHAIR. The gentleman's request is noted.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 2\1/2\ minutes to my friend,
the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.

{time} 1345

Mr. LANGEVIN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5136, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.
This is a strong, bipartisan bill; and as chairman of the Strategic
Forces Subcommittee, it has been a pleasure working with Chairman
Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon, as well as the ranking member of the
subcommittee, Mr. Turner, and members of the committee in crafting this
measure which provides our men and women in uniform with the tools to
address some of the most pressing strategic threats to our national
security.
Members of our subcommittee are acutely aware that we are racing
against time to secure vulnerable nuclear materials and prevent nuclear
terrorism and that we must deter nations like Iran from developing
nuclear weapons. We must also protect ourselves, our deployed forces
and our allies against the growing threat of attacks from ballistic
missiles, particularly from expanding stockpiles of short- and medium-
ranged rockets, as well as being mindful that both Iran and North Korea
are pursuing development of ICBM capabilities.
So our bill invests in maintaining a safe, secure, and reliable
nuclear deterrent, providing an effective missile defense against the
most likely and immediate threats, and protecting our national security
space and intelligence assets.
First, reflecting the President's commitment to provide a strong and
sustained investment in our nuclear deterrent, the bill provides $15
billion for the Department of Energy's Atomic Energy Defense
Activities, not counting the nonproliferation programs. This includes
$7 billion for nuclear weapons activities, a 10 percent increase over
last year's funding, and $5.6 billion for defense environmental cleanup
activities. This increase will sustain our nuclear arsenal without
nuclear testing. It ensures we will maintain a credible deterrent as we
responsibly reduce our stockpile and provides a robust foundation for
implementing the administration's Nuclear Posture Review and President
Obama's historic efforts to reduce nuclear dangers.
Second, H.R. 5136 will strengthen our ballistic missile defenses by
providing $10.3 billion to protect the United States, our deployed
troops, and our allies and friends against the most immediate threats
from nations such as Iran, Syria, and North Korea. Our funding
increases ensure that we will purchase key elements of the
administration's Phased Adaptive Approach for ballistic missile defense
in Europe more efficiently and at lower overall cost.
The bill also provides an additional $88 million for the longstanding
U.S.-Israeli collaboration on missile defense programs. Further, the
bill provides a

[[Page 9518]]

$50 million increase for directed energy research and the Airborne
Laser Test Bed to facilitate the testing and development of
technologies that are most likely to yield operational capabilities in
the future.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
Mr. LANGEVIN. The bill also requires operationally realistic testing
of missile defense systems. It makes deployment of missile defenses in
Europe contingent on such testing, as well as host nation ratification
of any deployments on European soil.
I am proud of our smart spending decisions to strengthen our defenses
against current missile threats. We are embracing good government
practices and emphasizing thorough testing that reduces the costs to
American taxpayers in the long run.
Finally, this authorization builds on the bipartisan approach of
previous years to military space programs, providing $9.7 billion to
sustain and improve these critical assets that are essential to our
warfighters.
I want to thank Chairman Skelton for his leadership one again in
crafting such a strong measure, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the ranking member on the Oversight and
Investigations Subcommittee.
Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by congratulating
Ranking Member McKeon and Chairman Skelton for their fine work on the
National Defense Authorization bill for 2011.
Mr. Chairman, the defense authorization bill provides our Department
of Defense the resources it needs and addresses the committee's
priorities in supporting our men and women in uniform, their spouses
and families.
To enable our servicemembers to continue defending our freedoms
abroad, we owe it to them to provide the best available support,
training and equipment; and this bill reflects our undying commitment
to those servicemembers. After traveling to Afghanistan and Pakistan
last month on a congressional delegation and visiting the troops in the
field, I know it is critical that we move the bill forward quickly to
provide them that vital support.
The funding and support in this bill for the wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq are critical. That support back home is just as critical. I am
concerned, though, today about the attempt to repeal the Don't Ask,
Don't Tell policy without listening to our servicemembers first. We are
currently fighting two wars and asking our men and women to make
tremendous sacrifices. Now this Congress wants to act without their
regard and essentially tell our American military members and families
that their views do not count.
We have only been given 5 minutes to debate this policy which will
affect millions of American servicemembers and their families. Surely
the American people and the military deserve more, especially as we
head into the Memorial Day weekend intending to honor our
servicemembers.
Furthermore, we heard from all the service branch chiefs yesterday
asking Congress not to support this amendment and wait for the study
next year. I believe Congress must make a fully informed decision, and
the Department of Defense must provide Congress a full and complete
report on the ramifications of changing the current law or whether a
change is necessary. We owe that much to our military personnel to
listen to them and to wait for the completion of a study next year.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire of the time remaining,
please.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Missouri has 5\1/4\ minutes remaining;
the gentleman from California has 7\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. SKELTON. Would the gentleman from California care to proceed?
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Conaway), a member of the committee.
Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill as it passed
out of the committee by unanimous vote. This legislation authorizes
good policy for directing the defense of our Nation. I also strongly
support the addition of the IMPROVE Act of 2010, which has already
passed this House with an overwhelming vote.
The IMPROVE Act will make needed improvements to the way the
acquisition process is managed; it will also help us move closer to the
day that the financial statements of the Department of Defense are
auditable and receive an unqualified opinion.
Mr. Chairman, the Murphy amendment will tell the 350,000-plus men and
women who are currently participating in the survey that what they
think about Don't Ask, Don't Tell Members of Congress, quite frankly,
couldn't care less what they say. While those constituents may work for
the Department of Defense and the President, as Commander in Chief,
they are our constituents. We are criticized roundly in this realm for
not listening to our constituents, and a vote for the Murphy amendment
will codify that statement in their minds.
I will oppose the Murphy amendment. I will also oppose the overall
legislation if the Murphy amendment is adopted.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, my
friend, the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee who is also
a member of our Committee on Armed Services, the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
Mr. SPRATT. I thank my good friend and colleague for yielding and
commend him for the job he has done in bringing together an excellent
bill to this floor.
This bill fully funds national security activities in the Departments
of Defense and Energy, including top-line funding increases for DOD as
well as fully funding Iraq and Afghanistan operations. This is the
fourth consecutive year that the Congress has significantly increased
funding for the military of this country. Overall, this bill provides
$548 billion for DOD, $159 billion for operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan, and a total altogether of $726 billion, if you include the
Department of Energy.
Among the unsung heroes in our national military are the families who
serve every bit as much as the member, particularly when there is
deployment in the family. This bill recognizes the vital role they play
and provides a 1.9 percent pay increase, it expands TRICARE health
coverage to include adult dependent children up to the age of 26, it
increases family separation allowance for troops who are deployed and
away from their families, and it increases hostile fire and imminent
danger pay for the first time since 2004.
There will be more extensive debate later on the alternate engine,
which this bill accommodates and provides for. Let me simply say I
think it makes sense and saves money--it will in the long run--because
the $100 billion program for the engine alone is something where
competition is vitally needed.
Having followed the course of ballistic missile defense for some
time, it's of interest to me that this bill amply provides for military
defense for a robust missile defense, providing $10.3 billion, which is
$361.6 million above the budget request.
Let me say finally that this bill is consistent too with the glide
path that has been set for exploring the ramifications of a change on
our Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. I think it would be wise if we left
the Secretary of Defense to finish his exploration, along with the
military chiefs, before dictating any changes.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Louisiana, a member of the committee, Dr. Fleming.
Mr. FLEMING. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
First of all, I want to congratulate the chairman and ranking member
for an excellent mark. I voted for it coming out of committee. I have
three amendments in en bloc, two I would like to mention quickly.
One is military retiree pay adjustment that ensures our Nation's
military retirees are always paid on or before the first of each month.
Second, it

[[Page 9519]]

requires reports to Congress on U.S. modernization, sustainment, and
recapitalization of our bomber force. However, I am very disappointed.
The lack of an ear to the people of this country by this Congress is
unprecedented, and a good example is the Murphy amendment that we see
today that repeals Don't Ask, Don't Tell when we have a scheduled
report coming out the 1st of December, and we had the entire Joint
Chiefs of Staff and Secretary Gates who oppose that. So I will oppose
the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire about the available time.
The CHAIR. The gentleman has 3\1/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Andrews), the chairman of the acquisition reform task force.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, the best way to defend this country is to
have every person who is willing to serve her have the opportunity to
do so and who is able to do so. That's the intention of the Murphy
amendment which, frankly, there have been a series of
misrepresentations about.
Let's set the record straight. If the Secretary of Defense and the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff believe, after listening to the
input of our service personnel, after reviewing the facts, if they
believe that implementation of this policy would in any way undercut
the readiness or effectiveness of our Armed Forces, they will not
certify the policy, and it will not happen. This policy will happen
only when the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff say that it's the right thing to do for this country.
The right thing to do for this country is not to ask someone what
church they go to, what country they came from, what color they are, or
what their sexual orientation is. It's to ask if they're willing and
able to serve, and that is what we are going to do.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Delaware (Mr. Castle).
Mr. CASTLE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise today to express concern with section 346 of the National
Defense Authorization Act.
While the bill before us takes the important step of preventing the
move of any C-130 aircraft away from air reserve components until
Congress receives written agreement on the details of such a temporary
transfer, I believe we should consider implementing a time limitation
of 18 months on the duration of those loans.
As a former Governor, I understand the important role the Air
National Guard provides in meeting our homeland security needs and that
any aircraft reductions may significantly impact each State's ability
to respond to emergencies. If this body does choose to move forward
with a C-130 loan agreement, we should at least set up a regime to
ensure this is truly a temporary transfer. Hopefully, we can consider
these issues as the bill moves forward.

{time} 1400

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chair, pursuant to section 4 of House Resolution
1404, I hereby give notice that amendment Nos. 80 and 82 may be offered
out of order.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from
Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin).
Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman, today, we have the opportunity to right a
wrong.
I rise in strong support of repealing the military's Don't Ask, Don't
Tell policy.
Seventeen years after Congress passed Don't Ask, Don't Tell, we know
that it is a misguided, unjust, and discriminatory policy. Not only
does Don't Ask, Don't Tell damage the lives and livelihoods of military
professionals, it deprives our Nation and our Armed Forces of their
honorable service and of their needed skills. Under this law, almost
14,000 servicemembers have been discharged, including almost 1,000
mission-critical troops and at least 60 Arabic speakers and 10 Farsi
linguists. It is indefensible.
When the House votes to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, we will have
taken one more step on the path to full civil rights and equality for
LGBT Americans, but we will also change the course of history for all
of the courageous Americans who serve our country and for their
families.
Mr. Chairman, in the land of the free and the home of the brave, it
is long past time for Congress to end this un-American policy.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time we have
remaining.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Serrano). The gentleman from California has
4\1/2\ minutes remaining; the gentleman from Missouri has 1 minute
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Oklahoma (Ms. Fallin).
Ms. FALLIN. Mr. Chairman, this Memorial Day, we thank our men and
women serving our Nation--our veterans, their families, and those who
have given their lives to defend and protect Americans. We honor their
sacrifices on behalf of our freedom as a Nation.
My colleagues and I have worked very hard in our Armed Services
Committee on the National Defense Authorization Act, which I believe to
be an effective and comprehensive blueprint for our Nation's defense
both at home and abroad. Most importantly, I believe this bill provides
our men and women in uniform with the support and protection they need
and deserve both on and off the battlefield.
Every day, these brave men and women put their lives on the line for
the safety and security of our Nation, and it is our job to make sure
that they receive the quality support and services they need,
especially when they return home.
I am very grateful for my amendments to improve the detection and the
diagnosis of common combat-related afflictions, like that of ringing in
the ears, of posttraumatic stress disorder, and of traumatic brain
injury, which are all included in this year's authorization. The sooner
we catch these prevalent service-related injuries, the sooner we will
simultaneously improve the quality of the lives of our troops and will
reduce the costs of health care across the board for them.
So, as this Memorial Day approaches, I hope we all remember our
troops--those who are currently serving and those who have served our
country to defend our freedoms.
If this bill makes it off the floor as it came out of the committee,
which was in one piece, then I will be supporting it. If there are
changes that deal with some other issues that this committee has raised
in the last few minutes as objectionable, then we will be considering
them.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, picture in your mind an American soldier, a corporal,
patrolling in Afghanistan, wearing his American-made uniform, carrying
his American-made M4 rifle, having been transported in an MRAP security
vehicle to his place of patrolling, with a radio on his back which was
made in America--all of these items furnished by the Congress of the
United States and under our duty and the duty to train and to allow him
to be fully prepared to fight the fight that he is.
That is what is important in what we do today. That is the purpose of
an authorization bill. It is required by the Constitution of the United
States. It is paramount. It is the most important job that we have to
do--to provide for the security of those who fight and who protect us
in their line of duty.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Coffman), a member of the committee.
Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the
defense authorization bill, but I rise in opposition to the Murphy
amendment to the bill.
Congress must review the results of the Department of Defense study
on Don't Ask, Don't Tell before we vote to reverse the existing policy
or to keep it. The purpose of this study is to survey those in uniform
on this issue. The Murphy amendment essentially says

[[Page 9520]]

that we are not willing to listen to those who currently serve in
uniform before making our decision.
It was during the first gulf war when I served as a ground combat
leader with the United States Marine Corps that I found that the
interdependent bond that was formed between marines on a ground combat
team was essential to our effectiveness on the battlefield. My concern
is that the ability for this bond to form might be greatly degraded
with the interjection of sexuality, whether it be heterosexuality or
homosexuality.
I think that it is absolutely essential for the study to be completed
so that the Department of Defense can demonstrate how challenges, such
as the one that I just raised, and concerns will be handled before
Congress makes a final decision on whether to keep the current policy
in regards to sexual orientation or to reject it.
Mr. McKEON. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned earlier, I think this is an outstanding
bill. I think the chairman has worked very hard. I think the members of
the committee--the subcommittee chairman and the ranking members--have
all worked very hard, and the staff.
It is an excellent product as it stands right now. I think we will
have, unfortunately, insufficient time to debate the Murphy amendment
about Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I think that it is unfortunate that the
Rules Committee did not give us the time that will be necessary to
fully debate that, but we will take advantage of the time as we may.
I would like to say, as for many of the Members who have spoken today
on our side, they do support the bill as it came out of committee. They
hope that it will be improved, but if the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Murphy
amendment passes, many of them will not be able to support the final
passage, which is, indeed, I believe, a tragedy. None of us have ever
before, to my knowledge, voted against the defense authorization bill,
and we really don't do that lightly. We want to support all of this
product, and we hope that we will be able to work this out as the day
goes on.
Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 5136, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. This bill makes
investments in our nation's military, authorizes funding to further
strengthen our national security, and provides resources and aid to
service members and their families.
However, I am disappointed with a Sense of Congress that was added to
this bill during the House Armed Services Committee Markup. This Sense
of Congress states that the administration's recently released Nuclear
Posture Review (NPR) weakens our national security. I disagree with
that position. The Nuclear Posture Review, led by the Department of
Defense, states that America's nuclear arsenal will be maintained
safely and securely without the need to develop new nuclear warheads.
The Nuclear Posture Review is particularly important as it shuts the
door on new nuclear weapons testing. I have long had concerns that the
development of new nuclear weapons could lead us back down a path to
new nuclear weapons testing, which I strongly oppose. Utahns and others
living downwind of the Nevada Test Site have paid dearly for government
deception about the safety of past nuclear weapons testing activities.
I will continue to work to ensure that history is not repeated.
Evidence has long supported the fact that our current nuclear arsenal
is a sufficient and reliable deterrent. In 2006 the National Nuclear
Security Administration released the results of a five-year, peer-
reviewed study which found that plutonium remains potent as a weapons
fuel for at least 90 years and perhaps much longer.
I believe the NPR sets us on a path forward that secures our existing
weapons stockpile as a continued, effective deterrent, combined with
efforts to reduce nuclear danger in the world. This direction will
allow the U.S. to focus on securing the intelligence and the
conventional weapons that we need to deal with the real and ongoing
terrorist threat that we face and assuring our continued national
security. I hope that as the Senate considers this bill, it will
reevaluate this misguided Sense of the Congress and recognize the
importance of the Nuclear Posture Review.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 5136, the
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.'' As with
most omnibus pieces of legislation, there are many provisions I
support, as well as those I do not. Unfortunately, the improvements to
our military policy do little to blunt the effect of the wasteful
billions authorized for military spending, which continue to feed the
military-industrial complex and the ever-growing imperial overstretch
of our military around the world.
I do want to briefly acknowledge a few of the provisions I supported
in this bill. First, I am heartened that an amendment I offered with my
colleague, Representative Geoff Davis of Kentucky, was adopted by the
House. Our amendment builds on our bipartisan resolution, H. Con. Res.
94, and would instruct the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with
the Secretary of State, to submit a report to Congress assessing the
strategic benefits of the successful negotiation of a ``rules of the
road'' Incidents At Sea naval agreement including the United States and
Iran. I believe such an agreement would reduce tensions in the region
and help prevent accidental war. I am heartened that the Defense
Department and State Department will officially address this critical
issue.
Additionally, I want to acknowledge the good work of Representatives
Schakowsky, McGovern, Hinchey, and Moran. Together, we successfully
offered an amendment that would empower the Special Inspector General
for Afghanistan Reconstruction to improve its oversight and take steps
to deny federal funding to private security contractors responsible for
the deaths of Afghan civilians. For far too long, mercenaries like
Blackwater have acted with impunity in the theaters of war, committing
human rights atrocities and soiling the good name of the American
people. With the adoption of this amendment, we are hopefully moving
closer to finally putting these reckless soldiers of fortune out of
business.
Unfortunately, this authorization does not do nearly enough to
properly reorient our national security posture to earn my vote. As
with past defense budgets, it spends too much on war, outdated Cold War
weapons systems, and nuclear weaponry.
The American people cannot afford the $159.3 billion provided in this
bill to fund our ``overseas contingency operations''--the Orwellian
term for our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq--with our economy struggling
to escape recession and with so many families torn apart by long
deployments, debilitating battlefield wounds, and heart-wrenching
premature deaths. Continuing to fund our wars simply continues to
compound the mistakes of the previous administration and I, in good
conscience, cannot support a bill that continues us down this path of
folly which has, to date, cost us the lives of 1,000 young men and
women in Afghanistan and nearly $1 trillion in war spending since 2001.
I was inspired by a passage in the President's new National Security
Strategy, which was released today. It spoke of another path towards
securing our homeland and brokering peace around the world. It simply
and eloquently stated:

The freedom that America stands for includes freedom from
want. Basic human rights cannot thrive in places where human
beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or
the medicine they need to survive.

Those are powerful words and they speak to a universal truth: When we
love and care for one another, we do not need to rely on nuclear
weapons, Virginia-class submarines, or other tools of destruction to
secure ourselves and our families. We don't need to invest 26.5 million
in ``counter-ideology initiatives,'' when our national policy is to
export hope and dignity instead of Predator drone missiles. The death
of a family member and the humiliation associated with a night raid is
what radicalizes someone to the point where they seek to harm the
American people. We can and we must stop these destructive practices if
we hope to win over our brothers and sisters in the Muslim world.
I have unending faith in the ability of the American people to change
our country's course when needed. I believe that they can stand up and
say ``no'' to our nation being perpetually at war. I believe that they
can say no to spending more on defense than all the other nations of
the world combined, especially when people in Detroit and Hamtramck and
Dearborn still need a job that pays a decent wage. I hope my fellow
Members will join me in opposing this bill, so that we can inspire the
American people to pursue another, better path.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5136, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011,'' which
provides $726 billion in budget authority for the Department of Defense
and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.
I thank Chairman Skelton for his masterful leadership in bringing
this legislation to the floor.

[[Page 9521]]

Mr. Chair, I support this bill for three reasons: (1) it restores and
enhances the readiness of our troops, equipment, and defense
infrastructure; (2) it takes care of our military personnel and their
families; and (3) it authorizes the needed investments to keep our
nation strong, safe, and respected in the world.
Let me briefly highlight some of the key provisions. This
legislation:

troop and equipment readiness

Provides $1.2 billion for projects in Afghanistan to allow our
commanders on the ground to immediately respond to military
construction needs in theater.
Authorizes $13.6 billion for the training of all active duty and
reserve forces to increase readiness as troops experience greater dwell
time following the Iraq drawdown.
Authorizes $345 million to fully fund the first increment of
construction funds to modernize DOD schools.
Authorizes $9.7 billion to fully fund day-to-day maintenance
requirements of DOD facilities.
Provides a total of $7.2 billion for the National Guard and Reserve,
including $700 million above the budget request.

HELP FOR MILITARY FAMILIES

Provides a 1.9 percent military pay raise.
Expands TRICARE health coverage to include adult dependent children
up to age 26.
Increases family separation allowance for troops who are deployed
away from their families.
Increases hostile fire and imminent danger pay for the first time
since 2004.
Expands college loan repayment benefits.
Contains the most comprehensive provisions to address sexual assault
in the military, including 28 recommendations of the Defense Task Force
on Sexual Assault.
Establishes a pilot program to help military spouses take advantage
of their personal skill sets to identify and obtain desirable and
portable careers.
Authorizes an additional special one-time payment to seriously
wounded servicemembers to pay for the relocation costs of their
caregivers.

IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN

Bans permanent bases in Iraq and prohibits U.S. control of Iraqi oil.
Requires report on responsible redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq,
the development of military capabilities that are necessary for the
Government of Iraq to stand on its own, and the status of nearly 1,000
projects, programs, and activities that will need to be closed or
transferred over a short period of time as a result of the drawdown.
Bans permanent bases in Afghanistan.
Requires reports to assess progress toward security and stability in
Afghanistan and the conditions and criteria that would need to permit
the transition of lead security responsibility to the Afghan
government, and allow the redeployment of U.S. forces from Afghanistan.

HOMELAND SECURITY AND COUNTERRORISM

Authorizes $87.8 million for the Combating Terrorism Technical
Support office.
Authorizes $2.6 billion for Homeland Defense and counterproliferation
activities, including $1.6 billion for chemical biological defense.
Provides $20 million for two cybersecurity new start programs.
Provides $1.6 billion to support nations providing support in Iraq
and Afghanistan in the fight against al Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban.
Extends DOD's Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund through FY11.

RICHARDSON AMENDMENT #1

Mr. Chair, in my remaining time let me discuss an additional reason
why I support this legislation. With the support of Chairman Skelton
and his committee, this bill includes an amendment I offered which I
will briefly describe.
My amendment, Richardson Amendment #1, improves the bill by
instructing the TRANSPORTATION COMMAND (TRANSCOM) to update and expand
the PORT LOOK 2008 Strategic Seaports study. This study remains a
crucial tool to ensure that our ports are ready to respond in the case
of an emergency. My amendment would expand the scope of the report to
include consideration of the infrastructure in the vicinity of
strategic ports, including bridges, roads, and rail capacity, in
addition to the facilities inside the port that are already covered.
Mr. Chair, it bears repeating that in time of war, ``the role of the
ports is to protect the forts.'' If the transportation systems and
infrastructure in and around our strategic ports is deficient, the
ability of these ports to fulfill their indispensable national security
role will be compromised. That cannot be allowed to happen. My
amendment will ensure that we have the information needed to make the
investments needed to keep our strategy the best in the world.
I thank the Rules Committee for making my amendment in order and
Chairman Skelton for accepting it.

RICHARDSON AMENDMENT #2

I also offered a second amendment, Richardson Amendment #2, to
increase the effectiveness of the Northern Command (``NORTHCOM'') in
fulfilling its critical mission of protecting the U.S. homeland in
event of war and in providing support to local, state, and federal
authorities in times of national emergency. Specifically, my amendment
would have ensured that NORTHCOM (1) develops and has in place a
leadership strategy that will strengthen and foster institutional and
interpersonal relationships with state and local governments and (2)
develops an instructional program to train key personnel how to lead
effectively in the event of a disaster when they do not have command
authority to dictate actions.
The purpose for NORTHCOM is to bring the capabilities and the
resources of the U.S. military to the assistance of the American people
during a catastrophic disaster. NORTHCOM leaders will be much more
effective in saving lives, protecting assets, and enhancing resilience
after the disaster has occurred if they are trained in the techniques
of effective engagement with civilian leadership. My amendment would
have ensured that such training will be available. Although this
amendment was not made in order by the Rules Committee, my present
intention is to introduce this legislation as a separate bill when the
House reconvenes next month.

CONCLUSION

Mr. Chair, let me express my thanks to Chairwoman Slaughter of the
Rules Committee for making the Richardson Amendment in order and to
Chairman Skelton for accepting it. I also want to acknowledge the
yeoman work of the Committee staffs and the excellent work of my
Legislative Director, Gregory Berry, and Jeremy Marcus, my Senior
Legislative Assistant.
In conclusion, I support H.R. 5136 because it restores and enhances
the readiness of our troops, equipment, and defense infrastructure. It
takes care of our military personnel and their families. And it
authorizes the needed investments to keep our Nation strong, safe, and
respected in the world. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for
the bill on final passage.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the National Defense
Authorization Act of 2011. The bill authorizes $726 billion for defense
programs, global military operations and pay and benefits for active
duty military personnel, veterans and their families. As Memorial Day
approaches, we are reminded of the great debt we owe to our men and
women in uniform. This bill continues our commitment to them, to their
civilian colleagues, and to their families for their support and
sacrifice.
The welfare and safety of our troops and their families is a priority
of this Congress. That is why this bill authorizes funding to support
not only the healthcare programs that our military personnel and their
families depend on, but also the funding to ensure that our troops have
the equipment and support they need for their mission.
In addition to authorizing funding for training, transportation and
equipment, the measure includes additional funding specifically
targeted to protecting troops in harm's way. For those currently
serving on the front lines in Afghanistan and Iraq at risk of injury
from improvised explosive devices, the bill authorizes $3.5 billion for
counter measures, $3.4 billion for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
vehicles, and almost $1 billion to up-armored Humvees.
The sluggish economy places a special burden on the limited financial
resources of military families. That is why the bill authorizes an
average 1.9% pay increase for military personnel and establishes a
career development pilot program for military spouses.
Healthcare for our troops and their families is a priority of this
congress. The bill authorizes $32.4 billion for defense health care
programs. This includes a one-time authorization for cash payments to
severely wounded combat veterans for attendant care, an extension of
health care coverage to dependent children of Tricare Beneficiaries up
to age 26, and $524 million for medical research and development,
including $3 million in extra funds for research in alcohol and
substance abuse disorders. For those suffering from mental health
problems associated with multiple deployments and Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder, the bill also authorizes a 25% increase in the number of
mental health providers for the military. According to the military,
the number of military personnel who committed suicide in 2009,
exceeded the number who died in combat in Afghanistan that year. This
is a growing and silent killer that must be addressed.

[[Page 9522]]

I am pleased to report that the bill also authorizes $2.5 million for
the Bethesda Hospitals Emergency Preparedness Partnership which
includes the Naval Bethesda Medical Center, the National Institute of
Health Clinical Center, the National Library of Medicine, and Suburban
Hospital, to develop plans and procedures to respond rapidly and
successfully to any emergency situation in the Washington DC region.
And, the measure also authorizes $5 million for the Hydrodynamic Test
Facilities at Carderock to replace the wavemaking equipment at the
Carderock Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center. These
authorizations will not only strengthen our national security, they
will also help create and retain good paying jobs for Montgomery and
Prince George's county residents.
And, finally, I support the repeal of the discriminatory Don't Ask,
Don't Tell policy. Since 1994, thousands of qualified and committed
service members have been fired simply on the basis of their sexual
orientation. At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in February,
Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said,
``I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a
policy that forces young men and women to lie about who they are in
order to defend their fellow citizens.'' And, General Colin Powell,
changing his long held position on Don't Ask Don't Tell recently said,
``It's been a whole generation since the legislation was adopted, and
there is increased acceptance of gays and lesbians in society.
Attitudes and circumstances have changed.''
We cannot afford to turn away dedicated, talented and committed
soldiers just because they are gay. Though this change will not go into
effect until the Pentagon completes an ongoing review due in December,
and the president and secretary of defense certify that a repeal is
consistent with the military's standards of readiness and
effectiveness, the end of this discriminatory policy is finally in
sight.
Mr. Chair, this bill authorizes much needed funding for vital
programs that benefit our men and women in uniform, their civilian
colleagues, our veterans and to their families. I urge its immediate
passage.
Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 5136 the
Fiscal Year 2011 Defense Authorization Appropriations Act.
It is fitting that we are considering this bill on the Friday before
Memorial Day. In my state of North Carolina, patriotism never went out
of style. We were patriotic before patriotism was cool. With Fort Bragg
and Pope Air Force Base, other bases and our Guard and Reserve, units
in my district, America's service members are our friends and
neighbors, sons and daughters. We swell with pride at the work being
done by our service members in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. As we
pray for their safe and speedy return, we also remember those veterans
who came before them, who served their country and protected our
freedom throughout history. I am proud every single day, not only on
Memorial Day.
Mr. Chair, this bill recognizes the service of our men and women in
uniform, and gives our troops the resources they need. It provides $567
billion to the Department of Defense and Department of Energy, and
commits $139 billion for today's active operations. In terms of future
security, the bill strengthens our counterterrorism efforts, providing
our military with the additional tools they need to disrupt, dismantle,
and defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies. Of particular importance
to Fort Bragg, which houses the Special Operations Command, it enhances
our capacity to directly act against terrorist forces. It also brings
warfare into the information age by integrating cybersecurity
protection with the protection of physical security.
H.R. 5136 strengthens protection for our troops at home and abroad,
and increases support for our soldiers and their families. It honors
our covenant with the Guard and Reserve by raising their pay and by
investing in new equipment. It strenthens our compact with the citizen
soldier, so that when Guard and Reserve are called to active duty that
they have the equipment and training they need to be effective.
The bill contains an amendment that I offered with Congressman Larry
Kissell and Congressman Sanford Bishop that reinforces the pact between
the communities that host the military bases and the Department of
Defense. The change confirms Congress' commitment to the quality of
life of America's soldiers, officers, civilians and their families.
While the Office of Economic Adjustment in the Department of Defense is
tasked with providing technical and financial assistance to communities
affected by Defense adjustments, there are often community needs that
cannot be financed in a timely manner with local resources. Our
amendment makes sure that Office now has the full authority required to
fulfill its mission. The Department now has clear authority to roll up
its sleeves, so the Department can help out while the changes are
happening. I appreciate Chairman Skelton's willingness to accept this
amendment, and I hope that we can work together to fund those needs.
Mr. Chair, the members of our armed forces give so much to our
country. Whatever we ask, even for the ultimate sacrifice, we know will
be given. On the eve of our Memorial Day observation, I urge my
colleagues to join me in voting yes on this bill, ensuring that our
military is fully prepared for threats and challenges worldwide and
that our troops get the benefits they deserve and have earned.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chair, it is with great appreciation that I rise
in support of provisions contained within H.R. 5136, the Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, relating to the procurement of
steel armor plate and the definition of the term ``produced.''
Recently, the Department of Defense has implemented a regulation that
allows the use of steel armor plate that is melted in foreign countries
to be used in various defense applications, and I want to thank
Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon for including language that
specifies that this type of steel must be melted in the United States.
I was informed of the urgency of this issue during a Steel Caucus
hearing in March of this year, when we discussed that a Department of
Defense regulation now merely requires the finishing processes of armor
plate manufacturing to take place domestically, which is contrary to
over thirty-five years of precedent requiring melting processes to
occur in the United States. After this hearing, Rep. Tim Murphy and I
spearheaded a Steel Caucus letter to Secretary of Defense Gates, with
35 other Members of the Caucus signing the letter, which urged him to
fully examine the implications of this regulation.
Steel armor plate plays a vital role in the protection of our troops
and the defense of our nation, and the Specialty Metals Amendment, as
originally included under the Berry Amendment in 1973, aims to ensure
that American steel is used to protect our troops. The regulation
amends the definition of produced under the Specialty Metals Amendment,
and I am thoroughly concerned that this threatens the safety of our
troops and the defense of our nation. Steel armor plate is used in Mine
Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles and MRAP All-Terrain
Vehicles, and we must do everything possible to ensure that American
made material is used in the production of these vehicles.
I understand that the House Armed Services Committee has closely
followed this situation and has included report language in the past
cautioning the Department of Defense on the implications of this
regulation, and I applaud your continued efforts today on remedying
this situation and protecting our national security and the American
industrial base.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the National
Defense Authorization Act of 2011. This legislation authorizes $725.9
billion for defense programs this year, including $159.3 billion
specifically for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the so-called ``war
on terror.'' Once again, the House of Representatives easily approves
billions of dollars for war, while a bill that would provide genuine
assistance to our constituents gets watered down by the demagoguery of
fiscal responsibility.
Our national security is not preserved or furthered through the
military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Our presence in the region
continues to foment resentment toward us and undermines the human
rights of the Iraqi and Afghani people. To date, more than 4,000 U.S.
servicemembers have lost their lives in Iraq, and more than 31,000 have
been wounded. As the number of troops in Afghanistan surpasses the
number in Iraq, over one thousand U.S. troops have been killed thus
far. With the continuation of the wars, we are creating a new
generation of Americans that will experience the trauma of war, like
Vietnam veterans before them.
According to the United Nations, air strikes continue to be the
leading cause of civilian deaths in Afghanistan, despite the
Administration's claims that avoiding civilian casualties is a
cornerstone of the Afghan strategy. Innocent Afghanis are killed,
detained or threatened in frequent night raids conducted by North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces, while Afghan President
Hamid Karzai buys million-dollar villas in Dubai. This bill also
authorizes $4.9 billion for ammunition and weapons systems, including
for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles--or drones--that conduct indiscriminate
attacks against suspected militants in Pakistan. According to a study
conducted by the New America Foundation, three civilians die for every
suspected militant killed by a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) drone
in Pakistan.

[[Page 9523]]

I am also concerned about a number of the amendments adopted in the
bill that I believe have no place in a bill that is intended to address
our national security. Language addressing sex-offenders and language
that has considerable implications on our foreign policy was included
as part of an en bloc amendment that addressed a significant gap in the
health care services provided to our veterans pre and post-deployment.
An amendment was also adopted that would allow the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA) to conduct defense-related pilot
programs with the Department of Defense (DOD). I have fought for years
to keep NASA separate from DOD in order to preserve NASA's mission
integrity and therefore, longevity.
While I oppose the underlying bill, I supported an amendment that
would lead to the repeal of the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' (DADT)
military policy. For the past 17 years, DADT has forced our service men
and women to hide who they are as they selflessly sacrificed their
lives for our country. The amendment would repeal DADT following the
receipt of recommendations from a Pentagon working group tasked with
formulating the implementation of the repeal and certification from the
President and Secretary of Defense that the Department of Defense is
prepared to implement its repeal.
Since the implementation of this discriminatory and misguided policy
in 1993, almost 14,000 service members have been fired because of their
sexual orientation. The United States is well behind many of our allies
in allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.
Policies, like DADT, that create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust
among colleagues serving side-by-side have no place in the military. I
applaud the repeal of DADT and believe it is a significant step toward
ensuring equality in our military and securing rights for members of
the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community.
I urge my colleagues to reflect on the policies and fiscal
implications included in this legislation. As the country struggles to
pull itself out of one of the worst economic recessions in history, we
must commit to our priorities here at home--protecting our environment,
keeping people in their homes, and getting people back to work.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Chair, I rise to oppose out of control war and defense
spending. This bill (H.R. 5136) would authorize a record $726 billion
for defense. Congress refuses to find money to maintain COBRA premium
assistance for jobless workers, but somehow we can afford yet another
increase to our already bloated defense budget.
We should recognize that this legislation would fix a long-standing
injustice by creating a path for the repeal of ``Don't Ask, Don't
Tell.'' I was proud to vote for the Murphy Amendment and I look forward
to the day when LGBT Americans enjoy equal rights in all facets of
society, including marriage. Although I strongly support the repeal of
``Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'' I cannot vote for this legislation.
The waste in this bill is shameful. It includes $361.6 million more
than the Pentagon wants for a missile defense program that doesn't
work, and $485 million in funding for another engine for a fighter jet
that already has a working engine. I offered an amendment that would
have cut the extra funding for missile defense, but it was not allowed
to come to the floor for a vote. An amendment to strike money for a
duplicative engine that the Pentagon doesn't want or need was also
defeated.
Congress needs to get our priorities in order. We should be working
to create jobs and assisting those impacted by the recession, not
continue runaway defense spending. I urge all of my colleagues to
oppose this wasteful bill.
Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 5136, the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2011, though I have
concerns about certain provisions that have been included in the bill.
While I strongly support many aspects of the bill, I am concerned
about the inclusion of language to overturn the military's ``Don't Ask,
Don't Tell'' policy. Earlier this year, the Secretary of Defense
ordered a study of the issue of repealing ``Don't Ask Don't Tell.'' He
said that while he believes it should be repealed, he first wanted to
gather input from the troops before moving forward with repeal. I agree
with the approach of Secretary Gates. I also agree with our military's
service chiefs, including Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton
Schwartz, who said we should complete the Secretary's review before
passing legislation to repeal ``Don't Ask Don't Tell.'' I believe we
should follow the lead of our military leaders. That means following
the process we set up earlier this year to gather input from our troops
and study the effect of repeal on our military forces. That is the best
way to make sure our troops have their views heard, and that the right
decision is made for the men and women in our armed forces.
While I voted against the amendment to end the ``Don't Ask, Don't
Tell'' policy, I will be voting in favor of final passage of the 2011
NDAA. I believe that it is vitally important that Congress enact its
yearly Defense Department authorization bill in a timely matter. This
legislation helps to set military policy and any delay in its enactment
will have a negative effect on the department's ability to effectively
and efficiently make decisions to execute that policy.
This bill also includes an important pay increase for our soldiers,
authorizes funding for badly needed equipment for our Guard and Reserve
and includes my amendment to continue the Joint Family Support
Assistance Program. Additionally, the bill authorizes important
military construction projects in North Dakota including nearly $19
million to construct a new Air Traffic Control Complex at Minot Air
Force Base, $11.2 million to renovate and expand the Readiness Center
at Camp Grafton and $500,000 to begin planning and design of a Central
Deployment Center at the Grand Forks Air Force Base. These programs
must be authorized so that the DoD can put these important initiatives
in place. My vote in favor of this bill is a vote to move the important
process of authorizing the activities of the Defense Department forward
in a timely manner and a vote in support of our soldiers.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, as we prepare to observe Memorial Day, the
House passed a measure that makes a significant investment in our armed
forces. In addition to much-needed additions in equipment, mental
health care, and health services, the FY 2011 Defense Authorization Act
includes a significant step forward for human rights. I am proud to say
that this Congress has taken action to end the outrageous ``Don't Ask,
Don't Tell'' policy. By the end of 2010, it is my hope that all members
of our armed forces will be able to serve our nation proudly and
openly.
I am also pleased that the Committee has taken my request for
additional environmental cleanup funding seriously. This bill provides
$20 million over the President's request, which is a small, but
important first step. Our nation has tens of millions of acres of land
that are contaminated with toxins and munitions left over from military
training. Much of this now serves as parks, housing, or business
development where Americans work and play every day. Yet the last of
these sites won't be cleaned for another 250 years. It was my hope to
include a provision, which I submitted to the Rules Committee as an
amendment with Representatives Brown-Waite and Farr, to require that
the military notify families and businesses living and operating on
these sites. I am disappointed that this simple and commonsense
amendment was not made in order, and it is my intention to offer it as
a stand-alone bill. Americans have a right to know.
The continuous commitment to the escalation in Afghanistan concerns
me greatly. The money and effort is misplaced and ultimately
ineffectual. I am also disappointed that the House voted to preserve
funding for the extra engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
I have opposed this program for years, as have President Obama,
Secretary Gates, the Army, Navy, and Marines. This is a sad reminder of
how parochial interests can overwhelm good policy, and I will work with
my colleagues to remove this funding in conference with the Senate.
I also look forward to working with my colleagues to clarify the
Department's role with respect to the siting of wind energy projects,
and to clarify the bidding process with regards to the Army's M915
truck.
No bill is ever perfect, and I will work to refine and strengthen
this legislation through the conference process.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chair, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 5136,
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. The bill
continues a strong tradition under the leadership of Chairman Ike
Skelton of Missouri of providing our men and women in uniform with the
training, equipment and authorities that they need to protect our
country. In particular, I rise in strong support of subtitle C of title
28 of this bill which includes several provisions that further
strengthen Congressional oversight of the military build-up on Guam and
directly address concerns raised in the draft environmental impact
statement on the military build-up.
Of significant importance is Section 2822 which grants authority to
the Secretary of Defense to assist the Government of Guam in providing
funding for civilian infrastructure improvements required as a result
of the realignment of military installations and the relocation of
military personnel on Guam. Congress has granted this authority before,
most recently

[[Page 9524]]

during the realignment of forces to Bangor, Washington. The authority
granted to the Secretary addresses concerns raised by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and our community in regards to
mitigating the impact of the buildup on our local infrastructure. The
authority granted in Section 2822 also expands on President Obama's
request for $50 million in transfer authority to modernize
infrastructure at the Port of Guam. To accommodate the influx of
servicemembers and their dependents, our island will have to modernize
aging infrastructure, build and repair roads, improve water and
wastewater capacity, and increase capacity at the Port of Guam among
many other preparations. This authority will assist our island in
preparing for the realignment of forces to Guam and mitigate impact to
our community.
Section 2824 is also important as it allows the Secretary of Defense
to transfer rights and management authority of Navy's water and
wastewater system to the Guam Waterworks Authority. This provision will
create one single water and wastewater system on the island, create
economies of scale, and will remove redundancies in our current system.
Most importantly, I worked to include an amendment that incorporated
the full text of H.R. 44, ``The Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition
Act,'' to the National Defense Authority Act for Fiscal Year 2011. This
provision would recognize the people of Guam for their sacrifices
during World War II when Guam was occupied by enemy forces. With the
realignment of forces to Guam, it is important that this longstanding
issue be resolved so that the military build-up on Guam is implemented
with community support. The Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act
was adopted by the House as an amendment to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, but was subsequently removed
during conference with the Senate. I thank my colleagues for voting to
adopt this provision once again.
I want to thank Chairman Ike Skelton of the House Armed Services for
his leadership on issues affecting the readiness of our military
forces. I look forward to working with my colleagues toward passage of
H.R. 5136 by the full House of Representatives.
Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 5136,
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.
Each year, Congress acts to authorize national defense spending.
Matters of defense spending have been one of my highest priorities
throughout my time in Congress. Especially during times of war, we, in
Congress, have the utmost obligation to ensure our service men and
women have the adequate resources they need to serve both honorably and
safely. Moreover, we must remember our retired and wounded service men
and women and ensure that they receive the benefits and care respectful
of their heroic sacrifices.
There are many provisions of this $567 billion authorization to be
proud of. This bill strengthens four pivotal national objectives
including, but not limited to, counterterrorism efforts, missile
defense, nuclear nonproliferation, and benefits and care to our
nation's service members and their families.
Some provisions that particularly stand out are the funding
authorizations that support the President's agenda in Afghanistan. This
bill takes steps to address prior shortfalls of our efforts in
Afghanistan under the Bush Administration. Specifically, the bill
outlines resources that will give U.S. commanders in the field the
tools they need for success, as well as the means to forge meaningful
strategic partnerships with neighboring nations so as to both
facilitate victory and a swift and safe return for our brave service
men and women. The bill also furthers the President's efforts to secure
the nuclear arsenals across the globe. If Cold War politics have taught
the world one thing, it is that nuclear proliferation could lead to
dangerous situations. H.R. 5136 makes significant strides in aligning
our defense policy with 21st century challenges, including facilitating
a mobile missile defense system and regulation of nuclear arms. I
believe Congress must do all that it can to ensure that the development
of nuclear technologies is globally regulated and transparent. This
bill, in funding key programs like the Department of Energy's Global
Threat Reduction Initiative and Department of Defense's Cooperative
Threat Reduction Program, takes important steps to ensuring that
weapons grade nuclear materials do not end up into the hands of
terrorists and dangerous states.
I am proud to speak to the funds authorized for the benefits and care
of our military servicemembers and their families. A nation with the
best military in the world should provide the best care in the world.
Among its many provisions, H.R. 5136 provides a 1.9% pay raise to our
troops, increases imminent danger pay, and expands college loan
repayment benefits. Furthermore, the bill includes a ``pre-separation''
counseling program to help provide discharged servicemembers and their
spouses with financial and job assistance. Especially in these tough
economic times, it is important to promote financial literacy efforts
across the board so as to better educate and inform average Americans
of their financial and professional options.
Finally, I am extremely encouraged by language included in the final
Defense Authorization bill that recognizes the harmful implications of
poor nutrition as it pertains to national security. As Chairwoman of
the Healthy Families and Communities Subcommittee, I have been very
active in efforts to increase access to child nutrition programs. It is
important that Congress recognize the vast impact proper child
nutrition has on our nation. H.R. 5136 includes a sense of Congress
that hunger and obesity are impairing military recruitment and must be
properly addressed. I am proud to lead efforts to improve access to
important initiatives like direct certification systems, and the
national school lunch and summer food services programs. The language
in this bill regarding obesity underscores the vast and grave
consequences an unhealthy nation can have.
Again, Mr. Chair, I support the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2011. I commend both Chairman Ike Skelton and Ranking
Member Howard McKeon for their hard work in putting together a
tremendous piece of legislation that, in my opinion, adequately
supports our active and retired service men and women.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chair, I would like to submit the following exchange
of letters:

Committee on Education

and Labor,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Re Corrected Bill Number.

Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Education and
Labor in matters being considered in H.R. 5136, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.
Our committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5136 and
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously.
Therefore, while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over
the bill, I do not intend to request a sequential referral.
This, of course, is conditional on our mutual understanding
that nothing in this legislation or my decision to forego a
sequential referral waives, reduces or otherwise affects the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Education and Labor, and
that a copy of this letter and your response acknowledging
our jurisdictional interest will be included in the Committee
Report and as part of the Congressional Record during
consideration of this bill by the House.
The Committee on Education and Labor also asks that you
support our request to be conferees on the provisions over
which we have jurisdiction during any House-Senate
conference.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
George Miller,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Armed Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. George Miller,
Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of
Representatives, Rayburn Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Education and Labor has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Education and Labor is not waiving its
jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill or similar
legislation be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I
will support the appointment of conferees from the Committee
on Education and Labor.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I am writing regarding H.R. 5136,
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.
As you know, the Committee on Energy and Commerce has
jurisdictional interest in a number of provisions of this
bill.

[[Page 9525]]

In light of the interest in moving this bill forward
promptly, I do not intend to exercise the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Energy and Commerce by seeking sequential
referral of H.R. 5136. I do this, however, only with the
understanding that forgoing consideration of H.R. 5136 at
this time will not be construed as prejudicing this
Committee's jurisdictional interests and prerogatives on the
subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. In
addition, we reserve the right to seek appointment of an
appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate
conference named to consider such provisions.
I would appreciate your including this letter in the
Congressional Record during consideration of the bill on the
House floor. Thank you for your cooperation on this matter.
Sincerely,
Henry A. Waxman,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Armed Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Henry A. Waxman,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of
Representatives, Rayburn Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Energy and Commerce has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Energy and Commerce is not waiving its
jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill or similar
legislation be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I
will support the appointment of conferees from the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Financial Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I write to confirm our mutual
understanding regarding H.R. 5136, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. While this
legislation as reported contains subject matter within the
jurisdiction of Committee on Financial Services, the
committee waives consideration of the bill in order to
expedite floor consideration of this important legislation.
The Committee on Financial Services takes this action only
with the understanding that the committee's jurisdictional
interests over this and similar legislation are in no way
diminished or altered.
The Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment
to any House-Senate conference on this legislation and
requests your support if such a request is made. Finally, I
would appreciate your including this letter in the committee
report or in the Congressional Record during consideration of
H.R. 5136 on the House Floor. Thank you for your attention to
these matters.
Barney Frank,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Armed Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Barney Frank,
Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, House of
Representatives, Rayburn Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Financial Services has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Financial Services is not waiving its
jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill or similar
legislation be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I
will support the appointment of conferees from the Committee
on Financial Services.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Foreign Affairs,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Rayburn House Office
Bldg., Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011.
This bill contains provisions within the Rule X
jurisdiction of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. In the
interest of permitting your Committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill,
I am willing to waive this Committee's right to mark up this
bill. I do so with the understanding that by waiving
consideration of the bill, the Committee on Foreign Affairs
does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the
subject matters contained in the bill which fall within its
Rule X jurisdiction.
Further, I request your support for the appointment of
Foreign Affairs Committee conferees during any House-Senate
conference convened on this legislation.
Please include a copy of this letter and your response in
the Congressional Record during consideration of the measure
on the House floor.
Sincerely,
Howard L. Berman,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Armed Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Howard Berman,
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of
Representatives, Rayburn Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Foreign Affairs has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not
to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of
expediting consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive
consideration of certain provisions of the bill, the
Committee on Foreign Affairs is not waiving its jurisdiction
over these matters. Should this bill or similar legislation
be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I will support
the appointment of conferees from the Committee on Foreign
Affairs.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
Committee on Homeland Security,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 20, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Rayburn House Office
Building, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I write to you regarding H.R. 5136,
the ``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011,'' introduced on April 26, 2010.
H.R. 5136 contains provisions that fall within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland Security. I
recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this
legislation before the House in an expeditious manner and,
accordingly, I will not seek a sequential referral of the
bill. However, agreeing to waive consideration of this bill
should not be construed as the Committee on Homeland Security
waiving, altering, or otherwise affecting its jurisdiction
over subject matters contained in the bill which fall within
its Rule X jurisdiction.
Further, I request your support for the appointment of
Homeland Security conferees during any House-Senate
conference convened on this or similar legislation. I also
ask that a copy of this letter and your response be placed in
the Committee Report accompanying the legislation and the
Congressional Record during floor consideration of this bill.
I look forward to working with you on this legislation and
other matters of great importance to this nation.
Sincerely,
Bennie G. Thompson,
Chairman.
____

Committee on Armed Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Bennie G. Thompson,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, House of
Representatives, Ford Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Homeland Security has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Homeland Security is not waiving its
jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill or similar
legislation be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I
will support the appointment of conferees from the Committee
on Homeland Security.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the men and women
in our armed forces and H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization
Act for FY 2011. H.R. 5136 makes sound investments in our armed
forces--strengthening our national security

[[Page 9526]]

and providing needed resources and support for our men and women in
uniform and their families.
I am particularly pleased by the inclusion of twenty-eight provisions
to ensure the Defense Department has the tools it needs to prevent and
respond to sexual assault in the military. These important provisions
will implement into law many of the recommendations of the Defense Task
Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services, and the inclusion of
these provisions in this bill makes this the single most comprehensive
legislative package in history to address sexual assault in the
military.
Preventing sexual assault in the military is a persistent problem and
an issue that I have worked on for many years. I firmly believe that
the best way to effectively tackle a problem such as sexual assault in
the military is to have accurate data, which is why I previously
introduced legislation that would force the Department of Defense (DoD)
to implement fully the Defense Incident-Based Reporting System (DIBRS).
DIBRS collects statistics about crimes committed within the military
services.
Despite the clear need for a well-functioning system for reporting
such crimes, DIBRS has yet to be completed. In the FY10 National
Defense Authorization Act, I offered an amendment that was successfully
adopted that required that the Secretary report to Congress on the
Department's progress to completing DIBRS. Since that time, the Defense
Department reports that the Navy has resumed full-time reporting and is
working towards full compliance. I applaud the Department for its
efforts and look forward to an accurate accounting of the crimes that
are occurring in the U.S. military and the effective policies that will
be implemented in response to ensure the safety of our military
personnel.
I have also introduced legislation, the Preventing Sexual Assaults in
the Military Act, that would provide funding to process the backlog of
DNA kits in the military, reduce the processing time, train medical
personnel as SANEs, and ensure an adequate supply of rape kits to
theaters of operation, academies, and domestic or overseas bases.
Similar provisions passed in the FY05 Defense Authorization
legislation, and I am very pleased to see that this bill before us
today requires DoD to specifically budget for the sexual assault
prevention and response program--a program that addresses these
shortfalls.
This bill before us today protects and supports our military service
members, while strengthening the ability of the finest military in the
world to respond to today's and future threats.
I urge my colleagues to support it.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chair. I rise in support of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. As a member of
both the Foreign Affairs and Homeland Security Committees, I support
Chairman Ike Skelton and the Democratic leadership's investment in our
military to increase our national security. I support our men and women
in the armed forces and our need to ensure our national security.
This defense bill reflects our commitment to support the men and
women who fight to secure not only our citizen's freedom, but the
freedom of others. This bill will provide the necessary resources to
protect the American people and our national interests at home and
abroad. The Armed Services committee has provided for military
readiness; taking care of our troops and their families; increasing
focus on the war in Afghanistan; and improving interagency cooperation,
oversight, and accountability in this year's defense authorization
bill.
I thank the Chair for this opportunity to explain the amendments I
propose to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010.
My first amendment would require the Secretary of Defense to provide a
report, not later than December 1, 2010 to the Congressional Black
Caucus, that includes a list of minority-owned, women-owned, and
disadvantaged small businesses, who receive contracts resulting from
authorized funding to the Department of Defense. The list shall cover
the 10 calendar years preceding this Act and shall include for each
listed business, the name of the business, the business owner and the
amount of the contract award.
Mr. Chair, I have long supported efforts to increase opportunities
for small businesses, especially those that are minority-owned, women-
owned and disadvantaged. We know that small businesses are the engine
to our economy and that they provide much needed support for
communities across the country. Small businesses employ 57.4 million
Americans. Many Americans seek to fulfill the American dream by
becoming small business owners and everyone in the United States should
be given the same opportunity to fulfill that dream.
Women and minorities have long been disadvantaged when it comes to
getting business opportunities and it is important to provide
educational resources that will enable women, minorities and other
disadvantaged business owners to arm themselves with the necessary
tools they need to operate viable and thriving businesses. This will
only improve communities throughout the United States.
My second amendment would make available post-traumatic stress
counseling for civilians affected by the Fort Hood shooting, and
shootings at other domestic military bases.
Many of those who passed in the November shooting were at Fort Hood
preparing to risk their lives for our country. I would like to express
my deepest sympathies for the loss of these 13 soldiers. My thoughts
and prayers go out to their families during their time of bereavement.
It is unacceptable that soldiers should fear attacks on American soil.
I want the military and their families to always be protected as they
are the backbone of American society. It is not only our soldiers who
make sacrifices to protect our great nation, but their families and
civilians as well. I am deeply saddened and troubled by the shootings
at Fort Hood, especially because soldiers and their families from my
own district are there.
I want to commend the soldiers at Fort Hood for their valiant and
selfless acts of bravery. Soldiers rushed to treat their injured
colleagues by ripping their uniforms into makeshift bandages. The top
commander at Fort Hood is crediting a civilian police officer, Sgt.
Kimberly Munley, for stopping the shooting. Fort Hood police Sgt.
Kimberly Munley and her partner responded within three minutes of
reported gunfire, and Munley shot the gunman four times despite being
shot herself.
Another story of heroism is that of 19 year old Amber Bahr. The
nutritionist put a tourniquet on a wounded soldier and carried him out
to medical care. And only after she had taken care of others did she
realize she had been shot. Both women heroically intervened despite
being shot.
Incidents like this bring light to the types of issues our military
service men and women face on a daily basis. When I visited Fort Hood,
and spoke with the victims of the shooting, I was reminded that we can
not ignore the side effects of military service, and we must ensure
that both the physical and mental health of those who serve our country
is carefully attended.
Although the shootings all took place on one day, they will leave a
legacy on each soldier, contractor, and civilian on the base. Many base
personnel, like Sergeant Munley and Ms. Bahr witnessed events as
horrific as those on any battlefield. Similar to returning from the
battlefield, soldiers and contractors who were at Fort Hood must go
through a painful rehabilitation process to come to terms with the
events they witnessed and experienced.
There have been numerous reports of Enlisted Personnel, National
Guards, Reservists and Veterans suffering from PTSD-like symptoms for
well over 100 years. Some examples are veterans of U.S. Civil War who
suffered emotional problems and were said to be afflicted with
``soldier's heart'' or ``Da Costa's Syndrome'', veterans of World War I
was diagnosed as ``shell shocked'', veterans of World War II were
classified with ``battle fatigue'' or ``combat fatigue''. Other terms
used to describe military-related mood disturbances include
``nostalgia'', ``not yet diagnosed nervousness'', irritable heart'',
effort syndrome'', ``war neurosis'' and ``operational exhaustion''. War
veterans are the most publicly-recognized victims of PTSD; long-term
psychiatric illness was formally observed in World War I and the
syndrome entered public consciousness after the Vietnam War.
Enlisted Personnel, National Guards, Reservists and Veterans with
PTSD have lived through traumatic events that caused them to fear for
their lives, bear witness to horrible things, and feel helpless and
hopeless. PTSD symptoms usually start soon after the traumatic event,
but they may not manifest until months or years later. If provided
proper medical care, about half, 40 percent to 60 percent, of people
who develop PTSD get better at some time.
Although veterans who served in combat are most frequently afflicted
by PTSD, events such as the Fort Hood shooting highlight the physical
and psychological dangers facing military personnel in all roles.
Consequently, it is extremely vital to extend to our civilian personnel
the same benefits and support that we give to our active duty military.
Civilians and military members on Fort Hood have equal responsibility
to protect our nation and, as such, it is morally imperative that we
honor these civilians by providing then with equal support in the
aftermath of such traumatic incidents.
I have worked with my colleagues to secure $1 million in Federal
funding in the Fiscal Year

[[Page 9527]]

2010 Defense Appropriations Bill for Riverside General Hospital in
Houston, Texas. Riverside General Hospital was founded due to the
heroic efforts of veterans in the First World War. Riverside General
Hospital, formerly the Houston Negro Hospital was erected in 1926 in
memory of Lieutenant John Halm Cullinan, 344th FA, and 90th Division
AEP. Today, Riverside General Hospital is the only private African-
American-owned hospital in the state of Texas that is contracted to
provide inpatient psychiatric and inpatient detoxification services to
TRICARE Beneficiaries. These funds will provide trained experienced
physicians, nurses, therapists and other healthcare professionals the
necessary services to treat post traumatic stress disorders for
enlisted personnel, National Guards, Reservists and veterans discharged
and/or on leave of duty. In addition, Riverside will provide
psychiatric, medical emergency medical inpatient, and outpatient
services.
It is time to end this distinct method of discrimination and we
should not rest until this message is clear. Every American has the
right to stand among their peers to undertake the noble task of
defending this great nation. The U.S. military loses patriotic and
talented men and women every day due to the discriminatory ``Don't Ask
Don't Tell'' policy. Since 1993, DADT has forced over 13,000 qualified
and patriotic men and women to leave the service. It has made many
thousands more decide not to re-enlist. There is empirical data
existing in the Armed Services of our allies as we stand with them in
Iraq and Afghanistan. The militaries of the United Kingdom, Canada,
Australia, Israel and the Netherlands are clear examples that, in spite
of concerns before the change, it became a nonissue once gays and
lesbians were allowed to serve. Now we must do right by all of our
American warriors and move forward together on repealing DADT.
In 1965 as the commencement speaker at Howard University, President
Johnson stated, ``We seek not just equality as a right and a theory but
equality as a fact and equality as a result.'' Do we deny the freedom
of an openly gay man or woman who serves in our military? The ``Don't
Tell, Don't Ask,'' policy violates both openly gay men and women
constitutional rights to privacy and their right to be treated equally
with heterosexuals. I support the ``Don't Tell, Don't Ask Repeal,''
policy.
We must maintain our efforts to restore military readiness in order
to meet current military challenges and prepare for the future, and
civilians area a major part of the military readiness equation.
Importantly, this defense bill:
Establishes a $500 million DOD Rapid Innovation Program to help DOD
quickly transition innovative, life-saving equipment from small
businesses and other innovative firms into the hands of our men and
women in combat.
Authorizes $2.6 billion for Homeland Defense and counter
proliferation activities, including $1 billion for the Defense Threat
Reduction Agency and $1.6 billion for the Chemical Biological Defense
Program.
Fully funds the $20 million budget request for two cyber security new
start programs.
Expands ``1206 funding'' authority to build the capacity of foreign
military forces to participate in military and stability operations to
support efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, including $75 million to build
the capacity of counterterrorism forces of the Yemeni Ministry of the
Interior.
Extends DOD's Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund through FY11.
Provides $200 million to address urgent force protection needs in
Iraq and Afghanistan.
Authorizes $9.7 billion for unclassified National Security Space
programs, including $40 million for additional ORS satellites to meet
commanders' urgent needs.
Provides a 1.9 percent pay raise to troops.
Expands TRICARE health coverage to include adult dependent children
up to age 26.
Increases family separation allowance for troops who are deployed
away from their families.
Increases hostile fire and imminent danger pay for the first time
since 2004.
Expands college loan repayment benefits.
Includes the most comprehensive legislative package to ever address
sexual assault in the military, including 28 provisions to implement
into law many of the recommendations of the Defense Task Force on
Sexual Assault.
Establishes a pilot program to offer an alternative career path to
military officers, providing a broader range of experiences over a
longer career.
Establishes a pilot program to help military spouses take advantage
of their personal skill sets to identify and obtain desirable and
portable careers.
Authorizes an additional special one-time payment to seriously
wounded servicemembers to pay for the relocation costs of their
caregivers;
Provides $1.2 billion with broad authorities for projects in
Afghanistan to allow our commanders on the ground to immediately
respond to military construction needs in theater.
In closing, I hope my colleagues will join me in support of H.R.
5136. I believe we are all on one accord that without reservation we
support our men and women of the United States military. I support this
bill and I ask my colleagues to support my proposed amendments and H.R.
5136.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chair, I would like to submit the following exchange
of letters:

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. John Conyers Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of
Representatives, Rayburn Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on the Judiciary has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not
to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of
expediting consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive
consideration of certain provisions of the bill, the
Committee on the Judiciary is not waiving its jurisdiction
over these matters. Should this bill or similar legislation
be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I will support
the appointment of conferees from the Committee on the
Judiciary.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: This is to advise you that, as a
result of your having consulted with us on provisions in H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011, that fall within the rule X jurisdiction of the
Committee on the Judiciary, we are able to agree to waive
seeking a formal referral of the bill, in order that it may
proceed without delay to the House floor for consideration.
The Judiciary Committee takes this action with our mutual
understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 5136 at
this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over subject
matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our
Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the
bill or similar legislation moves forward, so that we may
address any remaining issues in our jurisdiction. Our
Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an
appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate
conference involving this or similar legislation, and
requests your support for any such request.
I would appreciate your including this letter in the
Congressional Record during consideration of the bill on the
House floor. Thank you for your attention to this request,
and for the cooperative relationship between our two
committees.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Natural Resources,

Washington, DC, May 20, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for the opportunity to review
the text of H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2011, for provisions which are within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural Resources. Among
these provisions are those dealing with compensation and
benefits for the NOAA Corps, as well as a report on civilian
infrastructure needs for Guam in light of the upcoming
military realignment in the Pacific.
Because of the continued cooperation and consideration that
you have afforded me and my staff in developing these
provisions, I will not seek a sequential referral of H.R.
5136 based on their inclusion in the bill. Of course, this
waiver is not intended to prejudice any future jurisdictional
claims over these provisions or similar language. I also
reserve the right to seek to have conferees named from the
Committee on Natural Resources on these provisions, and
request your support if such a request is made.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
5136 and the Congressional Record during consideration of the
measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative
spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
With warm regards, I am
Sincerely,
Nick J. Rahall, II,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources.

[[Page 9528]]

____

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Nick J. Rahall II,
Committee on Natural Resources, House of Representatives,
Longworth Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Natural Resources has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Natural Resources is not waiving its
jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill or similar
legislation be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I
will support the appointment of conferees from the Committee
on Natural Resources.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I am writing about H.R. 5136, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. I
appreciate your efforts to consult with the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform regarding those provisions of
H.R. 5136 that fall within the Oversight Committee's
jurisdiction. These provisions involve the federal civil
service and federal acquisition policies, among other things.
In the interest of expediting consideration of H.R. 5136,
the Oversight Committee will not request a sequential
referral of this bill. I would, however, request your support
for the appointment of conferees from the Oversight Committee
should H.R. 5136 or a similar Senate bill be considered in
conference with the Senate. Moreover, this letter should not
be construed as a waiver of the Oversight Committee's
legislative jurisdiction over subjects addressed in H.R. 5136
that fall within the jurisdiction of the Oversight Committee.
Finally, I request that you include our exchange of letters
on this matter in the Committee Report on H.R. 5136 and in
the Congressional Record during consideration of this
legislation on the House floor. Again, I appreciate your
willingness to consult the Committee on these matters.
Sincerely,
Edolphus Towns,
Chairman.
____

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Edolphus Towns,
Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House
of Representatives, Rayburn Office Building, Washington,
DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions
in this important legislation, and I am most appreciative of
your decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is not
waiving its jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill
or similar legislation be the subject of a House-Senate
conference, I will support the appointment of conferees from
the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives, Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, House Armed Services Committee, Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I write concerning the jurisdictional
interest of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in
matters being considered in H.R. 5136, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.
The Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5136 and
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously.
Therefore, while the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence has valid claim to jurisdiction over the bill, I
do not intend to request a sequential referral. My decision
to waive further consideration of H.R. 5136 is conditional on
the mutual understanding that no part of this legislation
waives, reduces, or otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
I respectfully request that a copy of this letter and your
response acknowledging this Committee's jurisdictional
interest will be included in the Committee Report and as part
of the Congressional Record during consideration of this bill
by the House.
The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence also asks
that you support my request to include conferees on the
provisions over which we have jurisdiction during any
conference between the House and the Senate.
I thank you for your continued leadership.
Sincerely,
Silvestre Reyes,
Chairman.
____

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Silvestre Reyes,
Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, House
of Representatives, The Capitol, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to schedule a mark-up of
this bill in the interest of expediting consideration. I
agree that by agreeing to waive consideration of certain
provisions of the bill, the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence is not waiving its jurisdiction over these
matters. Should this bill or similar legislation be the
subject of a House-Senate conference, I will support the
appointment of conferees from the Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives, Committee on Science and
Technology,
Washington, DC, May 19, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Science and
Technology in H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2011.
Our committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5136 and
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously.
Therefore, while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over
the bill, I do not intend to request a sequential referral.
This, of course, is conditional on our mutual understanding
that nothing in this legislation or my decision to forego a
sequential referral waives, reduces or otherwise affects the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Science and Technology, and
that a copy of this letter and your response acknowledging
our jurisdictional interest will be included in the Committee
Report and as part of the Congressional Record during
consideration of this bill by the House.
The Committee on Science and. Technology also asks that you
support our request to be conferees on the provisions over
which we have jurisdiction during any House-Senate
conference.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Bart Gordon,
Chairman.
____

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Bart Gordon,
Chairman, Committee on Science and Technology, House of
Representatives, Rayburn Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Science and Technology
has valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Science and Technology is not waiving
its jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill or
similar legislation be the subject of a House-Senate
conference, I will support the appointment of conferees from
the Committee on Science and Technology.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.

[[Page 9529]]

____

House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, House Armed Services Committee, Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I write to you regarding H.R. 5136,
the ``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011''.
H.R. 5136 contains provisions that fall within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. I recognize and appreciate your desire to
bring this legislation before the House in an expeditious
manner and, accordingly, I will not seek a sequential
referral of the bill. However, I agree to waive consideration
of this bill with the mutual understanding that my decision
to forgo a sequential referral of the bill does not waive,
reduce, or otherwise affect the jurisdiction of the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure over H.R. 5136.
Further, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
reserves the right to seek the appointment of conferees
during any House-Senate conference convened on this
legislation on provisions of the bill that are within the
Committee's jurisdiction. I ask for your commitment to
support any request by the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure for the appointment of conferees on H.R. 5136
or similar legislation.
Please place a copy of this letter and your response
acknowledging the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure's jurisdictional interest in the Committee
Report on H.R. 5136 and in the Congressional Record during
consideration of the measure in the House.
I look forward to working with you as we prepare to pass
this important legislation.
Sincerely,
James L. Oberstar, M.C.,
Chairman.
____

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. James L. Oberstar,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Rayburn Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to schedule a mark-up of
this bill in the interest of expediting consideration. I
agree that by agreeing to waive consideration of certain
provisions of the bill, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure is not waiving its jurisdiction over these
matters. Should this bill or similar legislation be the
subject of a House-Senate conference, I will support the
appointment of conferees from the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Veterans' Affairs,

Washington, DC, May 20, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Rayburn Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Skelton: I am writing to you concerning H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. There are certain provisions in the legislation which
fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs.
In the interest of permitting your Committee to proceed
expeditiously to floor consideration of this important bill,
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs agrees not to request a
sequential referral. By waiving consideration of H.R. 5136,
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs does not waive any future
jurisdictional claim over any subject matter contained in the
bill which falls within its jurisdiction. The Committee on
Veterans' Affairs reserves its right to seek conferees on any
provisions within its jurisdiction which are considered in a
House-Senate conference, and requests your support if such a
request is made.
Please place this letter into the committee report on H.R.
5136 and into the Congressional Record during consideration
of the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the
cooperative spirit in which you have worked with the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs regarding this matter and
others between our respective committees.
Sincerely,
Bob Filner,
Chairman.
____

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Bob Filner,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of
Representatives, Cannon Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs has
valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this
important legislation, and I am most appreciative of your
decision not to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the
interest of expediting consideration. I agree that by
agreeing to waive consideration of certain provisions of the
bill, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs is not waiving its
jurisdiction over these matters. Should this bill or similar
legislation be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I
will support the appointment of conferees from the Committee
on Veterans' Affairs.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Ways and Means,

Washington, DC, May 20, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Ways and Means in
matters being considered in H.R. 5136, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.
Our Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5136 and
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously.
Therefore, while we have valid claims to jurisdiction over
the bill, I do not intend to request a sequential referral.
This, of course, is conditional on our mutual understanding
that nothing in this legislation or my decision to forego a
sequential referral waives, reduces, or otherwise affects the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means, and that a
copy of this letter and your response acknowledging our
jurisdictional interest will be included in the Committee
Report and as part of the Congressional Record during
consideration of this bill by the House.
I also wish to commend you for including in H.R. 5136, a
requirement that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the U.S. Trade Representative, consider the effect that
other countries' trade policies have on the ability of the
United States to obtain rare earth minerals. Not only are
those minerals critically important for many defense
applications, they are also critical for many other high-tech
applications such as wind turbine and hybrid gasoline-
electric automobiles--and, as a result, to U.S. manufacturing
competitiveness.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Sander M. Levin,
Chairman.
____

House Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2010.
Hon. Sander M. Levin,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of
Representatives, Longworth Office Building, Washington,
DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011. I agree that the Committee on Ways and Means has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not
to schedule a mark-up of this bill in the interest of
expediting consideration. I agree that by agreeing to waive
consideration of certain provisions of the bill, the
Committee on Ways and Means is not waiving its jurisdiction
over these matters. Should this bill or similar legislation
be the subject of a House-Senate conference, I will support
the appointment of conferees from the Committee on Ways and
Means.
This exchange of letters will be included in the committee
report on the bill.
Very truly yours,
Ike Skelton,
Chairman.

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute
printed in the bill is considered as an original bill for the purpose
of amendment under the 5-minute rule and is considered read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:

H.R. 5136

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011''.

[[Page 9530]]

SEC. 2. ORGANIZATION OF ACT INTO DIVISIONS; TABLE OF
CONTENTS.

(a) Divisions.--This Act is organized into four divisions
as follows:
(1) Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations.
(2) Division B--Military Construction Authorizations.
(3) Division C--Department of Energy National Security
Authorizations and Other Authorizations.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Organization of Act into divisions; table of contents.
Sec. 3. Congressional defense committees.
Sec. 4. Treatment of successor contingency operation to Operation Iraqi
Freedom.

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 101. Army.
Sec. 102. Navy and Marine Corps.
Sec. 103. Air Force.
Sec. 104. Defense-wide activities.

Subtitle B--Army Programs

Sec. 111. Procurement of early infantry brigade combat team increment
one equipment.
Sec. 112. Report on Army battlefield network plans and programs.

Subtitle C--Navy Programs

Sec. 121. Incremental funding for procurement of large naval vessels.
Sec. 122. Multiyear procurement of F/A-18E, F/A-18F, and EA-18G
aircraft.
Sec. 123. Report on naval force structure and missile defense.

Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

Sec. 131. Preservation and storage of unique tooling for F-22 fighter
aircraft.

Subtitle E--Joint and Multiservice Matters

Sec. 141. Limitation on procurement of F-35 Lightning II aircraft.
Sec. 142. Limitations on biometric systems funds.
Sec. 143. Counter-improvised explosive device initiatives database.
Sec. 144. Study on lightweight body armor solutions.

TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations.

Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 211. Report requirements for replacement program of the Ohio-class
ballistic missile submarine.
Sec. 212. Limitation on obligation of funds for F-35 Lightning II
aircraft program.
Sec. 213. Inclusion in annual budget request and future-years defense
program of sufficient amounts for continued development
and procurement of competitive propulsion system for F-35
Lightning II aircraft.
Sec. 214. Separate program elements required for research and
development of Joint Light Tactical Vehicle.

Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs

Sec. 221. Limitation on availability of funds for missile defenses in
Europe.
Sec. 222. Repeal of prohibition of certain contracts by Missile Defense
Agency with foreign entities.
Sec. 223. Phased, adaptive approach to missile defense in Europe.
Sec. 224. Homeland defense hedging policy.
Sec. 225. Independent assessment of the plan for defense of the
homeland against the threat of ballistic missiles.
Sec. 226. Study on ballistic missile defense capabilities of the United
States.
Sec. 227. Reports on standard missile system.

Subtitle D--Reports

Sec. 231. Report on analysis of alternatives and program requirements
for the Ground Combat Vehicle program.
Sec. 232. Cost benefit analysis of future tank-fired munitions.
Sec. 233. Annual comptroller general report on the VH-(XX) presidential
helicopter acquisition program.
Sec. 234. Joint assessment of the joint effects targeting system.

Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 241. Escalation of force capabilities.
Sec. 242. Pilot program to include technology protection features
during research and development of defense systems.
Sec. 243. Pilot program on collaborative energy security.

TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 301. Operation and maintenance funding.

Subtitle B--Energy and Environmental Provisions

Sec. 311. Reimbursement of Environmental Protection Agency for certain
costs in connection with the Twin Cities Army Ammunition
Plant, Minnesota.
Sec. 312. Payment to Environmental Protection Agency of stipulated
penalties in connection with Naval Air Station,
Brunswick, Maine.
Sec. 313. Testing and certification plan for operational use of an
aviation biofuel derived from materials that do not
compete with food stocks.
Sec. 314. Report identifying hybrid or electric propulsion systems and
other fuel-saving technologies for incorporation into
tactical motor vehicles.

Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues

Sec. 321. Technical amendments to requirement for service contract
inventory.
Sec. 322. Repeal of conditions on expansion of functions performed
under prime vendor contracts for depot-level maintenance
and repair.
Sec. 323. Pilot program on best value for contracts for private
security functions.
Sec. 324. Standards and certification for private security contractors.
Sec. 325. Prohibition on establishing goals or quotas for conversion of
functions to performance by Department of Defense
civilian employees.

Subtitle D--Reports

Sec. 331. Revision to reporting requirement relating to operation and
financial support for military museums.
Sec. 332. Additional reporting requirements relating to corrosion
prevention projects and activities.
Sec. 333. Modification and repeal of certain reporting requirements.
Sec. 334. Report on Air Sovereignty Alert mission.
Sec. 335. Report on the SEAD/DEAD mission requirement for the Air
Force.

Subtitle E--Limitations and Extensions of Authority

Sec. 341. Permanent authority to accept and use landing fees charged
for use of domestic military airfields by civil aircraft.
Sec. 342. Improvement and extension of Arsenal Support Program
Initiative.
Sec. 343. Extension of authority to reimburse expenses for certain Navy
mess operations.
Sec. 344. Limitation on obligation of funds for the Army Human Terrain
System.
Sec. 345. Limitation on obligation of funds pending submission of
classified justification material.
Sec. 346. Limitation on retirement of C-130 aircraft from Air Force
inventory.
Sec. 347. Commercial sale of small arms ammunition in excess of
military requirements.
Sec. 348. Limitation on Air Force fiscal year 2011 force structure
announcement implementation.

Subtitle F--Other Matters

Sec. 351. Expedited processing of background investigations for certain
individuals.
Sec. 352. Adoption of military working dogs by family members of
deceased or seriously wounded members of the Armed Forces
who were handlers of the dogs.
Sec. 353. Revision to authorities relating to transportation of
civilian passengers and commercial cargoes by Department
of Defense when space unavailable on commercial lines.
Sec. 354. Technical correction to obsolete reference relating to use of
flexible hiring authority to facilitate performance of
certain Department of Defense functions by civilian
employees.
Sec. 355. Inventory and study of budget modeling and simulation tools.
Sec. 356. Sense of Congress regarding continued importance of High-
Altitude Aviation Training Site, Colorado.
Sec. 357. Department of Defense study on simulated tactical flight
training in a sustained g environment.
Sec. 358. Study of effects of new construction of obstructions on
military installations and operations.

TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

Subtitle A--Active Forces

Sec. 401. End strengths for active forces.
Sec. 402. Revision in permanent active duty end strength minimum
levels.

Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

Sec. 411. End strengths for Selected Reserve.
Sec. 412. End strengths for Reserves on active duty in support of the
Reserves.
Sec. 413. End strengths for military technicians (dual status).
Sec. 414. Fiscal year 2011 limitation on number of non-dual status
technicians.
Sec. 415. Maximum number of reserve personnel authorized to be on
active duty for operational support.

Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 421. Military personnel.

TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy Generally

Sec. 501. Age for health care professional appointments and mandatory
retirements.

[[Page 9531]]

Sec. 502. Authority for appointment of warrant officers in the grade of
W-1 by commission and standardization of warrant officer
appointing authority.
Sec. 503. Nondisclosure of information from discussions, deliberations,
notes, and records of special selection boards.
Sec. 504. Administrative removal of officers from list of officers
recommended for promotion.
Sec. 505. Eligibility of officers to serve on boards of inquiry for
separation of regular officers for substandard
performance and other reasons.
Sec. 506. Temporary authority to reduce minimum length of active
service as a commissioned officer required for voluntary
retirement as an officer.

Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

Sec. 511. Preseparation counseling for members of the reserve
components.
Sec. 512. Military correction board remedies for National Guard
members.
Sec. 513. Removal of statutory distribution limits on Navy reserve flag
officer allocation.
Sec. 514. Assignment of Air Force Reserve military technicians (dual
status) to positions outside Air Force Reserve unit
program.
Sec. 515. Temporary authority for temporary employment of non-dual
status military technicians.
Sec. 516. Revised structure and functions of Reserve Forces Policy
Board.
Sec. 517. Merit Systems Protection Board and judicial remedies for
National Guard technicians.

Subtitle C--Joint Qualified Officers and Requirements

Sec. 521. Technical revisions to definition of joint matters for
purposes of joint officer management.
Sec. 522. Changes to process involving promotion boards for joint
qualified officers and officers with joint staff
experience.

Subtitle D--General Service Authorities

Sec. 531. Extension of temporary authority to order retired members of
the Armed Forces to active duty in high-demand, low-
density assignments.
Sec. 532. Correction of military records.
Sec. 533. Modification of Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty (DD Form 214) to specifically identify a
space for inclusion of email address.
Sec. 534. Recognition of role of female members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense review of military occupational
specialties available to female members.

Subtitle E--Military Justice and Legal Matters

Sec. 541. Continuation of warrant officers on active duty to complete
disciplinary action.
Sec. 542. Enhanced authority to punish contempt in military justice
proceedings.
Sec. 543. Limitations on use in personnel action of information
contained in criminal investigative report or in index
maintained for law enforcement retrieval and analysis.
Sec. 544. Protection of child custody arrangements for parents who are
members of the Armed Forces deployed in support of a
contingency operation.
Sec. 545. Improvements to Department of Defense domestic violence
programs.
Sec. 546. Public release of restricted annex of Department of Defense
Report of the Independent Review Related to Fort Hood
pertaining to oversight of the alleged perpetrator of the
attack.

Subtitle F--Member Education and Training Opportunities and
Administration

Sec. 551. Repayment of education loan repayment benefits.
Sec. 552. Active duty obligation for graduates of the military service
academies participating in the Armed Forces Health
Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance program.
Sec. 553. Waiver of maximum age limitation on admission to service
academies for certain enlisted members who served during
Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom.
Sec. 554. Report of feasibility and cost of expanding enrollment
authority of Community College of the Air Force to
include additional members of the Armed Forces.

Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education

Sec. 561. Continuation of authority to assist local educational
agencies that benefit dependents of members of the Armed
Forces and Department of Defense civilian employees.
Sec. 562. Enrollment of dependents of members of the Armed Forces who
reside in temporary housing in Department of Defense
domestic dependent elementary and secondary schools.

Subtitle H--Decorations, Awards, and Commemorations

Sec. 571. Notification requirement for determination made in response
to review of proposal for award of a Medal of Honor not
previously submitted in timely fashion.
Sec. 572. Department of Defense recognition of spouses of members of
the Armed Forces.
Sec. 573. Department of Defense recognition of children of members of
the Armed Forces.
Sec. 574. Clarification of persons eligible for award of bronze star
medal.
Sec. 575. Award of Vietnam Service Medal to veterans who participated
in Mayaguez rescue operation.
Sec. 576. Authorization for award of Medal of Honor to certain members
of the Army for acts of valor during the Civil War,
Korean War, or Vietnam War.
Sec. 577. Authorization and request for award of Distinguished-Service
Cross to Jay C. Copley for acts of valor during the
Vietnam War.
Sec. 578. Program to commemorate 60th anniversary of the Korean War.

Subtitle I--Military Family Readiness Matters

Sec. 581. Appointment of additional member of Department of Defense
Military Family Readiness Council.
Sec. 582. Director of the Office of Community Support for Military
Families With Special Needs.
Sec. 583. Pilot program of personalized career development counseling
for military spouses.
Sec. 584. Modification of Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program.
Sec. 585. Importance of Office of Community Support for Military
Families with Special Needs.
Sec. 586. Comptroller General report on Department of Defense Office of
Community Support for Military Families with Special
Needs.
Sec. 587. Comptroller General report on Exceptional Family Member
Program.
Sec. 588. Comptroller General review of Department of Defense military
spouse employment programs.
Sec. 589. Report on Department of Defense military spouse education
programs.

Subtitle J--Other Matters

Sec. 591. Establishment of Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
units for students in grades above sixth grade.
Sec. 592. Increase in number of private sector civilians authorized for
admission to National Defense University.
Sec. 593. Admission of defense industry civilians to attend United
States Air Force Institute of Technology.
Sec. 594. Date for submission of annual report on Department of Defense
STARBASE Program.
Sec. 595. Extension of deadline for submission of final report of
Military Leadership Diversity Commission.
Sec. 596. Enhanced authority for members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense and Coast Guard civilian employees
and their families to accept gifts from non-Federal
entities.
Sec. 597. Report on performance and improvements of Transition
Assistance Program.
Sec. 598. Sense of Congress regarding assisting members of the Armed
Forces to participate in apprenticeship programs.

TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Sec. 601. Fiscal year 2011 increase in military basic pay.
Sec. 602. Basic allowance for housing for two-member couples when one
or both members are on sea duty.
Sec. 603. Allowances for purchase of required uniforms and equipment.
Sec. 604. Increase in amount of family separation allowance.
Sec. 605. One-time special compensation for transition of assistants
providing aid and attendance care to members of the
uniformed services with catastrophic injuries or
illnesses.
Sec. 606. Expansion of definition of senior enlisted member to include
senior enlisted member serving within a combatant
command.
Sec. 607. Ineligibility of certain Federal civilian employees for
Reservist income replacement payments on account of
availability of comparable benefits under another
program.

Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

Sec. 611. One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay
authorities for reserve forces.
Sec. 612. One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay
authorities for health care professionals.
Sec. 613. One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities for
nuclear officers.
Sec. 614. One-year extension of authorities relating to title 37
consolidated special pay, incentive pay, and bonus
authorities.

[[Page 9532]]

Sec. 615. One-year extension of authorities relating to payment of
other title 37 bonuses and special pays.
Sec. 616. One-year extension of authorities relating to payment of
referral bonuses.
Sec. 617. Treatment of officers transferring between Armed Forces for
receipt of aviation career special pay.
Sec. 618. Increase in maximum amount of special pay for duty subject to
hostile fire or imminent danger or for duty in foreign
area designated as an imminent danger area.
Sec. 619. Special payment to members of the Armed Forces and civilian
employees of the Department of Defense killed or wounded
in attacks directed at members or employees outside of
combat zone, including those killed or wounded in certain
2009 attacks.

Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

Sec. 631. Extension of authority to provide travel and transportation
allowances for inactive duty training outside of normal
commuting distances.
Sec. 632. Travel and transportation allowances for attendance of
designated persons at Yellow Ribbon Reintegration events.
Sec. 633. Mileage reimbursement for use of privately owned vehicles.

Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits

Sec. 641. Elimination of cap on retired pay multiplier for members with
greater than 30 years of service who retire for
disability.
Sec. 642. Equity in computation of disability retired pay for reserve
component members wounded in action.
Sec. 643. Elimination of the age requirement for health care benefits
for non-regular service retirees.
Sec. 644. Clarification of effect of ordering reserve component member
to active duty to receive authorized medical care on
reducing eligibility age for receipt of non-regular
service retired pay.
Sec. 645. Special survivor indemnity allowance for recipients of pre-
Survivor Benefit Plan annuity affected by required offset
for dependency and indemnity compensation.
Sec. 646. Payment date for retired and retainer pay.

Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality
Benefits and Operations

Sec. 651. Shared construction costs for shopping malls or similar
facilities containing a commissary store and one or more
nonappropriated fund instrumentality activities.
Sec. 652. Addition of definition of morale, welfare, and recreation
telephone services for use in contracts to provide such
services for military personnel serving in combat zones.
Sec. 653. Feasibility study on establishment of full exchange store in
the Northern Mariana Islands.

Subtitle F--Alternative Career Track Pilot Program

Sec. 661. Pilot program to evaluate alternative career track for
commissioned officers to facilitate an increased
commitment to academic and professional education and
career-broadening assignments.

Subtitle G--Other Matters

Sec. 671. Participation of members of the Armed Forces Health
Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance program
in active duty health profession loan repayment program.
Sec. 672. Retention of enlistment, reenlistment, and student loan
benefits received by military technicians (dual status).
Sec. 673. Cancellation of loans of members of the Armed Forces made
from student loan funds.

TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Improvements to Health Benefits

Sec. 701. Extension of prohibition on increases in certain health care
costs.
Sec. 702. Extension of dependent coverage under TRICARE.
Sec. 703. Survivor dental benefits.
Sec. 704. Aural screenings for members of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 705. Temporary prohibition on increase in copayments under retail
pharmacy system of pharmacy benefits program.

Subtitle B--Health Care Administration

Sec. 711. Administration of TRICARE.
Sec. 712. Updated terminology for the Army medical service corps.
Sec. 713. Clarification of licensure requirements applicable to
military health-care professionals who are members of the
national guard performing duty while in title 32 status.
Sec. 714. Annual report on joint health care facilities of the
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans
Affairs.
Sec. 715. Improvements to oversight of medical training for Medical
Corps officers.
Sec. 716. Study on reimbursement for costs of health care provided to
ineligible individuals.
Sec. 717. Limitation on transfer of funds to Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs medical facility
demonstration project.
Sec. 718. Enterprise risk assessment of health information technology
programs.

Subtitle C--Other Matters

Sec. 721. Improving aural protection for members of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 722. Comprehensive policy on neurocognitive assessment by the
military health care system.
Sec. 723. National Casualty Care Research Center.
Sec. 724. Report on feasibility of study on breast cancer among female
members of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 725. Assessment of post-traumatic stress disorder by military
occupation.
Sec. 726. Visiting NIH Senior Neuroscience Fellowship Program.

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS

Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

Sec. 801. Disclosure to litigation support contractors.
Sec. 802. Designation of F135 and F136 engine development and
procurement programs as major subprograms.
Sec. 803. Conforming amendments relating to inclusion of major
subprograms to major defense acquisition programs under
various acquisition-related requirements.
Sec. 804. Enhancement of Department of Defense authority to respond to
combat and safety emergencies through rapid acquisition
and deployment of urgently needed supplies.
Sec. 805. Prohibition on contracts with entities engaging in commercial
activity in the energy sector of Iran.

Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations

Sec. 811. Extension of authority to procure certain fibers; limitation
on specification.
Sec. 812. Small arms production industrial base matters.
Sec. 813. Additional definition relating to production of specialty
metals within the United States.

Subtitle C--Studies and Reports

Sec. 821. Studies to analyze alternative models for acquisition and
funding of technologies supporting network-centric
operations.
Sec. 822. Annual joint report and Comptroller General review on
contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Sec. 823. Extension of Comptroller General review and report on
contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Sec. 824. Interim report on review of impact of covered subsidies on
acquisition of KC-45 aircraft.
Sec. 825. Reports on Joint Capabilities Integration and Development
System.

Subtitle D--Other Matters

Sec. 831. Extension of authority for defense acquisition challenge
program.
Sec. 832. Energy savings performance contracts.
Sec. 833. Consideration of sustainable practices in procurement of
products and services.
Sec. 834. Definition of materials critical to national security.
Sec. 835. Determination of strategic or critical rare earth materials
for defense applications.
Sec. 836. Review of national security exception to competition.
Sec. 837. Inclusion of bribery in disclosure requirements of the
Federal awardee performance and integrity information
system.
Sec. 838. Requirement for entities with facility clearances that are
not under foreign ownership control or influence
mitigation.

TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management

Sec. 901. Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as the Department
of the Navy and Marine Corps.
Sec. 902. Realignment of the organizational structure of the Office of
the Secretary of Defense to carry out the reduction
required by law in the number of Deputy Under Secretaries
of Defense.
Sec. 903. Unified medical command.

Subtitle B--Space Activities

Sec. 911. Integrated space architectures.

Subtitle C--Intelligence-Related Matters

Sec. 921. 5-year extension of authority for Secretary of Defense to
engage in commercial activities as security for
intelligence collection activities.
Sec. 922. Space and counterspace intelligence analysis.

[[Page 9533]]

Subtitle D--Other Matters

Sec. 931. Revisions to the board of regents for the Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences.
Sec. 932. Increased flexibility for Combatant Commander Initiative
Fund.
Sec. 933. Two-year extension of authorities relating to temporary
waiver of reimbursement of costs of activities for
nongovernmental personnel at Department of Defense
Regional Centers for Security Studies.
Sec. 934. Additional requirements for quadrennial roles and missions
review in 2011.
Sec. 935. Codification of congressional notification requirement before
permanent relocation of any United States military unit
stationed outside the United States.

TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Financial Matters

Sec. 1001. General transfer authority.
Sec. 1002. Authorization of additional appropriations for operations in
Afghanistan, Iraq, and Haiti for fiscal year 2010.
Sec. 1003. Budgetary effects of this Act.

Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities

Sec. 1011. Unified counter-drug and counterterrorism campaign in
Colombia.
Sec. 1012. Joint task forces support to law enforcement agencies
conducting counterterrorism activities.
Sec. 1013. Reporting requirement on expenditures to support foreign
counter-drug activities.
Sec. 1014. Support for counter-drug activities of certain foreign
governments.

Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

Sec. 1021. Requirements for long-range plan for construction of naval
vessels.
Sec. 1022. Requirements for the decommissioning of naval vessels.
Sec. 1023. Requirements for the size of the Navy battle force fleet.
Sec. 1024. Retention and status of certain naval vessels.

Subtitle D--Counterterrorism

Sec. 1031. Extension of certain authority for making rewards for
combating terrorism.
Sec. 1032. Prohibition on the use of funds for the transfer or release
of individuals detained at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Sec. 1033. Certification requirements relating to the transfer of
individuals detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, to foreign countries and other foreign entities.
Sec. 1034. Prohibition on the use of funds to modify or construct
facilities in the United States to house detainees
transferred from United States Naval Station, Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba.
Sec. 1035. Comprehensive review of force protection policies.
Sec. 1036. Fort Hood Follow-on Review Implementation Fund.
Sec. 1037. Inspector General investigation of the conduct and practices
of lawyers representing individuals detained at Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Subtitle E--Studies and Reports

Sec. 1041. Department of Defense aerospace-related mishap safety
investigation reports.
Sec. 1042. Interagency national security knowledge and skills.
Sec. 1043. Report on establishing a Northeast Regional Joint Training
Center.
Sec. 1044. Comptroller General report on previously requested reports.
Sec. 1045. Report on nuclear triad.
Sec. 1046. Cybersecurity study and report.

Subtitle F--Other Matters

Sec. 1051. National Defense Panel.
Sec. 1052. Quadrennial defense review.
Sec. 1053. Sale of surplus military equipment to State and local
homeland security and emergency management agencies.
Sec. 1054. Department of Defense rapid innovation program.
Sec. 1055. Technical and clerical amendments.
Sec. 1056. Limitation on Air Force fiscal year 2011 force structure
announcement implementation.
Sec. 1057. Budgeting for the sustainment and modernization of nuclear
delivery systems.
Sec. 1058. Limitation on nuclear force reductions.
Sec. 1059. Sense of Congress on the Nuclear Posture Review.
Sec. 1060. Strategic assessment of strategic challenges posed by
potential competitors.
Sec. 1061. Electronic access to certain classified information.
Sec. 1062. Justice for victims of torture and terrorism.
Sec. 1063. Policy regarding appropriate use of Department of Defense
resources.
Sec. 1064. Executive agent for preventing the introduction of
counterfeit microelectronics into the defense supply
chain.

TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

Sec. 1101. Authority for the Department of Defense to approve an
alternate method of processing equal employment
opportunity complaints within one or more component
organizations under specified circumstances.
Sec. 1102. Clarification of authorities at personnel demonstration
laboratories.
Sec. 1103. Special rule relating to certain overtime pay.
Sec. 1104. One-year extension of authority to waive annual limitation
on premium pay and aggregate limitation on pay for
Federal civilian employees working overseas.
Sec. 1105. Waiver of certain pay limitations.
Sec. 1106. Services of post-combat case coordinators.
Sec. 1107. Authority to waive maximum age limit for certain
appointments.
Sec. 1108. Sense of Congress regarding waiver of recovery of certain
payments made under civilian employees voluntary
separation incentive program.
Sec. 1109. Suspension of DCIPS pay authority extended for a year.

TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS

Subtitle A--Assistance and Training

Sec. 1201. Expansion of authority for support of special operations to
combat terrorism.
Sec. 1202. Addition of allied government agencies to enhanced logistics
interoperability authority.
Sec. 1203. Modification and extension of authorities relating to
program to build the capacity of foreign military forces.
Sec. 1204. Air Force scholarships for Partnership for Peace nations to
participate in the Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training
Program.

Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan

Sec. 1211. Limitation on availability of funds for certain purposes
relating to Iraq.
Sec. 1212. Commanders' Emergency Response Program.
Sec. 1213. Modification of authority for reimbursement to certain
coalition nations for support provided to United States
military operations.
Sec. 1214. Modification of report on responsible redeployment of United
States Armed Forces from Iraq.
Sec. 1215. Modification of reports relating to Afghanistan.
Sec. 1216. No permanent military bases in Afghanistan.
Sec. 1217. Authority to use funds for reintegration activities in
Afghanistan.
Sec. 1218. One-year extension of Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund.
Sec. 1219. Authority to use funds to provide support to coalition
forces supporting military and stability operations in
Iraq and Afghanistan.
Sec. 1220. Requirement to provide United States brigade and equivalent
units deployed to Afghanistan with the commensurate level
of unit and theater-wide combat enablers.

Subtitle C--Other Matters

Sec. 1231. NATO Special Operations Coordination Center.
Sec. 1232. National Military Strategic Plan to Counter Iran.
Sec. 1233. Report on Department of Defense's plans to reform the export
control system.
Sec. 1234. Report on United States efforts to defend against threats
posed by the advanced anti-access capabilities of
potentially hostile foreign countries.
Sec. 1235. Report on force structure changes in composition and
capabilities at military installations in Europe.
Sec. 1236. Sense of Congress on missile defense and New Start Treaty
with Russian Federation.

TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION

Sec. 1301. Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and
funds.
Sec. 1302. Funding allocations.

TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

Subtitle A--Military Programs

Sec. 1401. Working capital funds.
Sec. 1402. Study on working capital fund cash balances.
Sec. 1403. Modification of certain working capital fund requirements.
Sec. 1404. Reduction of unobligated balances within the Pentagon
Reservation Maintenance Revolving Fund.
Sec. 1405. National Defense Sealift Fund.
Sec. 1406. Chemical agents and munitions destruction, defense.
Sec. 1407. Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide.
Sec. 1408. Defense Inspector General.
Sec. 1409. Defense Health Program.

Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile

Sec. 1411. Authorized uses of National Defense Stockpile funds.
Sec. 1412. Revision to required receipt objectives for previously
authorized disposals from the National Defense Stockpile.

[[Page 9534]]

Subtitle C--Other Matters

Sec. 1421. Authorization of appropriations for Armed Forces Retirement
Home.
Sec. 1422. Plan for funding fuel infrastructure sustainment,
restoration, and modernization requirements.

TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS
CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

Sec. 1501. Purpose.
Sec. 1502. Army procurement.
Sec. 1503. Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund.
Sec. 1504. Navy and Marine Corps procurement.
Sec. 1505. Air Force procurement.
Sec. 1506. Defense-wide activities procurement.
Sec. 1507. Iron Dome short-range rocket defense program.
Sec. 1508. National Guard and Reserve equipment.
Sec. 1509. Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund.
Sec. 1510. Research, development, test, and evaluation.
Sec. 1511. Operation and maintenance.
Sec. 1512. Limitations on availability of funds in Afghanistan Security
Forces Fund.
Sec. 1513. Limitations on Iraq Security Forces Fund.
Sec. 1514. Military personnel.
Sec. 1515. Working capital funds.
Sec. 1516. Defense Health Program.
Sec. 1517. Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide.
Sec. 1518. Defense Inspector General.
Sec. 1519. Continuation of prohibition on use of United States funds
for certain facilities projects in Iraq.
Sec. 1520. Availability of funds for rapid force protection in
Afghanistan.
Sec. 1521. Treatment as additional authorizations.
Sec. 1522. Special transfer authority.

TITLE XVI--IMPROVED SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE IN THE ARMED
FORCES

Sec. 1601. Definition of Department of Defense sexual assault
prevention and response program and other definitions.

Subtitle A--Immediate Actions to Improve Department of Defense Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response Program

Sec. 1611. Specific budgeting for Department of Defense sexual assault
prevention and response program.
Sec. 1612. Consistency in terminology, position descriptions, program
standards, and organizational structures.
Sec. 1613. Guidance for commanders.
Sec. 1614. Commander consultation with victims of sexual assault.
Sec. 1615. Oversight and evaluation.
Sec. 1616. Sexual assault reporting hotline.
Sec. 1617. Review of application of sexual assault prevention and
response program to reserve components.
Sec. 1618. Review of effectiveness of revised Uniform Code of Military
Justice offenses regarding rape, sexual assault, and
other sexual misconduct.
Sec. 1619. Training and education programs for sexual assault
prevention and response program.
Sec. 1620. Use of sexual assault forensic medical examiners.
Sec. 1621. Sexual Assault Advisory Board.
Sec. 1622. Department of Defense Sexual Assault Advisory Council.
Sec. 1623. Service-level sexual assault review boards.
Sec. 1624. Renewed emphasis on acquisition of centralized Department of
Defense sexual assault database.

Subtitle B--Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy and Annual Reporting
Requirement

Sec. 1631. Comprehensive Department of Defense sexual assault
prevention strategy.
Sec. 1632. Annual report on sexual assaults involving members of the
Armed Forces and sexual assault prevention and response
program.

Subtitle C--Amendments to Title 10

Sec. 1641. Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office.
Sec. 1642. Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault
Victim Advocates.
Sec. 1643. Sexual assault victims access to legal counsel and Victim
Advocate services.
Sec. 1644. Notification of command of outcome of court-martial
involving charges of sexual assault.
Sec. 1645. Copy of record of court-martial to victim of sexual assault
involving a member of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 1646. Medical care for victims of sexual assault.
Sec. 1647. Privilege against disclosure of certain communications with
Sexual Assault Victim Advocates.

Subtitle D--Other Matters

Sec. 1661. Recruiter selection and oversight.
Sec. 1662. Availability of services under sexual assault prevention and
response program for dependents of members, military
retirees, Department of Defense civilian employees, and
defense contractor employees.
Sec. 1663. Application of sexual assault prevention and response
program in training environments.
Sec. 1664. Application of sexual assault prevention and response
program in remote environments and joint basing
situations.

DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

Sec. 2001. Short title.
Sec. 2002. Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be
specified by law.
Sec. 2003. Effective date.
Sec. 2004. General reduction across division.

TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Sec. 2101. Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects
and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2102. Family housing.
Sec. 2103. Use of unobligated Army military construction funds in
conjunction with funds provided by the Commonwealth of
Virginia to carry out certain fiscal year 2002 project.
Sec. 2104. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year
2009 project.
Sec. 2105. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year
2010 project.
Sec. 2106. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2008
projects.

TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Sec. 2201. Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects
and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2202. Family housing.
Sec. 2203. Technical amendment to reflect multi-increment fiscal year
2010 project.
Sec. 2204. Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2008
project.

TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Sec. 2301. Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2302. Family housing.
Sec. 2303. Extension of authorization of certain fiscal year 2007
project.

TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations

Sec. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land
acquisition projects and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2402. Family housing.
Sec. 2403. Energy conservation projects.

Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations

Sec. 2411. Authorization of appropriations, chemical demilitarization
construction, defense-wide.
Sec. 2412. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year
2000 project.

TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM

Sec. 2501. Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects.
Sec. 2502. Authorization of appropriations, NATO.

TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

Sec. 2601. Authorized Army National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2602. Authorized Army Reserve construction and land acquisition
projects and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2603. Authorized Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
construction and land acquisition projects and
authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2604. Authorized Air National Guard construction and land
acquisition projects and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2605. Authorized Air Force Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2606. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2008
projects.

TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES

Subtitle A--Authorizations

Sec. 2701. Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and
closure activities funded through Department of Defense
Base Closure Account 1990.
Sec. 2702. Authorized base realignment and closure activities funded
through Department of Defense Base Closure Account 2005.
Sec. 2703. Authorization of appropriations for base realignment and
closure activities funded through Department of Defense
Base Closure Account 2005.

Subtitle B--Other Matters

Sec. 2711. Transportation plan for BRAC 133 project under Fort Belvoir,
Virginia, BRAC initiative.

[[Page 9535]]

TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing
Changes

Sec. 2801. Availability of military construction information on
Internet.
Sec. 2802. Authority to transfer proceeds from sale of military family
housing to Department of Defense Family Housing
Improvement Fund.
Sec. 2803. Enhanced authority for provision of excess contributions for
NATO Security Investment program.
Sec. 2804. Duration of authority to use Pentagon Reservation
Maintenance Revolving Fund for construction and repairs
at Pentagon Reservation.
Sec. 2805. Authority to use operation and maintenance funds for
construction projects inside the United States Central
Command area of responsibility.
Sec. 2806. Veterans to Work pilot program for military construction
projects.

Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

Sec. 2811. Notice-and-wait requirements applicable to real property
transactions.
Sec. 2812. Treatment of proceeds generated from leases of non-excess
property involving military museums.
Sec. 2813. Repeal of expired authority to lease land for special
operations activities.
Sec. 2814. Former Naval Bombardment Area, Culebra Island, Puerto Rico.

Subtitle C--Provisions Related to Guam Realignment

Sec. 2821. Sense of Congress regarding importance of providing
community adjustment assistance to Government of Guam.
Sec. 2822. Department of Defense assistance for community adjustments
related to realignment of military installations and
relocation of military personnel on Guam.
Sec. 2823. Extension of term of Deputy Secretary of Defense's
leadership of Guam Oversight Council.
Sec. 2824. Utility conveyances to support integrated water and
wastewater treatment system on Guam.
Sec. 2825. Report on types of facilities required to support Guam
realignment.
Sec. 2826. Report on civilian infrastructure needs for Guam.
Sec. 2827. Comptroller General report on planned replacement Naval
Hospital on Guam.

Subtitle D--Energy Security

Sec. 2831. Consideration of environmentally sustainable practices in
Department energy performance plan.
Sec. 2832. Plan and implementation guidelines for achieving Department
of Defense goal regarding use of renewable energy to meet
facility energy needs.
Sec. 2833. Insulation retrofitting assessment for Department of Defense
facilities.

Subtitle E--Land Conveyances

Sec. 2841. Conveyance of personal property related to waste-to-energy
power plant serving Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska.
Sec. 2842. Land conveyance, Whittier Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricant Tank
Farm, Whittier, Alaska.
Sec. 2843. Land conveyance, Fort Knox, Kentucky.
Sec. 2844. Land conveyance, Naval Support Activity (West Bank), New
Orleans, Louisiana.
Sec. 2845. Land conveyance, former Navy Extremely Low Frequency
communications project site, Republic, Michigan.
Sec. 2846. Land conveyance, Marine Forces Reserve Center, Wilmington,
North Carolina.

Subtitle F--Other Matters

Sec. 2851. Requirements related to providing world class military
medical facilities.
Sec. 2852. Naming of Armed Forces Reserve Center, Middletown,
Connecticut.

TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Subtitle A--Fiscal Year 2010 Projects

Sec. 2901. Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects
and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2902. Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects and authorization of appropriations.

Subtitle B--Fiscal Year 2011 Projects

Sec. 2911. Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects
and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2912. Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects and authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 2913. Authorized Defense Wide Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects and Authorization of Appropriations.
Sec. 2914. Construction authorization for National Security Agency
facilities in a foreign country.

Subtitle C--Other Matters

Sec. 2921. Notification of obligation of funds and quarterly reports.

DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations

Sec. 3101. National Nuclear Security Administration.
Sec. 3102. Defense environmental cleanup.
Sec. 3103. Other defense activities.
Sec. 3104. Energy security and assurance.

Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 3111. Extension of authority relating to the International
Materials Protection, Control, and Accounting Program of
the Department of Energy.
Sec. 3112. Energy parks initiative.
Sec. 3113. Establishment of technology transfer centers.
Sec. 3114. Aircraft procurement.

Subtitle C--Reports

Sec. 3121. Comptroller General report on NNSA biennial complex
modernization strategy.
Sec. 3122. Report on graded security protection policy.

TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Sec. 3201. Authorization.

TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

Sec. 3401. Authorization of appropriations.

TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 3501. Authorization of appropriations for national security
aspects of the merchant marine for fiscal year 2011.
Sec. 3502. Extension of Maritime Security Fleet program.
Sec. 3503. United States Merchant Marine Academy nominations of
residents of the Northern Mariana Islands.
Sec. 3504. Administrative expenses for Port of Guam Improvement
Enterprise Program.
Sec. 3505. Vessel loan guarantees: procedures for traditional and
nontraditional applications.

SEC. 3. CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES.

For purposes of this Act, the term ``congressional defense
committees'' has the meaning given that term in section
101(a)(16) of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 4. TREATMENT OF SUCCESSOR CONTINGENCY OPERATION TO
OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM.

Any law or regulation applicable to Operation Iraqi Freedom
shall apply in the same manner and to the same extent to the
successor contingency operation known as Operation New Dawn,
except as specifically provided in this Act, any amendment
made by this Act, or any other law enacted after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

SEC. 101. ARMY.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for procurement for the Army as follows:
(1) For aircraft, $5,986,361,000.
(2) For missiles, $1,631,463,000.
(3) For weapons and tracked combat vehicles,
$1,616,245,000.
(4) For ammunition, $1,946,948,000.
(5) For other procurement, $9,398,728,000.

SEC. 102. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.

(a) Navy.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal year 2011 for procurement for the Navy as follows:
(1) For aircraft, $19,132,613,000.
(2) For weapons, including missiles and torpedoes,
$3,350,894,000.
(3) For shipbuilding and conversion, $15,724,520,000.
(4) For other procurement, $6,450,208,000.
(b) Marine Corps.--Funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2011 for procurement for the
Marine Corps in the amount of $1,379,044,000.
(c) Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011 for
procurement of ammunition for the Navy and the Marine Corps
in the amount of $817,991,000.

SEC. 103. AIR FORCE.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for procurement for the Air Force as follows:
(1) For aircraft, $15,355,908,000.
(2) For ammunition, $672,420,000.
(3) For missiles, $5,470,772,000.
(4) For other procurement, $17,911,730,000.

SEC. 104. DEFENSE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for Defense-wide procurement in the amount of
$4,399,768,000.

Subtitle B--Army Programs

SEC. 111. PROCUREMENT OF EARLY INFANTRY BRIGADE COMBAT TEAM
INCREMENT ONE EQUIPMENT.

(a) Limitation on Production Quantities.--Except as
provided in subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense may not
procure more than

[[Page 9536]]

two brigade sets of early-infantry brigade combat team
increment one equipment (in this section referred to as a
``brigade set'').
(b) Applicability to Long-lead Production Items.--The
limitation in subsection (a) includes procurement of a long-
lead item for an element of a brigade set beyond the two
brigade sets authorized under such subsection.
(c) Waiver.--The Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics may waive the
limitation in subsection (a) if--
(1) the Under Secretary submits to Congress written
certification that--
(A) the initial operational test and evaluation of the
brigade set has been completed;
(B) the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation has
submitted to Congress a report describing the results of the
initial operational test and evaluation (as described in
section 2399(b) of title 10, United States Code) and the
comparative test of the brigade set;
(C) all of the subsystems tested in the initial operational
test and evaluation were tested in the intended production
configuration; and
(D) all radios planned for fielding with the brigade set
have received the appropriate National Security Agency
approvals, as determined by the Under Secretary; and
(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which
the certification under paragraph (1) is received.
(d) Exception for Meeting Operational Need Statement
Requirements.--The limitation in subsection (a) does not
apply to the procurement of individual components of the
brigade set if the procurement of such components is
specifically intended to address an operational need
statement requirement (as described in Army Regulation 71-9
or a successor regulation).

SEC. 112. REPORT ON ARMY BATTLEFIELD NETWORK PLANS AND
PROGRAMS.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the
Secretary of the Army shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on plans for fielding tactical
communications network equipment. Such report shall include--
(1) an explanation of the current communications
architecture of every level of the Army;
(2) an explanation of the future communications
architecture of every level of the Army;
(3) the quantities and types of new equipment that the
Secretary plans to procure in the five-year period following
the date on which the report is submitted in order to develop
the architecture described in paragraph (2); and
(4) a list of the equipment described in paragraph (3) that
is included in the budget of the President for fiscal year
2012 (as submitted to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code).
(b) Limitation on Obligation of Funds.--Except as provided
in subsection (c), of the funds authorized to be appropriated
by this or any other Act for fiscal year 2011 for
procurement, Army, for tactical radios or tactical
communications network equipment, not more than 50 percent
may be obligated or expended until the date that is 15 days
after the date on which the report is submitted under
subsection (a).
(c) Exception for Meeting Operational Need Statement
Requirements.--The limitation in subsection (b) does not
apply to the procurement of tactical radio or tactical
communications network equipment if the procurement of such
equipment is specifically intended to address an operational
need statement requirement (as described in Army Regulation
71-9 or a successor regulation).
(d) Tactical Communications Network Equipment Defined.--In
this section, the term ``tactical communications network
equipment'' means all electronic communications systems
operated by a tactical unit (of brigade size or smaller) of
the Army.

Subtitle C--Navy Programs

SEC. 121. INCREMENTAL FUNDING FOR PROCUREMENT OF LARGE NAVAL
VESSELS.

(a) Incremental Funding of Large Naval Vessels.--Except as
provided in subsection (b), the Secretary of the Navy may use
incremental funding for the procurement of a large naval
vessel over a period not to exceed the number of years equal
to three-fourths of the total period of planned ship
construction of such vessel.
(b) LPD 26.--With respect to the vessel designated LPD 26,
the Secretary may use incremental funding for the procurement
of such vessel through fiscal year 2012 if the Secretary
determines that such incremental funding--
(1) is in the best interest of the overall shipbuilding
efforts of the Navy;
(2) is needed to provide the Secretary with the ability to
facilitate changes to the shipbuilding industrial base of the
Navy; and
(3) will provide the Secretary with the ability to award a
contract for construction of the vessel that provides the
best value to the United States.
(c) Condition for Out-year Contract Payments.--A contract
entered into under subsection (a) or (b) shall provide that
any obligation of the United States to make a payment under
the contract for a fiscal year after the fiscal year the
vessel was authorized is subject to the availability of
appropriations for that purpose for that later fiscal year.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``large naval vessel'' means a vessel--
(A) that is--
(i) an aircraft carrier designated a CVN;
(ii) an amphibious assault ship designated LPD, LHA, LHD,
or LSD; or
(iii) an auxiliary vessel; and
(B) that has a light ship displacement of 17,000 tons or
more.
(2) The term ``total period of planned ship construction''
means the period of years beginning on the date of the first
authorization of funding (not including funding requested for
advance procurement) and ending on the date that is projected
on the date of the first authorization of funding to be the
delivery date of the vessel to the Navy.

SEC. 122. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT OF F/A-18E, F/A-18F, AND EA-
18G AIRCRAFT.

(a) Multiyear Procurement.--
(1) Additional authority.--Section 128 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law
111-84; 123 Stat. 2217) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsections:
``(e) Updated Report.--With respect to a multiyear contract
entered into under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense
may submit to the congressional defense committees an update
to the report under section 2306b(l)(4) of title 10, United
States Code, by not later than September 1, 2010.
``(f) Required Authority.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, with respect to a multiyear contract
entered into under subsection (a), this section shall be
deemed to meet the requirements under subsection (i)(3) and
(l)(3) of section 2306b of title 10, United States Code.
``(g) Exception to Certain Requirement.--Section 8008(b) of
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public
Law 105-56; 10 U.S.C. 2306b note) shall not apply to a
multiyear contract entered into under subsection (a).
``(h) Use of Funds.--
``(1) Procurement.--In accordance with paragraph (2), the
Secretary of Defense shall ensure that all funds authorized
to be appropriated for the advance procurement or procurement
of F/A-18E, F/A-18F, or EA-18G aircraft under this section
are obligated or expended for such purpose.
``(2) Use of excess funds.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that any excess funds are obligated or expended for
the advance procurement or procurement of F/A-18E or F/A-18F
aircraft under this section, regardless of whether such
aircraft are in addition to the 515 F/A-18E and F/A-18F
aircraft planned by the Secretary of the Navy.
``(3) Excess funds defined.--In this subsection, the term
`excess funds', with respect to funds available for the
advance procurement or procurement of F/A-18E, F/A-18F, or
EA-18G aircraft under this section, means the amount of funds
that is equal to the difference of--
``(A) the sum of--
``(i) the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
or otherwise available for fiscal year 2010 for the advance
procurement and procurement of F/A-18E, F/A-18F, or EA-18G
aircraft; and
``(ii) the funding levels for the advance procurement and
procurement of such aircraft for fiscal years 2011 through
2013 proposed by the Secretary of Defense in the future-years
defense program for fiscal year 2011 submitted under section
221 of title 10, United States Code; and
``(B) the funds required to execute the multiyear contracts
for the advance procurement and procurement of such aircraft
under this section.''.
(2) Extension of certification.--Paragraph (2) of
subsection (a) of such section is amended by striking ``a
reference to March'' and inserting ``a reference to
September''.
(b) Full Funding Certification.--Paragraph (1) of section
8011 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010
(Public Law 111-118; 10 U.S.C. 2306b note) is amended by
inserting after ``within 30 days of enactment of this Act''
the following: ``(or in the case of a multiyear contract for
the procurement of F/A-18E, F/A-18F, or EA-18G aircraft, by
the date that is not less than 30 days prior to the contract
award)''.

SEC. 123. REPORT ON NAVAL FORCE STRUCTURE AND MISSILE
DEFENSE.

(a) Report.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the Secretary of
the Navy, in coordination with the Chief of Naval Operations,
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the requirements of the major combatant surface vessels
with respect to missile defense.
(b) Matters Included.--The report shall include the
following:
(1) An analysis of whether the requirement for sea-based
missile defense can be accommodated by upgrading Aegis ships
that exist as of the date of the report or by procuring
additional combatant surface vessels.
(2) Whether such sea-based missile defense will require
increasing the overall number of combatant surface vessels
beyond the requirement of 88 cruisers and destroyers in the
313-ship fleet plan of the Navy.
(3) The number of Aegis ships needed by each combatant
commander to fulfill ballistic missile defense requirements,
including (in consultation with the Chairman of the Joints
Chiefs of Staff) the number of such ships needed to support
the phased, adaptive approach to ballistic missile defense in
Europe.
(4) A discussion of the potential effect of ballistic
missile defense operations on the ability of the Navy to meet
surface fleet demands in each geographic area and for each
mission set.
(5) An evaluation of how the Aegis ballistic missile
defense program can succeed as part of a balanced fleet of
adequate size and strength to meet the security needs of the
United States.
(6) A description of both the shortfalls and the benefits
of expected technological advancements in the sea-based
missile defense program.

[[Page 9537]]

(7) A description of the anticipated plan for deployment of
Aegis ballistic missile ships within the context of the fleet
response plan.

Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

SEC. 131. PRESERVATION AND STORAGE OF UNIQUE TOOLING FOR F-22
FIGHTER AIRCRAFT.

Subsection (b) of section 133 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat.2219) is amended by striking ``2010'' and inserting
``2011''.

Subtitle E--Joint and Multiservice Matters

SEC. 141. LIMITATION ON PROCUREMENT OF F-35 LIGHTNING II
AIRCRAFT.

(a) Limitation.--Except as provided in subsection (c), of
the amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act or
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2011 for aircraft
procurement, Air Force, and aircraft procurement, Navy, for
F-35 Lightning II aircraft, not more than an amount necessary
for the procurement of 30 such aircraft may be obligated or
expended unless--
(1) the certifications under subsection (b) are received by
the congressional defense committees on or before January 15,
2011; and
(2) a period of 15 days has elapsed after the date of such
receipt.
(b) Certifications.--Not later than January 15, 2011--
(1) the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics shall certify in writing to the
congressional defense committees that--
(A) each of the 11 scheduled system development and
demonstration aircraft planned in the schedule for delivery
during 2010 has been delivered to the designated test
location;
(B) the initial service release has been granted for the
F135 engine designated for the short take-off and vertical
landing variant;
(C) facility configuration and industrial tooling
capability and capacity is sufficient to support production
of at least 42 F-35 aircraft for fiscal year 2011;
(D) block 1.0 software has been released and is in flight
test;
(E) the Secretary of Defense has--
(i) determined that two F-35 aircraft from low-rate initial
production 1 have met established criteria for acceptance;
and
(ii) accepted such aircraft for delivery; and
(F) advance procurement funds appropriated for the advance
procurement of F136 engines for fiscal years 2009 and 2010
have either been obligated or the Secretary of Defense has
submitted a reprogramming action to the congressional defense
committees that would reprogram such funds to meet other F136
development requirements; and
(2) the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall
certify in writing to the congressional defense committees
that--
(A) the F-35C aircraft designated as CF-1 has effectively
accomplished its first flight;
(B) the 394 F-35 aircraft test flights planned in the
schedule to occur during 2010 have been completed with
sufficient results;
(C) 95 percent of the 3,772 flight test points planned for
completion in 2010 were accomplished;
(D) the conventional take-off and land variant low
observable signature flight test has been conducted and the
results of such test have met or exceeded threshold key
performance parameters;
(E) six F136 engines have been made available for testing;
and
(F) not less than 1,000 test hours have been completed in
the F136 system development and demonstration program.
(c) Waiver.--After January 15, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense may waive the limitation in subsection (a) if each of
the following occurs:
(1) The written certification described in subsection
(b)(1) is submitted by the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics not later than January
15, 2011.
(2) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics certifies in writing to the
congressional defense committees that the failure to fully
achieve the milestones described in subsection (b)(2) will
not--
(A) delay or otherwise negatively affect the F-35 aircraft
test schedule for fiscal year 2011;
(B) impede production of 42 F-35 aircraft in such fiscal
year; and
(C) otherwise increase risk to the F-35 aircraft program.
(3) A period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which
the certification under paragraph (2) is submitted to the
congressional defense committees.
(d) Schedule Defined.--In this section, the term
``schedule'' means the F-35 Lightning II program update
schedule received by the congressional defense committees on
March 15, 2010.

SEC. 142. LIMITATIONS ON BIOMETRIC SYSTEMS FUNDS.

(a) General Limitation.--Of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2011 for biometrics programs and operations, not
more than 85 percent may be obligated or expended until--
(1) the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional
defense committees a report on the actions taken--
(A) to implement subparagraphs (A) through (F) of paragraph
(16) of the National Security Presidential Directive dated
June 5, 2008 (NSPD-59);
(B) to implement the recommendations of the Comptroller
General of the United States included in the report of the
Comptroller General numbered GAO-08-1065 dated September,
2008;
(C) to implement the recommendations of the Comptroller
General included in the report of the Comptroller General
numbered GAO-09-49 dated October, 2008;
(D) to fully and completely characterize the current
biometrics architecture and establish the objective
architecture for the Department of Defense;
(E) to ensure that an official of the Office of the
Secretary of Defense has the authority necessary to be
responsible for ensuring that all funding for biometrics
programs and operations is programmed, budgeted, and
executed; and
(F) to ensure that an officer within the Office of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff has the authority necessary to be
responsible for ensuring the development and implementation
of common and interoperable standards for the collection,
storage, and use of biometrics data by all combatant
commanders and their commands; and
(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which
the report is submitted under paragraph (1).
(b) Specific Limitation.--None of the funds authorized to
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2011 for biometrics programs and operations may
be obligated or expended unless the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (acting
through the Director of Defense Biometrics) approves such
obligation or expenditure in writing.

SEC. 143. COUNTER-IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE INITIATIVES
DATABASE.

(a) Comprehensive Database.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense, acting through
the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat
Organization, shall develop and maintain a comprehensive
database containing appropriate information for coordinating,
tracking, and archiving each counter-improvised explosive
device initiative within the Department of Defense. The
database shall, at a minimum, ensure the visibility of each
counter-improvised explosive device initiative.
(2) Use of information.--Using information contained in the
database developed under paragraph (1), the Secretary, acting
through the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device
Defeat Organization, shall--
(A) identify and eliminate redundant counter-improvised
explosive device initiatives;
(B) facilitate the transition of counter-improvised
explosive device initiatives from funding under the Joint
Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund to funding provided
by the military departments; and
(C) notify the appropriate personnel and organizations
prior to a counter-improvised explosive device initiative
being funded through the Joint Improvised Explosive Device
Defeat Fund.
(3) Coordination.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall ensure that the Secretary of each military
department coordinates and collaborates on development of the
database to ensure its interoperability, completeness,
consistency, and effectiveness.
(b) Metrics.--The Secretary of Defense, acting through the
Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat
Organization, shall--
(1) develop appropriate means to measure the effectiveness
of counter-improvised explosive device initiatives; and
(2) prioritize the funding of such initiatives according to
such means.
(c) Elimination of Prior Notice Requirement.--Subsection
(c) of section 1514 of the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364;
120 Stat. 2439), as amended by the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 122 Stat. 4649), is further amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (4); and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4).
(d) Counter-improvised Explosive Device Initiative
Defined.--In this section, the term ``counter-improvised
explosive device initiative'' means any project, program, or
research activity funded by any component of the Department
of Defense that is intended to assist or support efforts to
counter, combat, or defeat the use of improvised explosive
devices.

SEC. 144. STUDY ON LIGHTWEIGHT BODY ARMOR SOLUTIONS.

(a) Study Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall enter
into a contract with a federally funded research and
development center to conduct a study to--
(1) assess the effectiveness of the processes used by the
Secretary to identify and examine the requirements for
lighter weight body armor systems; and
(2) determine ways in which the Secretary may more
effectively address the research, development, and
procurement requirements regarding reducing the weight of
body armor.
(b) Matters Covered.--The study conducted under subsection
(a) shall include findings and recommendations regarding the
following:
(1) The requirement for lighter weight body armor and
personal protective equipment and the ability of the
Secretary to meet such requirement.
(2) Innovative design ideas for more modular body armor
that allow for scalable protection levels for various
missions and threats.
(3) The need for research, development, and acquisition
funding dedicated specifically for reducing the weight of
body armor.
(4) The efficiency and effectiveness of current body armor
funding procedures and processes.
(5) Industry concerns, capabilities, and willingness to
invest in the development and production of lightweight body
armor initiatives.

[[Page 9538]]

(6) Barriers preventing the development of lighter weight
body armor (including such barriers with respect to
technical, institutional, or financial problems).
(7) Changes to procedures or policy with respect to
lightweight body armor.
(8) Other areas of concern not previously addressed by
equipping boards, body armor producers, or program managers.
(c) Submission to Congress.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on
the study conducted under subsection (a).

TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the use of the Department of Defense for
research, development, test, and evaluation as follows:
(1) For the Army, $10,316,754,000.
(2) For the Navy, $17,978,646,000.
(3) For the Air Force, $27,269,902,000.
(4) For Defense-wide activities, $20,908,006,000, of which
$194,910,000 is authorized for the Director of Operational
Test and Evaluation.

Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

SEC. 211. REPORT REQUIREMENTS FOR REPLACEMENT PROGRAM OF THE
OHIO-CLASS BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINE.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The sea-based strategic deterrence provided by the
ballistic missile submarine force of the Navy has been
essential to the national security of the United States since
the deployment of the first ballistic missile submarine, the
USS George Washington SSBN 598, in 1960.
(2) Since 1960, a total of 59 submarines have served the
United States to provide the sea-based strategic deterrence.
(3) As of the date of the enactment of this Act, the sea-
based strategic deterrence is provided by the tremendous
capability of the 14 ships of the Ohio-class submarine force,
which have been the primary sea-based deterrent force for
more than two decades.
(4) Ballistic missile submarines are the most survivable
asset in the arsenal of the United States in the event of a
surprise nuclear attack on the country because, being
submerged for months at a time, these submarines are
virtually undetectable to any adversary and therefore
invulnerable to attack, thus providing the submarines with
the ability to respond with significant force against any
adversary who attacks the United States or its allies.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) as Ohio-class submarines reach the end of their service
life and are retired, the United States must maintain the
robust sea-based strategic deterrent force that has the
ability to remain undetected by potential adversaries and
must have the capability to deliver a retaliatory strike of
such magnitude that no rational actor would dare attack the
United States;
(2) the Secretary of Defense should conduct a comprehensive
analysis of the alternative capabilities to provide the sea-
based strategic deterrence that includes consideration of
different types and sizes of submarines, different types and
sizes of missile systems, the number of submarines necessary
to provide such deterrence, and the cost of each alternative;
and
(3) prior to requesting more than $1,000,000,000 in
research and development funding to develop a replacement for
the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine force in advance
of a Milestone A decision, the Secretary of Defense should
have made available to Congress the guidance issued by the
Director of Cost Assessment and Performance Evaluation with
respect to the analysis of alternative capabilities and the
results of such analysis.
(c) Limitation.--
(1) Report.--Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by
this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2011 for
research and development for the Navy, not more than 50
percent may be obligated or expended to research or develop a
submarine as a replacement for the Ohio-class ballistic
missile submarine force unless--
(A) the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional
defense committees a report including--
(i) guidance issued by the Director of Cost Assessment and
Performance Evaluation with respect to the analysis of
alternative capabilities to provide the sea-based strategic
deterrence currently provided by the Ohio-class ballistic
missile submarine force and any other guidance relating to
requirements for such alternatives intended to affect the
analysis;
(ii) an analysis of the alternative capabilities considered
by the Secretary to continue the sea-based strategic
deterrence currently provided by the Ohio-class ballistic
missile submarine force, including--

(I) the cost estimates for each alternative capability;
(II) the operational challenges and benefits associated
with each alternative capability; and
(III) the time needed to develop and deploy each
alternative capability; and

(iii) detailed reasoning associated with the decision to
replace the capability of sea-based deterrence provided by
the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine force with an
alternative capability designed to carry the Trident II D5
missile; and
(B) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which
the report under subparagraph (A) is submitted.
(2) Form.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified
annex.

SEC. 212. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF FUNDS FOR F-35
LIGHTNING II AIRCRAFT PROGRAM.

Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act or
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2011 for research,
development, test, and evaluation for the F-35 Lightning II
aircraft program, not more than 75 percent may be obligated
until the date that is 15 days after the date on which the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics submits to the congressional defense committees
certification in writing that all funds made available for
fiscal year 2011 for the continued development and
procurement of a competitive propulsion system for the F-35
Lightning II aircraft have been obligated.

SEC. 213. INCLUSION IN ANNUAL BUDGET REQUEST AND FUTURE-YEARS
DEFENSE PROGRAM OF SUFFICIENT AMOUNTS FOR
CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT AND PROCUREMENT OF
COMPETITIVE PROPULSION SYSTEM FOR F-35
LIGHTNING II AIRCRAFT.

(a) Annual Budget.--Chapter 9 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 236. Budgeting for competitive propulsion system for
F-35 Lightning II aircraft

``(a) Annual Budget.--Effective for the budget for fiscal
year 2012 and each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary of
Defense shall include in the defense budget materials a
request for such amounts as are necessary for the full
funding of the continued development and procurement of a
competitive propulsion system for the F-35 Lightning II
aircraft.
``(b) Future-years Defense Program.--In each future-years
defense program submitted to Congress under section 221 of
this title, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the
estimated expenditures and proposed appropriations for the F-
35 Lightning II aircraft, for each fiscal year of the period
covered by that program, include sufficient amounts for the
full funding of the continued development and procurement of
a competitive propulsion system for the F-35 Lightning II
aircraft.
``(c) Requirement to Obligate and Expend Funds.--Of the
amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011 or
any fiscal year thereafter, for research, development, test,
and evaluation and procurement for the F-35 Lightning II
aircraft program, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure the
obligation and expenditure in each such fiscal year of
sufficient annual amounts for the continued development and
procurement of two options for the propulsion system for the
F-35 Lightning II aircraft in order to ensure the development
and competitive production for the propulsion system for such
aircraft.
``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `budget', with respect to a fiscal year,
means the budget for that fiscal year that is submitted to
Congress by the President under section 1105(a) of title 31.
``(2) The term `defense budget materials', with respect to
a fiscal year, means the materials submitted to Congress by
the Secretary of Defense in support of the budget for that
fiscal year.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by at the end the
following new item:

``236. Budgeting for competitive propulsion system for F-35 Lightning
II aircraft.''.

(c) Conforming Repeal.--Section 213 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181)
is repealed.

SEC. 214. SEPARATE PROGRAM ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT OF JOINT LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE.

In the budget materials submitted to the President by the
Secretary of Defense in connection with the submission to
Congress, pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States
Code, of the budget for fiscal year 2012, and each subsequent
fiscal year, the Secretary shall ensure that within each
research, development, test, and evaluation account of the
Army and the Navy a separate, dedicated program element is
assigned to the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle.

Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs

SEC. 221. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR MISSILE
DEFENSES IN EUROPE.

(a) Limitation on Construction and Deployment of Systems.--
No funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or
otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2011 or any fiscal year thereafter may be
obligated or expended for site activation, construction,
preparation of equipment for, or deployment of a medium-range
or long-range missile defense system in Europe until--
(1) any nation agreeing to host such system has signed and
ratified a missile defense basing agreement and a status of
forces agreement; and
(2) a period of 45 days has elapsed following the date on
which the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional
defense committees the report on the independent assessment
of alternative missile defense systems in Europe required by
section 235(c)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2235).
(b) Limitation on Procurement or Deployment of
Interceptors.--No funds authorized to be appropriated by this
Act or otherwise made

[[Page 9539]]

available for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011
or any fiscal year thereafter may be obligated or expended
for the procurement (other than initial long-lead
procurement) or deployment of operational missiles of a
medium-range or long-range missile defense system in Europe
until the Secretary of Defense, after receiving the views of
the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, submits to
the congressional defense committees a report certifying that
the proposed interceptor to be deployed as part of such
missile defense system has demonstrated, through successful,
operationally realistic flight testing, a high probability of
working in an operationally effective manner and that such
missile defense system has the ability to accomplish the
mission.
(c) Conforming Repeal.--Section 234 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-81;
123 Stat. 2234) is repealed.

SEC. 222. REPEAL OF PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN CONTRACTS BY
MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY WITH FOREIGN ENTITIES.

Section 222 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (Public Law 100-180; 101 Stat.
1055; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note) is repealed.

SEC. 223. PHASED, ADAPTIVE APPROACH TO MISSILE DEFENSE IN
EUROPE.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the new phased, adaptive approach to missile defense in
Europe, announced by the President on September 17, 2009,
should be supported by sound analysis, program plans,
schedules, and technologies that are credible;
(2) the cost, performance, and risk of such approach to
missile defense should be well understood; and
(3) Congress should have access to information regarding
the analyses, plans, schedules, technologies, cost,
performance, and risk of such approach to missile defense in
order to conduct effective oversight.
(b) Report Required.--
(1) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the phased,
adaptive approach to missile defense in Europe.
(2) Matters included.--The report under paragraph (1) shall
include the following:
(A) A discussion of the analyses conducted by the Secretary
of Defense preceding the announcement of the phased, adaptive
Approach to missile defense in Europe on September 17, 2009,
including--
(i) a description of any alternatives considered;
(ii) the criteria used to analyze each such alternative;
and
(iii) the result of each analysis, including a description
of the criteria used to judge each alternative.
(B) A discussion of any independent assessments or reviews
of alternative approaches to missile defense in Europe
considered by the Secretary in support of the announcement of
the phased, adaptive approach to missile defense in Europe on
September 17, 2009.
(C) A description of the architecture for each of the four
phases of the phased, adaptive approach to missile defense in
Europe, including--
(i) the composition, basing locations, and quantities of
ballistic missile defense assets, including ships, batteries,
interceptors, radars and other sensors, and command and
control nodes;
(ii) program schedules and site-specific schedules with
task activities, test plans, and knowledge and decision
points;
(iii) technology maturity levels of missile defense assets
and plans for retiring technical risks;
(iv) planned performance of missile defense assets and
defended area coverage, including sensitivity analysis to
various basing scenarios and varying threat capabilities
(including simple and complex threats, liquid and solid-
fueled ballistic missiles, and varying raid sizes);
(v) operational concepts and how such operational concepts
effect force structure and inventory requirements;
(vi) total cost estimates and funding profiles, by year,
for acquisition, fielding, and operations and support; and
(vii) acquisition strategies.
(3) GAO.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
assessing the report under paragraph (1) pursuant to section
232(g) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note).
(c) Limitation on Funds.--Of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated by section 301(5) for operation and maintenance,
Defense-wide, for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, not
more than 95 percent of such amounts may be obligated or
expended until the date on which the report required under
subsection (b)(1) is submitted to the congressional defense
committees.

SEC. 224. HOMELAND DEFENSE HEDGING POLICY.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) As noted by the Director of National Intelligence,
testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
on February 2, 2010, ``the Iranian regime continues to flout
UN Security Council restrictions on its nuclear program. .
.we judge Iran would likely choose missile delivery as its
preferred method of delivering a nuclear weapon. Iran already
has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle
East and it continues to expand the scale, reach, and
sophistication of its ballistic missile forces--many of which
are inherently capable of carrying a nuclear payload.''.
(2) The Unclassified Report on Military Power of Iran,
dated April 2010, states that, ``with sufficient foreign
assistance, Iran could probably develop and test an
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching
the United States by 2015. Iran could also have an
intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) capable of
threatening Europe.''.
(3) Under phase 3 of the phased, adaptive approach for
missile defense in Europe (scheduled for 2018), the United
States plans to deploy the standard missile-3 block IIA
interceptor at sea- and land-based sites in addition to
existing missile defense systems to provide coverage for all
NATO allies in Europe against medium- and intermediate-range
ballistic missiles.
(4) Under phase 4 of the phased, adaptive approach for
missile defense in Europe (scheduled for 2020), the United
States plans to deploy the standard missile-3 block IIB
interceptor to provide additional coverage of the United
States against a potential intercontinental ballistic missile
launched from the Middle East in the 2020 time frame.
(5) According to the February 2010 Ballistic Missile
Defense Review, the United States will continue the
development and assessment of a two-stage ground-based
interceptor as part of a hedging strategy and, as further
noted by the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy during
testimony before the Committee on Armed Services of the House
of Representatives on October 1, 2009, ``we keep the
development of the two-stage [ground-based interceptor] on
the books as a hedge in case things come earlier, in case
there's any kind of technological challenge with the later
models of the [standard missile-3].''.
(b) Policy.--It shall be the policy of the United States
to--
(1) field missile defense systems in Europe that--
(A) provide protection against medium- and intermediate-
range ballistic missile threats consistent with NATO policy
and the phased, adapted approach for missile defense
announced on September 17, 2009; and
(B) have been confirmed to perform the assigned mission
after successful, operationally realistic testing;
(2) field missile defenses to protect the territory of the
United States pursuant to the National Missile Defense Act of
1999 (Public Law 106-38; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note) and to test
those systems in an operationally realistic manner;
(3) ensure that the standard missile-3 block IIA
interceptor planned for phase 3 of the phased, adaptive
approach for missile defense is capable of addressing
intermediate-range ballistic missiles launched from the
Middle East and the standard missile-3 block IIB interceptor
planned for phase 4 of such approach is capable of addressing
intercontinental ballistic missiles launched from the Middle
East; and
(4) continue the development and testing of the two-stage
ground-based interceptor to maintain it--
(A) as a means of protection in the event that--
(i) the intermediate-range ballistic missile threat to NATO
allies in Europe materializes before the availability of the
standard missile-3 block IIA interceptor;
(ii) the intercontinental ballistic missile threat to the
United States that cannot be countered with the existing
ground-based missile defense system materializes before the
availability of the standard missile-3 block IIB interceptor;
or
(iii) technical challenges or schedule delays affect the
standard missile-3 block IIA interceptor or the standard
missile-3 block IIB interceptor; and
(B) as a complement to the missile defense capabilities
deployed in Alaska and California for the defense of the
United States.

SEC. 225. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF THE PLAN FOR DEFENSE OF
THE HOMELAND AGAINST THE THREAT OF BALLISTIC
MISSILES.

(a) Finding.--Congress finds that section 2 of the National
Missile Defense Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-38; 10 U.S.C.
2431 note) states that it is the policy of the United States
to deploy as soon as is technologically possible an effective
National Missile Defense system capable of defending the
territory of the United States against limited ballistic
missile attack (whether accidental, unauthorized, or
deliberate) with funding subject to the annual authorization
of appropriations and the annual appropriation of funds for
National Missile Defense.
(b) Assessment.--The Secretary of Defense shall contract
with an independent entity to conduct an assessment of the
plans of the Secretary for defending the territory of the
United States against the threat of attack by ballistic
missiles, including electromagnetic pulse attacks, as such
plans are described in the Ballistic Missile Defense Review
submitted to Congress on February 1, 2010, and the report
submitted to Congress under section 232 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law
111-84; 123 Stat. 2232).
(c) Elements.--The assessment required by subsection (b)
shall include an assessment of the following:
(1) The ballistic missile threat, including electromagnetic
pulse attacks, against which the homeland defense elements
are intended to defend, including mobile or fixed threats
that might arise from non-state actors and accidental or
unauthorized launches.
(2) The military requirements for defending the territory
of the United States against such missile threats.
(3) The capabilities of the missile defense elements
available to defend the territory of the United States as of
the date of the assessment.

[[Page 9540]]

(4) The planned capabilities of the homeland defense
elements, if different from the capabilities under paragraph
(3).
(5) The force structure and inventory levels necessary to
achieve the planned capabilities of the elements described in
paragraph (3) and (4).
(6) The infrastructure necessary to achieve such
capabilities, including the number and location of
operational silos.
(7) The number of interceptor missiles necessary for
operational assets, test assets (including developmental and
operational test assets and aging and surveillance test
assets), and spare missiles.
(d) Report.--
(1) In general.--At or about the same time the budget of
the President for fiscal year 2012 is submitted to Congress
pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the
Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report setting forth the results of the
assessment required by subsection (b).
(2) Form.--The report shall be in unclassified form, but
may include a classified annex.

SEC. 226. STUDY ON BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE CAPABILITIES OF
THE UNITED STATES.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall conduct a
joint capabilities mix study on the ballistic missile defense
capabilities of the United States.
(b) Elements.--The study under paragraph (1) shall include,
at a minimum, the following:
(1) An assessment of the missile defense capability, force
structure, and inventory sufficiency requirements of the
combatant commanders based on the threat assessments and
operational plans for each combatant command.
(2) A discussion of the infrastructure necessary to achieve
the ballistic missile defense capabilities, force structure,
and inventory assessed under paragraph (1).
(3) An analysis of mobile and fixed missile defense assets.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--At or about the same time the budget of
the President for fiscal year 2012 is submitted to Congress
pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the
Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report setting forth the results of the study
under subsection (a).
(2) Form.--The report shall be in unclassified form, but
may include a classified annex.

SEC. 227. REPORTS ON STANDARD MISSILE SYSTEM.

(a) Reports.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and each 180-day period thereafter,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the standard missile system,
particularly with respect to standard missile-3 block IIA and
standard missile-3 block IIB.
(b) Matters Included.--The reports under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) A detailed discussion of the modernization,
capabilities, and limitations of the standard missile.
(2) A review of the standard missile's comparison
capability against all expected threats.
(3) A report on the progress of complimentary systems,
including, at a minimum, radar systems, delivery systems, and
recapitalization of supporting software and hardware.
(4) Any industrial capacities that must be maintained to
ensure adequate manufacturing of standard missile technology
and production ratio.

Subtitle D--Reports

SEC. 231. REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES AND PROGRAM
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE GROUND COMBAT VEHICLE
PROGRAM.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than January 15, 2011, the
Secretary of the Army shall provide to the congressional
defense committees a report on the Ground Combat Vehicle
program of the Army. Such report shall include--
(1) the results of the analysis of alternatives conducted
prior to milestone A, including any technical data; and
(2) an explanation of any plans to adjust the requirements
of the Ground Combat Vehicle program during the technology
development phase of such program.
(b) Form.--The report required by subsection (a) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified
annex.
(c) Limitation on Obligation of Funds.--Of the funds
authorized to be appropriated by this or any other Act for
fiscal year 2011 for research, development, test, and
evaluation, Army, for development of the Ground Combat
Vehicle, not more than 50 percent may be obligated or
expended until the date that is 30 days after the date on
which the report is submitted under subsection (a).

SEC. 232. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF FUTURE TANK-FIRED
MUNITIONS.

(a) Cost Benefit Analysis Required.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Army shall conduct a
cost benefit analysis of future munitions to be fired from
the M1 Abrams series main battle tank to determine the proper
investment to be made in tank munitions, including beyond
line of sight technology.
(2) Elements.--The cost benefit analysis under paragraph
(1) shall include--
(A) the predicted operational performance of future tank-
fired munitions, including those incorporating beyond line of
sight technology, based on the relevant modeling and
simulation of future combat scenarios of the Army, including
a detailed analysis on the suitability of each munition to
address the full spectrum of targets across the entire range
of the tank (including close range, mid-range, long-range,
and beyond line of sight);
(B) a detailed assessment of the projected costs to develop
and field each tank-fired munition included in the analysis,
including those incorporating beyond line of sight
technology; and
(C) a comparative analysis of each tank-fired munition
included in the analysis, including suitability to address
known capability gaps and overmatch against known and
projected threats.
(3) Munitions included.--In conducting the cost benefit
analysis under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include, at
a minimum, the Mid-Range Munition, the Advanced Kinetic
Energy round, and the Advanced Multipurpose Program.
(b) Report.--Not later than March 15, 2011, the Secretary
shall submit to the congressional defense committees the cost
benefit analysis under subsection (a).

SEC. 233. ANNUAL COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON THE VH-(XX)
PRESIDENTIAL HELICOPTER ACQUISITION PROGRAM.

(a) Annual GAO Review.--During the period beginning on the
date of the enactment of this Act and ending on March 1,
2018, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
conduct an annual review of the VH-(XX) aircraft acquisition
program.
(b) Annual Reports.--
(1) In general.--Not later than March 1 of each year
beginning in 2011 and ending in 2018, the Comptroller General
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the review of the VH-(XX) aircraft acquisition program
conducted under subsection (a).
(2) Matters to be included.--Each report on the review of
the VH-(XX) aircraft acquisition program shall include the
following:
(A) The extent to which the program is meeting development
and procurement cost, schedule, performance, and risk
mitigation goals.
(B) With respect to meeting the desired initial operational
capability and full operational capability dates for the VH-
(XX) aircraft, the progress and results of--
(i) developmental and operational testing of the aircraft;
and
(ii) plans for correcting deficiencies in aircraft
performance, operational effectiveness, reliability,
suitability, and safety.
(C) An assessment of VH-(XX) aircraft procurement plans,
production results, and efforts to improve manufacturing
efficiency and supplier performance.
(D) An assessment of the acquisition strategy of the VH-
(XX) aircraft, including whether such strategy is in
compliance with acquisition management best-practices and the
acquisition policy and regulations of the Department of
Defense.
(E) A risk assessment of the integrated master schedule and
the test and evaluation master plan of the VH-(XX) aircraft
as it relates to--
(i) the probability of success;
(ii) the funding required for such aircraft compared with
the funding programmed; and
(iii) development and production concurrency.
(3) Additional information.--In submitting to the
congressional defense committees the first report under
paragraph (1) and a report following any changes made by the
Secretary of the Navy to the baseline documentation of the
VH-(XX) aircraft acquisition program, the Comptroller General
shall include, with respect to such program, an assessment of
the sufficiency and objectivity of--
(A) the analysis of alternatives;
(B) the initial capabilities document;
(C) the capabilities development document; and
(D) the systems requirement document.

SEC. 234. JOINT ASSESSMENT OF THE JOINT EFFECTS TARGETING
SYSTEM.

(a) Review.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics shall form a joint assessment team to review the
joint effects targeting system.
(b) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date on which
the review under subsection (a) is completed, the Under
Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on the review.

Subtitle E--Other Matters

SEC. 241. ESCALATION OF FORCE CAPABILITIES.

(a) Non-lethal Demonstration Program.--The Secretary of
Defense, acting through the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation and in consultation with the Executive Agent for
Non-lethal Weapons, shall carry out a program to
operationally test and evaluate non-lethal weapons that
provide counter-personnel escalation of force options to
members of the Armed Forces deploying in support of a
contingency operation.
(b) Technology Tested.--Technologies evaluated under
subsection (a) shall include crowd control, area denial,
space clearing, and personnel incapacitation tools.
(c) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report that--
(1) evaluates operational and situational suitability for
each non-lethal weapon tested;
(2) defines the tactics, techniques, and procedures
approved for deployment of each non-lethal weapon by service;
(3) identifies deployment schemes for each type of non-
lethal weapon by service; and
(4) details, by service, the number of units receiving pre-
deployment training on each non-lethal weapon and the total
number of units trained.
(d) Procurement Line Item.--In the budget materials
submitted to the President by the Secretary of Defense in
connection with submission

[[Page 9541]]

to Congress, pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United
States Code, of the budget for fiscal year 2012, and each
subsequent fiscal year, the Secretary shall ensure that
within each military department procurement account, a
separate, dedicated procurement line item is designated for
non-lethal weapons.

SEC. 242. PILOT PROGRAM TO INCLUDE TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION
FEATURES DURING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF
DEFENSE SYSTEMS.

(a) Pilot Program.--The Secretary of Defense shall carry
out a pilot program to develop and incorporate technology
protection features in a designated system during the
research and development phase of such system.
(b) Funding.--Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated
by this Act for research, development, test, and evaluation,
Defense-wide, not more than $5,000,000 may be available to
carry out this section.
(c) Annual Reports.--Not later than December 31 of each
year in which the Secretary carries out the pilot program,
the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on the pilot program established under
this section, including a list of each designated system
included in the program.
(d) Termination.--The pilot program established under this
section shall terminate on October 1, 2015.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``designated system'' means any system
(including a major system, as defined in section 2302(5) of
title 10, United States Code) that the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics designates
as being included in the pilot program established under this
section.
(2) The term ``technology protection features'' means the
technical modifications necessary to protect critical program
information, including anti-tamper technologies and other
systems engineering activities intended to prevent or delay
exploitation of critical technologies in a designated system.

SEC. 243. PILOT PROGRAM ON COLLABORATIVE ENERGY SECURITY.

(a) Pilot Program.--The Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Secretary of Energy, shall carry out a
collaborative energy security pilot program involving one or
more partnerships between one military installation and one
national laboratory, for the purpose of evaluating and
validating secure, salable microgrid components and systems
for deployment.
(b) Selection of Military Installation and National
Laboratory.--The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
Energy shall jointly select a military installation and a
national laboratory for the purpose of carrying out the pilot
program under this section. In making such selections, the
Secretaries shall consider each of the following:
(1) A commitment to participate made by a military
installation being considered for selection.
(2) The findings and recommendations of relevant energy
security assessments of military installations being
considered for selection.
(3) The availability of renewable energy sources at a
military installation being considered for selection.
(4) Potential synergies between the expertise and
capabilities of a national laboratory being considered for
selection and the infrastructure, interests, or other energy
security needs of a military installation being considered
for selection.
(5) The effects of any utility tariffs, surcharges, or
other considerations on the feasibility of enabling any
excess electricity generated on a military installation being
considered for selection to be sold or otherwise made
available to the local community near the installation.
(c) Program Elements.--The pilot program shall be carried
out as follows:
(1) Under the pilot program, the Secretaries shall evaluate
and validate the performance of new energy technologies that
may be incorporated into operating environments.
(2) The pilot program shall involve collaboration with the
Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability of the
Department of Energy and other offices and agencies within
the Department of Energy, as appropriate, and the
Environmental Security Technical Certification Program of the
Department of Defense.
(3) Under the pilot program, the Secretary of Defense shall
investigate opportunities for any excess electricity created
for the military installation to be sold or otherwise made
available to the local community near the installation.
(4) The Secretary of Defense shall use the results of the
pilot program as the basis for informing key performance
parameters and validating energy components and designs that
could be implemented in various military installations across
the country and at forward operating bases.
(5) The pilot program shall support the effort of the
Secretary of Defense to use the military as a test bed to
demonstrate innovative energy technologies.
(d) Implementation and Duration.--The Secretary of Defense
shall begin the pilot program under this section by not later
than July 1, 2011. Such pilot program shall be not less than
three years in duration.
(e) Reports.--
(1) Initial report.--Not later than October 1, 2011, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees an initial report that provides an
update on the implementation of the pilot program under this
section, including an identification of the selected military
installation and national laboratory partner and a
description of technologies under evaluation.
(2) Final report.--Not later than 90 days after completion
of the pilot program under this section, the Secretary shall
submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report
on the pilot program, including any findings and
recommendations of the Secretary.
(f) Funding.--
(1) Department of defense.--Of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by section 201 for fiscal year 2011 for
research, development, test, and evaluation, Defense-wide,
$5,000,000 is available to carry out this section.
(2) Department of energy.--Upon determination by the
Secretary of Energy that the program under this section is
relevant and consistent with the mission of the Department of
Energy to lead the modernization of the electric grid,
enhance the security and reliability of the energy
infrastructure, and facilitate recovery from disruptions to
energy supply, the Secretary may transfer funds made
available for the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability of the Department of Energy in order to carry out
this section.
(g) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Energy and Commerce, and the Committee on Science and
Technology of the House of Representatives; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources, and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
(2) The term ``microgrid'' means an integrated energy
system consisting of interconnected loads and distributed
energy resources (including generators, energy storage
devices, and smart controls) that can operate with the
utility grid or in an intentional islanding mode.
(3) The term ``national laboratory'' means--
(A) a national laboratory (as defined in section 2 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801)); or
(B) a national security laboratory (as defined in section
3281 of the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50
U.S.C. 2471)).

TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

SEC. 301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the use of the Armed Forces and other
activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for
expenses, not otherwise provided for, for operation and
maintenance, in amounts as follows:
(1) For the Army, $34,232,221,000.
(2) For the Navy, $37,976,443,000.
(3) For the Marine Corps, $5,568,340,000.
(4) For the Air Force, $36,684,588,000.
(5) For Defense-wide activities, $30,200,596,000.
(6) For the Army Reserve, $2,942,077,000.
(7) For the Naval Reserve, $1,374,764,000.
(8) For the Marine Corps Reserve, $287,234,000.
(9) For the Air Force Reserve, $3,311,827,000.
(10) For the Army National Guard, $6,628,525,000.
(11) For the Air National Guard, $5,980,139,000.
(12) For the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed
Forces, $14,068,000.
(13) For the Acquisition Development Workforce Fund,
$229,561,000.
(14) For Environmental Restoration, Army, $444,581,000.
(15) For Environmental Restoration, Navy, $304,867,000.
(16) For Environmental Restoration, Air Force,
$502,653,000.
(17) For Environmental Restoration, Defense-wide,
$10,744,000.
(18) For Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense
Sites, $296,546,000.
(19) For Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid
programs, $108,032,000.
(20) For Cooperative Threat Reduction programs,
$522,512,000.

Subtitle B--Energy and Environmental Provisions

SEC. 311. REIMBURSEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FOR CERTAIN COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE TWIN
CITIES ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT, MINNESOTA.

(a) Authority to Reimburse.--
(1) Transfer amount.--Using funds described in subsection
(b) and notwithstanding section 2215 of title 10, United
States Code, the Secretary of Defense may transfer to the
Hazardous Substance Superfund not more than $5,611,670.67 for
fiscal year 2011.
(2) Purpose of reimbursement.--A payment made under
paragraph (1) is to reimburse the Environmental Protection
Agency for all costs the Agency has incurred through fiscal
year 2011 relating to the response actions performed by the
Department of Defense under the Defense Environmental
Restoration Program at the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant,
Minnesota.
(3) Interagency agreement.--The reimbursement described in
paragraph (2) is provided for in an interagency agreement
entered into by the Department of the Army and the
Environmental Protection Agency for the Twin Cities Army
Ammunition Plant that took effect in December 1987.
(b) Source of Funds.--A payment under subsection (a) shall
be made using funds authorized

[[Page 9542]]

to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011 to the Department of
Defense for operation and maintenance for Environmental
Restoration, Army.
(c) Use of Funds.--The Environmental Protection Agency
shall use the amounts transferred under subsection (a) to pay
costs incurred by the Agency at the Twin Cities Army
Ammunition Plant.

SEC. 312. PAYMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OF
STIPULATED PENALTIES IN CONNECTION WITH NAVAL
AIR STATION, BRUNSWICK, MAINE.

(a) Authority to Transfer Funds.--From amounts authorized
to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011 for the Department of
Defense Base Closure Account 2005, and notwithstanding
section 2215 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary
of Defense may transfer an amount of not more than $153,000
to the Hazardous Substance Superfund established under
subchapter A of chapter 98 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986.
(b) Purpose of Transfer.--The purpose of a transfer made
under subsection (a) is to satisfy a stipulated penalty
assessed by the Environmental Protection Agency on June 12,
2008, against Naval Air Station, Brunswick, Maine, for the
failure of the Navy to sample certain monitoring wells in a
timely manner pursuant to a schedule included in the Federal
facility agreement for Naval Air Station, Brunswick, which
was entered into by the Secretary of the Navy and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency on
October 19, 1990.
(c) Acceptance of Payment.--If the Secretary of Defense
makes a transfer authorized under subsection (a), the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall
accept the amount transferred as payment in full of the
penalty referred to in subsection (b).

SEC. 313. TESTING AND CERTIFICATION PLAN FOR OPERATIONAL USE
OF AN AVIATION BIOFUEL DERIVED FROM MATERIALS
THAT DO NOT COMPETE WITH FOOD STOCKS.

Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
testing and certification plan for the operational use of a
biofuel that--
(1) is derived from materials that do not compete with food
stocks; and
(2) is suitable for use for military purposes as an
aviation fuel or in an aviation-fuel blend.

SEC. 314. REPORT IDENTIFYING HYBRID OR ELECTRIC PROPULSION
SYSTEMS AND OTHER FUEL-SAVING TECHNOLOGIES FOR
INCORPORATION INTO TACTICAL MOTOR VEHICLES.

(a) Identification of Usable Alternative Technology.--Not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of each military department shall submit
to Congress a report identifying hybrid or electric
propulsion systems and other vehicle technologies that reduce
consumption of fossil fuels and are suitable for
incorporation into the current fleet of tactical motor
vehicles of each Armed Force under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary. In identifying suitable alternative technologies,
the Secretary shall consider the feasibility and cost of
incorporating the technology, the design changes and amount
of time required for incorporation, and the overall impact of
incorporation on vehicle performance.
(b) Hybrid Defined.--In this section, the term ``hybrid''
refers to a propulsion system, including the engine and drive
train, that draws energy from onboard sources of stored
energy that involve--
(1) an internal combustion or heat engine using combustible
fuel; and
(2) a rechargeable energy storage system.

Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues

SEC. 321. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO REQUIREMENT FOR SERVICE
CONTRACT INVENTORY.

Section 2330a(c)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting
after the first sentence the following new sentence: ``The
guidance for compiling the inventory shall be issued by the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, as
supported by the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics.''; and
(2) by striking subparagraph (E) and inserting the
following new subparagraph (E):
``(E) The number and work location of contractor employees,
expressed as full-time equivalents for direct labor, using
direct labor hours and associated cost data collected from
contractors.''.

SEC. 322. REPEAL OF CONDITIONS ON EXPANSION OF FUNCTIONS
PERFORMED UNDER PRIME VENDOR CONTRACTS FOR
DEPOT-LEVEL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.

Section 346 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261;
112 Stat. 1979; 10 U.S.C. 2464 note) is repealed.

SEC. 323. PILOT PROGRAM ON BEST VALUE FOR CONTRACTS FOR
PRIVATE SECURITY FUNCTIONS.

(a) Pilot Program Authorized.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall establish a pilot program under which the
Secretary shall implement a best value procurement standard
in entering into contracts for the provision of private
security functions in Afghanistan and Iraq. In entering into
a covered contract under the pilot program, in addition to
taking into consideration the cost of the contract, the
Secretary shall take into consideration each of the
following:
(1) Past performance.
(2) Quality.
(3) Delivery.
(4) Management expertise.
(5) Technical approach.
(6) Experience of key personnel.
(7) Management structure.
(8) Risk.
(9) Such other matters as the Secretary determines are
appropriate.
(b) Justification.--A covered contract under the pilot
program may not be awarded unless the contracting officer for
the contract justifies in writing the reason for the award of
the contract.
(c) Annual Report.--Not later than January 15 of each year
the pilot program under this section is carried out, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees an unclassified report containing each of
the following:
(1) A list of any covered contract awarded for private
security functions in Afghanistan and Iraq under the pilot
program.
(2) A description of the matters that the Secretary of
Defense took into consideration, in addition to cost, in
awarding each such contract.
(3) Any additional information or recommendations the
Secretary considers appropriate to include with respect to
the pilot program, the contracts awarded under the pilot
program, or the considerations for evaluating such contracts.
(d) Termination of Program.--The authority of the Secretary
of Defense to carry out a pilot program under this section
terminates on September 30, 2013. The termination of the
authority shall not affect the validity of contracts that are
awarded or modified during the period of the pilot program,
without regard to whether the contracts are performed during
the period.
(e) Discretionary Implementation After September 30,
2013.--After September 30, 2013, implementation of a best
value procurement standard in entering into contracts for the
provision of private security functions in Afghanistan and
Iraq shall be at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense.
(f) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``best value'' means providing the best
overall benefit to the Government in accordance with the
tradeoff process described in section 15.101-1 of title 48 of
the Code of Federal Regulations.
(2) The term ``covered contract'' means--
(A) a contract of the Department of Defense for the
performance of services; or
(B) a task order or delivery order issued under such a
contract.
(3) The term ``private security functions'' means guarding,
by a contractor under a covered contract, of personnel,
facilities, or property of a Federal agency, the contractor,
a subcontractor of a contractor, or a third party.

SEC. 324. STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATION FOR PRIVATE SECURITY
CONTRACTORS.

(a) Third-party Certification Policy Guidance.--Not later
than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of Defense shall issue policy guidance
requiring, as a condition for award of a covered contract for
the provision of private security functions, that each
contractor receive certification from a third party that the
contractor adheres to specified operational and business
practice standards. The guidance shall--
(1) establish criteria for defining standard practices for
the performance of private security functions, which shall
reflect input from industry representatives as well as the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense;
(2) establish criteria for weapons training programs for
contractors performing private security functions, including
minimum requirements for weapons training programs of
instruction and minimum qualifications for instructors for
such programs; and
(3) identify organizations that can carry out the
certifications.
(b) Regulations Required.--Not later than 270 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall revise the Department of Defense supplement to
the Federal Acquisition Regulation to carry out the
requirements of this section and the guidance issued under
this section.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``covered contract'' means--
(A) a contract of the Department of Defense for the
performance of services;
(B) a subcontract at any tier under such contract;
(C) a task order or delivery order issued under such a
contract or subcontract.
(2) The term ``contractor'' means, with respect to a
covered contract, the contractor or subcontractor carrying
out the covered contract.
(3) The term ``private security functions'' means
activities engaged in by a contractor under a covered
contract as follows:
(A) Guarding of personnel, facilities, or property of a
Federal agency, the contractor or subcontractor, or a third
party.
(B) Any other activity for which personnel are required to
carry weapons in the performance of their duties.
(d) Exception.--The requirements of this section shall not
apply to contracts entered into by elements of the
intelligence community in support of intelligence activities.

[[Page 9543]]

SEC. 325. PROHIBITION ON ESTABLISHING GOALS OR QUOTAS FOR
CONVERSION OF FUNCTIONS TO PERFORMANCE BY
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.

(a) Prohibition.--The Secretary of Defense may not
establish, apply, or enforce any numerical goal, target, or
quota for the conversion of Department of Defense function to
performance by Department of Defense civilian employees,
unless such goal, target, or quota is based on considered
research and analysis, as required by section 235, 2330a, or
2463 of title 10, United States Code.
(b) Decisions To Insource.--In deciding which functions
should be converted to performance by Department of Defense
civilian employees pursuant to section 2463 of title 10,
United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall use the
costing methodology outlined in the Directive-Type Memorandum
09-007 (Estimating and Comparing the Full Costs of Civilian
and Military Manpower and Contractor Support) or any
successor guidance for the determination of costs when costs
are the sole basis for the decision. The Secretary of a
military department may issue supplemental guidance to assist
in such decisions affecting functions of that military
department.
(c) Reports.--
(1) Report to congress.--Not later than December 31, 2010,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the decisions with respect to
the conversion of functions to performance by Department of
Defense civilian employees made during fiscal year 2010. Such
report shall identify, for each such decision--
(A) the agency or service of the Department involved in the
decision;
(B) the basis and rationale for the decision; and
(C) the number of contractor employees whose functions were
converted to performance by Department of Defense civilian
employees.
(2) Comptroller general review.--Not later than 120 days
after the submittal of the report under paragraph (1), the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the
congressional defense committees an assessment of the report.

Subtitle D--Reports

SEC. 331. REVISION TO REPORTING REQUIREMENT RELATING TO
OPERATION AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR MILITARY
MUSEUMS.

(a) Change in Frequency of Report.--Subsection (a) of
section 489 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``As part of'' and all that follows through ``fiscal
year--'' and inserting the following: ``As part of the budget
materials submitted to Congress for every odd-numbered fiscal
year, in connection with the submission of the budget for
that fiscal year pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on
military museums. In each such report, the Secretary shall
identify all military museums that, during the most recently
completed two fiscal-year period--''
(b) Repeal of Required Report Element.--Subsection (b) of
such section is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (5); and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (5).
(c) Clerical Amendments.--
(1) Section heading.--The heading of such section is
amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 489. Department of Defense operation and financial
support for military museums: biennial report''.

(2) Table of sections.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 23 of such title is amended by striking
the item relating to section 489 and inserting the following
new item:

``489. Department of Defense operation and financial support for
military museums: biennial report.''.

SEC. 332. ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO
CORROSION PREVENTION PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES.

Section 2228(e) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``The'' and inserting
``For the fiscal year covered by the report and the preceding
fiscal year, the''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) For the fiscal year covered by the report and the
preceding fiscal year, the amount of funds requested in the
budget for each project or activity described in subparagraph
(E) compared to the funding requirements for the project or
activity.'';
(2) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting before the period at
the end the following: ``, including the annex to the report
described in paragraph (3)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Each report under this section shall include, in an
annex to the report, a copy of the annual corrosion report
most recently submitted by the corrosion control and
prevention executive of each military department under
section 903(b)(5) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
122 Stat. 4567; 10 U.S.C. 2228 note).''.

SEC. 333. MODIFICATION AND REPEAL OF CERTAIN REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Modification of Report on Army Progress.--Section 323
of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364; 120 Stat. 2146; 10
U.S.C. 229 note) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (c) and redesignating
subsections (d) and (e) as subsections (c) and (d),
respectively; and
(2) in subsection (d), as so redesignated, by striking ``or
(d)''.
(b) Repeal of Report on Disposition of Reserve Equipment.--
Title III of the John Warner National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) is amended by
striking section 349.
(c) Repeal of Report on Readiness of Ground Forces.--Title
III of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (Public Law 110-181) is amended by striking section 355.

SEC. 334. REPORT ON AIR SOVEREIGNTY ALERT MISSION.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the
Commander of the United States Northern Command and the North
American Aerospace Defense Command (hereinafter in this
section referred to as ``NORTHCOM'') shall submit to the
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee
on Armed Service of the House of Representatives a report on
the Air Sovereignty Alert (hereinafter in this section
referred to as ``ASA'') Mission and Operation Noble Eagle
(hereinafter in this section referred to as ``ONE'').
(b) Consultation.--NORTHCOM shall consult with the Director
of the National Guard Bureau who shall be authorized to
review and provide independent analysis and comments on the
report required under subsection (a).
(c) Contents of Report.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall include each of the following:
(1) An evaluation of the current ASA mission and ONE.
(2) An evaluation of each of the following:
(A) The current ability to perform the mission with regards
to training, equipment, funding, and military construction.
(B) Any current deficiencies in the mission.
(C) Any changes in threats which would allow for any change
in number of ASA sites or force structure required to support
the ASA mission.
(D) Future ability to perform the ASA mission with current
and programmed equipment.
(E) Coverage of units with respect to--
(i) population centers covered;
(ii) targets of value covered, including symbolic (national
monuments, sports venue, and centers of commerce), critical
infrastructure (nuclear plants, dams, bridges, and
telecommunication nodes) and national security (military
bases and organs of government); and
(iii) an unclassified, notional area of responsibility
conforming to the unclassified response time of unit
represented graphically on a map and detailing total
population covered and number of targets described in clause
(ii).
(3) Status of implementation of the recommendations made in
the Government Accountability Office Report entitled
``Actions Needed to Improve Management of Air Sovereignty
Alert Operations to Protect U.S. Airspace'' (GAO-09-184).
(d) Means of Delivery of Report.--The report required by
subsection (a) shall be unclassified, and NORTHCOM shall
brief the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
House of Representatives at the appropriate classification
level.

SEC. 335. REPORT ON THE SEAD/DEAD MISSION REQUIREMENT FOR THE
AIR FORCE.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 120 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air
Force shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate and the Committee on Armed Service of the House of
Representatives a report describing the feasibility and
desirability of designating the Suppression of Enemy Air
Defenses/Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses (hereinafter in
this section referred to as ``SEAD/DEAD'') mission as a
responsibility of the Air National Guard .
(b) Contents of Report.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall include each of the following:
(1) An evaluation of the SEAD/DEAD mission, as in effect on
the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) An evaluation of the following with respect to the
SEAD/DEAD mission:
(A) The current ability of the Air National Guard to
perform the mission with regards to training, equipment,
funding, and military construction.
(B) Any current deficiencies of the Air National Guard to
perform the mission.
(C) The corrective actions and costs required to address
any deficiencies described in subparagraph (B).
(D) The need for SEAD/DEAD ranges to be constructed on
existing ranges operated, controlled, or used by Air National
Guard units based on geographic considerations of proximity
and utility.
(c) Consultation.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall
consult with the Director of the National Guard Bureau who
shall be authorized to review and provide independent
analysis and comments on the report required under subsection
(a).

Subtitle E--Limitations and Extensions of Authority

SEC. 341. PERMANENT AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT AND USE LANDING FEES
CHARGED FOR USE OF DOMESTIC MILITARY AIRFIELDS
BY CIVIL AIRCRAFT.

(a) In General.--Chapter 159 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

[[Page 9544]]

``Sec. 2697. Acceptance and use of landing fees charged for
use of domestic military airfields by civil aircraft.

``(a) Authority.--The Secretary of a military department
may impose landing fees for the use by civil aircraft of
domestic military airfields under the jurisdiction of that
Secretary and may use any fees received under this section as
a source of funding for the operation and maintenance of
airfields of that department.
``(b) Uniform Landing Fees.--The Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe the amount of the landing fees that may be imposed
under this section. Such fees shall be uniform among the
military departments.
``(c) Use of Proceeds.--Amounts received for a fiscal year
in payment of landing fees imposed under this section for the
use of a military airfield shall be credited to the
appropriation that is available for that fiscal year for the
operation and maintenance of that military airfield, shall be
merged with amounts in the appropriation to which credited,
and shall be available for that military airfield for the
same period and purposes as the appropriation is
available.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``2697. Acceptance and use of landing fees charged for use of domestic
military airfields by civil aircraft.''.

SEC. 342. IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION OF ARSENAL SUPPORT
PROGRAM INITIATIVE.

(a) Improvement.--
(1) In general.--Section 343 of the Floyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398; 10 U.S.C. 4551 note) is amended--
(A) in subsection (b), by striking paragraphs (3) and (4)
and redesignating paragraphs (5) through (11) as paragraphs
(3) through (9), respectively;
(B) by striking subsection (d) and redesignating
subsections (e), (f), and (g) as subsections (d), (e), and
(f), respectively.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Prioritization of Program Purposes.--The Secretary of
the Army shall--
(1) prioritize the purposes of the Arsenal Support Program
Initiative under section 343(b) of the Floyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398; U.S.C. 4551 note), as amended by
subsection (a)(1)(A); and
(2) issue guidance to the appropriate commands reflecting
such priorities.
(c) Extension.--
(1) In general.--Such section, as amended by subsection
(a)(1) of this section, is further amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking ``2010'' and inserting
``2012''; and
(B) in paragraph (1) of subsection (f), as redesignated by
subsection (a)(1)(B) of this section, by striking ``2010''
and inserting ``2012''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on the date of the submittal of the report
required under subsection (d).
(d) Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall
submit to Congress a report on the Arsenal Support Program
Initiative that includes--
(1) the Secretary's determination with respect to the
Army's highest priorities from among the purposes of the
Arsenal Support Program Initiative under section 343(b) of
the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398; U.S.C. 4551 note), as
amended by subsection (a)(1)(A), reflecting the Secretary's
overall strategy to achieve desired results;
(2) performance goals for the Arsenal Support Program
Initiative; and
(3) outcome-focused performance measures to assess the
progress the Army has made toward addressing the purposes of
the Arsenal Support Program Initiative.

SEC. 343. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO REIMBURSE EXPENSES FOR
CERTAIN NAVY MESS OPERATIONS.

Section 1014(b) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
122 Stat. 4585) is amended by striking ``September 30, 2010''
and inserting ``September 30, 2012''.

SEC. 344. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF FUNDS FOR THE ARMY
HUMAN TERRAIN SYSTEM.

(a) Limitation.--Of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated for the Human Terrain System (hereinafter in
this section referred to as the ``HTS'') that are described
in subsection (b), not more than 50 percent of the amounts
remaining unobligated as of the date of enactment of this Act
may be obligated until the Secretary of the Army submits to
the congressional defense committees each of the following:
(1) The independent assessment of the HTS called for in the
report of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (H. Rept. 111-166).
(2) A validation of all HTS requirements, including any
prior joint urgent operations needs statements.
(3) A certification that policies, procedures, and guidance
are in place to protect the integrity of social science
researchers participating in HTS, including ethical
guidelines and human studies research procedures.
(b) Covered Authorizations or Appropriations.--The amounts
authorized to be appropriated described in this subsection
are amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year
2011, including such amounts authorized to be appropriated
for oversees contingency operations, for--
(1) Operation and maintenance for HTS;
(2) Procurement for Mapping the Human Terrain hardware and
software; and
(3) Research, development, test, and evaluation for Mapping
the Human Terrain hardware and software.

SEC. 345. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF FUNDS PENDING
SUBMISSION OF CLASSIFIED JUSTIFICATION
MATERIAL.

Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated in this title
for fiscal year 2011 for the Office of the Secretary of
Defense for budget activity four, line 270, not more than 90
percent may be obligated until 15 days after the information
cited in the classified annex accompanying this Act relating
to the provision of classified justification material to
Congress is provided to the congressional defense committees.

SEC. 346. LIMITATION ON RETIREMENT OF C-130 AIRCRAFT FROM AIR
FORCE INVENTORY.

The Secretary of the Air Force may not take any action to
retire any C-130 aircraft from the inventory of the Air Force
until 30 days after the date on which the Secretary submits
to the congressional defense committees a written agreement
between the Director of the Air National Guard, the Commander
of Air Force Reserve Command, and the Chief of Staff of the
Air Force. The agreement shall specify the following:
(1) The number of and type of C-130 aircraft to be
transferred, on a temporary basis, from the Air National
Guard to the Air Force.
(2) The schedule by which any C-130 aircraft transferred to
the Air Force will be returned to the Air National Guard.
(3) A description of the condition, including the estimated
remaining service life, in which the C-130 aircraft will be
returned to the Air National Guard following the period
during which the aircraft are on loan to the Air Force.
(4) A description of the allocation of resources, including
the designation of responsibility for funding aircraft
operations and maintenance, in fiscal year 2011, and detailed
description of budgetary responsibilities through the
remaining period the aircraft are on loan to the Air Force.
(5) The designation of responsibility for funding depot
maintenance requirements or modifications to the aircraft
during the period the aircraft are on loan with the Air
Force, or otherwise generated as a result of transfer.
(6) The locations from which the C-130 aircraft will be
transferred.
(7) The manpower planning and certification that such a
transfer will not result in manpower authorization reductions
or resourcing at the Air National Guard facilities identified
in paragraph (6).
(8) The manner by which Air National Guard personnel
affected by the transfer will maintain their skills and
proficiencies in order to preserve readiness at the affected
units.
(9) Any other items the Director of the Air National Guard
or the Commander of Air Force Reserve Command determine are
necessary in order to ensure such a transfer will not
negatively impact the ability of the Air National Guard and
Air Force Reserve to accomplish their respective missions.

SEC. 347. COMMERCIAL SALE OF SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION IN EXCESS
OF MILITARY REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Commercial Sale of Small Arms Ammunition.--Small arms
ammunition and ammunition components in excess of military
requirements, including fired cartridge cases, which is not
otherwise prohibited from commercial sale or certified by the
Secretary of Defense as unserviceable or unsafe, may not be
demilitarized or destroyed and shall be made available for
commercial sale.
(b) Deadline for Guidance.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall issue guidance to ensure compliance with
subsection (a). Not later than 15 days after issuing such
guidance, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a letter of compliance providing notice of
such guidance.

SEC. 348. LIMITATION ON AIR FORCE FISCAL YEAR 2011 FORCE
STRUCTURE ANNOUNCEMENT IMPLEMENTATION.

None of the amounts authorized to be appropriated by this
Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2011 may be
obligated or expended for the purpose of implementing the Air
Force fiscal year 2011 Force Structure Announcement until 45
days after--
(1) the Secretary of the Air Force provides a detailed
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
House of Representatives on the follow-on missions for bases
affected by the 2010 Combat Air Forces restructure; and
(2) the Secretary of the Air Force certifies to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives that the Air Sovereignty Alert Mission will
be fully resourced with required funding, personnel, and
aircraft.

Subtitle F--Other Matters

SEC. 351. EXPEDITED PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS
FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS.

(a) Expedited Processing of Security Clearances.--Section
1564 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following
new subsection (a):
``(a) Expedited Process.--The Secretary of Defense may
prescribe a process for expediting

[[Page 9545]]

the completion of the background investigations necessary for
granting security clearances for--
``(1) Department of Defense personnel and Department of
Defense contractor personnel who are engaged in sensitive
duties that are critical to the national security; and
``(2) any individual who submits an application for a
position as an employee of the Department of Defense for
which a security clearance is required who is a member of the
armed forces who was retired or separated for physical
disability pursuant to chapter 61 of this title.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Use of Appropriated Funds.--The Secretary of Defense
may use funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department
of Defense for operation and maintenance to conduct
background investigations under this section for individuals
described in subsection (a)(2).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply with respect to a background investigation
conducted after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 352. ADOPTION OF MILITARY WORKING DOGS BY FAMILY MEMBERS
OF DECEASED OR SERIOUSLY WOUNDED MEMBERS OF THE
ARMED FORCES WHO WERE HANDLERS OF THE DOGS.

Section 2583(c) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``Military animals''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) For purposes of making a determination under
subsection (a)(2), unusual or extraordinary circumstances may
include situations in which the handler of a military working
dog is a member of the armed forces who is killed in action,
dies of wounds received in action, or is so seriously wounded
in action that the member will (or most likely will) receive
a medical discharge. If the Secretary of the military
department concerned determines that an adoption is justified
in such a situation, the military working dog shall be made
available for adoption only by the immediate family of the
member.''.

SEC. 353. REVISION TO AUTHORITIES RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION
OF CIVILIAN PASSENGERS AND COMMERCIAL CARGOES
BY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE WHEN SPACE UNAVAILABLE
ON COMMERCIAL LINES.

(a) Transportation on DOD Vehicles and Aircraft.--
Subsection (a) of section 2649 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by inserting ``Authority.--'' before ``Whenever''; and
(2) by inserting ``, vehicles, or aircraft'' in the first
sentence after ``vessels'' both places it appears.
(b) Amounts Charged for Transportation in Emergency,
Disaster, or Humanitarian Response Cases.--
(1) Limitation on amounts charged.--The second sentence of
subsection (a) of such section is amended by inserting before
the period the following: ``, except that in the case of
transportation provided in response to an emergency, a
disaster, or a request for humanitarian assistance, any
amount charged for such transportation may not exceed the
cost of providing the transportation''.
(2) Crediting of receipts.--Subsection (b) of such section
is amended by striking ``Amounts'' and inserting ``Crediting
of Receipts.--Any amount received under this section with
respect to transportation provided in response to an
emergency, a disaster, or a request for humanitarian
assistance may be credited to the appropriation, fund, or
account used in incurring the obligation for which such
amount is received. In all other cases, amounts''.
(c) Transportation During Contingencies or Disaster
Responses.--Such section is further amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(c) Transportation of Allied Personnel During
Contingencies or Disaster Responses.--(1) During the five-
year period beginning on the date of the enactment of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, when
space is available on vessels, vehicles, or aircraft operated
by the Department of Defense and the Secretary of Defense
determines that operations in the area of a contingency
operation or disaster response would be facilitated if allied
forces or civilians were to be transported using such
vessels, vehicles, or aircraft, the Secretary may provide
such transportation on a noninterference basis, without
charge.
``(2) Not later than March 1 of each year following a year
in which the Secretary provides transportation under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives
a report describing, in detail, the transportation so
provided during that year. Each such report shall include a
description of each of the following:
``(A) How the authority under paragraph (1) was used during
the year covered by the report.
``(B) The frequency with which such authority was used
during that year.
``(C) The rationale of the Secretary for each such use of
the authority.
``(D) The total cost of the transportation provided under
paragraph (1) during that year.
``(E) The appropriation, fund, or account credited and the
total amount received as a result of providing transportation
under paragraph (1) during that year.''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2648 of such title is
amended by inserting ``, vehicles, or aircraft'' after
``vessels'' in the matter preceding paragraph (1).
(e) Technical Amendments.--
(1) The heading of section 2648 of such title is amended to
read as follows:

``Sec. 2648. Persons and supplies: sea, land, and air
transportation''.

(2) The heading of section 2649 of such title is amended to
read as follows:

``Sec. 2649. Civilian passengers and commercial cargoes:
transportation on Department of Defense vessels, vehicles,
and aircraft''.

(f) Clerical Amendments.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 157 of such title is amended by striking
the items relating to sections 2648 and 2649 and inserting
the following new items:

``2648. Persons and supplies: sea, land, and air transportation.
``2649. Civilian passengers and commercial cargoes: transportation on
Department of Defense vessels, vehicles, and aircraft.''.

SEC. 354. TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO OBSOLETE REFERENCE RELATING
TO USE OF FLEXIBLE HIRING AUTHORITY TO
FACILITATE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE FUNCTIONS BY CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.

2463(d)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``under the National Security Personnel System, as
established''.

SEC. 355. INVENTORY AND STUDY OF BUDGET MODELING AND
SIMULATION TOOLS.

(a) Inventory.--
(1) Inventory required.--The Comptroller General of the
United States shall perform an inventory of all modeling and
simulation tools used by the Department of Defense to develop
and analyze the Department's annual budget submission and to
support decision making inside the budget process. In
carrying out the inventory, the Comptroller General shall
identify the purpose, scope, and levels of validation,
verification, and accreditation of each such model and
simulation.
(2) Report.--Not later than December 1, 2010, the
Comptroller General shall submit to Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the
Secretary of Defense a report on the inventory under
paragraph (1) and the findings of the Comptroller General in
carrying out the inventory.
(b) Study.--
(1) Study required.--By not later than January 15, 2011,
the Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into a contract
with a federally funded research and development center to
carry out a study examining the requirements for and
capabilities of modeling and simulation tools used by the
Department of Defense to support the annual budget process. A
contract entered into under this paragraph shall specify that
in carrying out the study, the center shall--
(A) use the inventory performed by the Comptroller General
under subsection (a) as a baseline;
(B) examine the efficacy and sufficiency of the modeling
and simulation tools used by the Department of Defense to
support the development, analysis, and decision-making
associated with the construction and validation of
requirements used as a basis for the annual budget process of
the Department;
(C) examine the requirements and any capability gaps with
respect to such modeling and simulation tools;
(D) provide recommendations as to how the Department should
best address the requirements and fill the capabilities gaps
identified under subparagraph (C);
(E) identify annual investment levels in modeling and
simulation tools and certifications required to achieve a
high degree of confidence in the relationship between the
Department's mission effectiveness and the budget materials
submitted to the President by the Secretary of Defense in
connection with the submission to Congress, pursuant to
section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, of the budget
for a fiscal year;
(F) examine the verification, validation, and accreditation
requirements for each of the military services and provide
recommendations with respect to establishing uniform
standards for such requirements across all of the military
services; and
(G) recommend improvements to enhance the confidence,
efficacy, and sufficiency of the modeling and simulation
tools used by the Department of Defense in the development of
the annual budget.
(2) Report.--Not later than January 1, 2012, the chief
executive officer of the center that carries out the study
pursuant to a contract under paragraph (1) shall submit to
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives a report on the findings of the study.

SEC. 356. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING CONTINUED IMPORTANCE OF
HIGH-ALTITUDE AVIATION TRAINING SITE, COLORADO.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The High-Altitude Aviation Training Site in Gypsum,
Colorado, is the only Department of Defense aviation school
that provides an opportunity for rotor-wing military pilots
to train in high-altitude, mountainous terrain, under full
gross weight and power management operations.
(2) The High-Altitude Aviation Training Site is operated by
the Colorado Army National Guard and is available to pilots
of all branches of the Armed Forces and to pilots of allied
countries.

[[Page 9546]]

(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the High-Altitude Army Aviation Training Site continues
to be critically important to ensuring the readiness and
capabilities of rotor-wing military pilots; and
(2) the Department of Defense should take all appropriate
actions to prevent encroachment on the High-Altitude Army
Aviation Training Site.

SEC. 357. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STUDY ON SIMULATED TACTICAL
FLIGHT TRAINING IN A SUSTAINED G ENVIRONMENT.

(a) Study Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct
a study on the effectiveness of simulated tactical flight
training in a sustained g environment. In conducting the
study, the Secretary shall include all relevant factors,
including each of the following:
(1) Training effectiveness.
(2) Cost reductions.
(3) Safety.
(4) Research benefits.
(5) Carbon emissions reduction.
(6) Lifecycles of training aircraft.
(b) Deadline for Completion.--The study required by
subsection (a) shall be completed not later than 18 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Submission to Congress.--Upon completion of the study
required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit the
results of the study to the congressional defense committees.

SEC. 358. STUDY OF EFFECTS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION OF
OBSTRUCTIONS ON MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AND
OPERATIONS.

(a) Designation of Department Organization.--Not later than
60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall designate a single organization
within the Department of Defense to--
(1) serve as the executive agent to carry out the study
required by subsection (b);
(2) serve as a clearinghouse to review applications filed
with the Secretary of Transportation pursuant to section
44718 of title 49, United States Code, and received by the
Department of Defense from the Secretary of Transportation;
and
(3) accelerate the development of planning tools to provide
preliminary notice as to the acceptability to the Department
of Defense of proposals included in an application submitted
pursuant to such section.
(b) Military Installations and Operations Impact Study.--
(1) Study required.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
carry out a study to identify any areas where military
installations and military operations, including the use of
air navigation facilities, navigable airspace, military
training routes, and air defense radars, could be affected by
any proposed construction, alteration, establishment, or
expansion of a structure described in section 44718 of title
49, United States Code.
(2) Military mission impact zones.--The Secretary of
Defense shall publish a notice of the areas identified
pursuant to the study under paragraph (1). Such areas shall
be known as ``military mission impact zones''.
(c) Effect of Department of Defense Hazard Assessment.--A
notice under subsection (a)(3) or (b)(2) shall not be
considered to be a substitute for any assessment required by
the Secretary of Transportation under section 44718 of title
49, United States Code.
(d) Savings Provision.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect or limit the application of, or any
obligation to comply with, any environmental law, including
the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.).
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``military training route'' means a training
route developed as part of the Military Training Route
Program, carried out jointly by the Federal Aviation
Administration and the Secretary Defense, for use by the
Armed Forces for the purpose of conducting low-altitude,
high-speed military training.
(2) The term ``high value military training route'' means a
military training route that is in the highest quartile of
military training routes used by the Department of Defense
with respect to frequency of use.
(3) The term ``military installation'' has the meaning
given that term in section 2801(c)(4) of title 10, United
States Code.
(4) The term ``military operation'' means military
navigable airspace, including high value military training
routes, air defense radars, special use airspace, warning
areas, and other military related systems.

TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

Subtitle A--Active Forces

SEC. 401. END STRENGTHS FOR ACTIVE FORCES.

The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for active duty
personnel as of September 30, 2011, as follows:
(1) The Army, 569,400.
(2) The Navy, 328,700.
(3) The Marine Corps, 202,100.
(4) The Air Force, 332,200.

SEC. 402. REVISION IN PERMANENT ACTIVE DUTY END STRENGTH
MINIMUM LEVELS.

Section 691(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by striking paragraphs (1) through (4) and inserting the
following new paragraphs:
``(1) For the Army, 547,400.
``(2) For the Navy, 324,300.
``(3) For the Marine Corps, 202,100.
``(4) For the Air Force, 332,200.''.

Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

SEC. 411. END STRENGTHS FOR SELECTED RESERVE.

(a) In General.--The Armed Forces are authorized strengths
for Selected Reserve personnel of the reserve components as
of September 30, 2011, as follows:
(1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 358,200.
(2) The Army Reserve, 205,000.
(3) The Navy Reserve, 65,500.
(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 39,600.
(5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 106,700.
(6) The Air Force Reserve, 71,200.
(7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 10,000.
(b) End Strength Reductions.--The end strengths prescribed
by subsection (a) for the Selected Reserve of any reserve
component shall be proportionately reduced by--
(1) the total authorized strength of units organized to
serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such component
which are on active duty (other than for training) at the end
of the fiscal year; and
(2) the total number of individual members not in units
organized to serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such
component who are on active duty (other than for training or
for unsatisfactory participation in training) without their
consent at the end of the fiscal year.
(c) End Strength Increases.--Whenever units or individual
members of the Selected Reserve of any reserve component are
released from active duty during any fiscal year, the end
strength prescribed for such fiscal year for the Selected
Reserve of such reserve component shall be increased
proportionately by the total authorized strengths of such
units and by the total number of such individual members.

SEC. 412. END STRENGTHS FOR RESERVES ON ACTIVE DUTY IN
SUPPORT OF THE RESERVES.

Within the end strengths prescribed in section 411(a), the
reserve components of the Armed Forces are authorized, as of
September 30, 2011, the following number of Reserves to be
serving on full-time active duty or full-time duty, in the
case of members of the National Guard, for the purpose of
organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or
training the reserve components:
(1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 32,060.
(2) The Army Reserve, 16,261.
(3) The Navy Reserve, 10,688.
(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 2,261.
(5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 14,584.
(6) The Air Force Reserve, 2,992.

SEC. 413. END STRENGTHS FOR MILITARY TECHNICIANS (DUAL
STATUS).

The minimum number of military technicians (dual status) as
of the last day of fiscal year 2011 for the reserve
components of the Army and the Air Force (notwithstanding
section 129 of title 10, United States Code) shall be the
following:
(1) For the Army Reserve, 8,395.
(2) For the Army National Guard of the United States,
27,210.
(3) For the Air Force Reserve, 10,720.
(4) For the Air National Guard of the United States,
22,394.

SEC. 414. FISCAL YEAR 2011 LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF NON-DUAL
STATUS TECHNICIANS.

(a) Limitations.--
(1) National guard.--Within the limitation provided in
section 10217(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code, the
number of non-dual status technicians employed by the
National Guard as of September 30, 2011, may not exceed the
following:
(A) For the Army National Guard of the United States,
2,520.
(B) For the Air National Guard of the United States, 350.
(2) Army reserve.--The number of non-dual status
technicians employed by the Army Reserve as of September 30,
2011, may not exceed 595.
(3) Air force reserve.--The number of non-dual status
technicians employed by the Air Force Reserve as of September
30, 2011, may not exceed 90.
(b) Non-Dual Status Technicians Defined.--In this section,
the term ``non-dual status technician'' has the meaning given
that term in section 10217(a) of title 10, United States
Code.
(c) Conforming Amendment to Annual Limitation on Non-dual
Status Technicians for the Army National Guard.--Section
10217(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``1,950'' and inserting ``2,870''.

SEC. 415. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF RESERVE PERSONNEL AUTHORIZED TO
BE ON ACTIVE DUTY FOR OPERATIONAL SUPPORT.

During fiscal year 2011, the maximum number of members of
the reserve components of the Armed Forces who may be serving
at any time on full-time operational support duty under
section 115(b) of title 10, United States Code, is the
following:
(1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 17,000.
(2) The Army Reserve, 13,000.
(3) The Navy Reserve, 6,200.
(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 3,000.
(5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 16,000.
(6) The Air Force Reserve, 14,000.

Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

SEC. 421. MILITARY PERSONNEL.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense
for military personnel for fiscal year 2011 a total of
$138,540,700,000.

[[Page 9547]]

(b) Construction of Authorization.--The authorization of
appropriations in subsection (a) supersedes any other
authorization of appropriations (definite or indefinite) for
such purpose for fiscal year 2011.

TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy Generally

SEC. 501. AGE FOR HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL APPOINTMENTS AND
MANDATORY RETIREMENTS.

(a) Age for Original Appointment as a Health Professions
Officer.--Section 532(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code,
is amended by striking ``reserve''.
(b) Additional Categories of Officers Eligible for Deferral
of Mandatory Retirement for Age.--Section 1251(b) of such
title is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the officer will be
performing duties consisting primarily of providing patient
care or performing other clinical duties.'' and inserting
``the officer--
``(A) will be performing duties consisting primarily of
providing patient care or performing other clinical duties;
or
``(B) is in a category of officers designated under
subparagraph (D) of paragraph (2) whose duties will consist
primarily of the duties described in clause (i), (ii), or
(iii) of such subparagraph.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B);
(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C)
and inserting ``; or''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) an officer in a category of officers designated by
the Secretary concerned for the purposes of this paragraph as
consisting of officers whose duties consist primarily of--
``(i) providing health care;
``(ii) performing other clinical care; or
``(iii) performing health-care related administrative
duties.''.

SEC. 502. AUTHORITY FOR APPOINTMENT OF WARRANT OFFICERS IN
THE GRADE OF W-1 BY COMMISSION AND
STANDARDIZATION OF WARRANT OFFICER APPOINTING
AUTHORITY.

(a) Regular Officers.--
(1) Authority for appointments by commission in warrant
officer w-1 grade.--The first sentence of section 571(b) of
title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking ``by the
Secretary concerned'' and inserting ``, except that, with
respect to an armed force under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary of a military department, the Secretary may provide
by regulation that appointments in that grade shall be made
by commission''.
(2) Appointing authority.--The second sentence of section
571(b) of such title is amended by inserting before the
period at the end the following: ``, and appointments in the
grade of regular warrant officer, W-1 (whether by warrant or
commission), shall be made by the President, except that
appointments in that grade in the Coast Guard shall be made
by the Secretary of Homeland Security when it is not
operating as a service in the Department of the Navy''.
(b) Reserve Officers.--Subsection (b) of section 12241 of
such title is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Appointments in permanent reserve warrant officer
grades shall be made in the same manner as is prescribed for
regular warrant officer grades by section 571(b) of this
title.''.
(c) Presidential Functions.--Except as otherwise provided
by the President by Executive order, the provisions of
Executive Order 13384 (10 U.S.C. 531 note) relating to the
functions of the President under the second sentence of
section 571(b) of title 10, United States Code, shall apply
in the same manner to the functions of the President under
section 12241(b) of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 503. NONDISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION FROM DISCUSSIONS,
DELIBERATIONS, NOTES, AND RECORDS OF SPECIAL
SELECTION BOARDS.

(a) Nondisclosure of Board Proceedings.--Section 613a of
title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following
new subsection:
``(a) Prohibition on Disclosure.--The proceedings of a
selection board convened under section 573, 611, or 628 of
this title may not be disclosed to any person not a member of
the board, except as authorized or required to process the
report of the board. This prohibition is a statutory
exemption from disclosure, as described in section 552(b)(3)
of title 5.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``and Records'' and
inserting ``Notes, and Records''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Applicability.--This section applies to all selection
boards convened under section 573, 611, or 628 of this title,
regardless of the date on which the board was convened.''.
(b) Reports of Boards.--Section 628(c)(2) of such title is
amended by striking ``sections 576(d) and 576(f)'' and
inserting ``sections 576(d), 576(f), and 613a''.
(c) Reserve Boards.--Section 14104 of such title is
amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following
new subsection:
``(a) Prohibition on Disclosure.--The proceedings of a
selection board convened under section 14101 or 14502 of this
title may not be disclosed to any person not a member of the
board, except as authorized or required to process the report
of the board. This prohibition is a statutory exemption from
disclosure, as described in section 552(b)(3) of title 5.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``and Records'' and
inserting ``Notes, and Records''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Applicability.--This section applies to all selection
boards convened under section 14101 or 14502 of this title,
regardless of the date on which the board was convened.''.

SEC. 504. ADMINISTRATIVE REMOVAL OF OFFICERS FROM LIST OF
OFFICERS RECOMMENDED FOR PROMOTION.

(a) Active-duty List.--Section 629 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new
subsection (d):
``(d) Administrative Removal.--If an officer on the active-
duty list is discharged or dropped from the rolls,
transferred to a retired status, or found to have been
erroneously included in a zone of consideration, after having
been recommended for promotion to a higher grade under this
chapter, but before being promoted, the officer shall be
administratively removed from the promotion list under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned.''.
(b) Reserve Active-status List.--Section 14310 of such
title is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new
subsection (d):
``(d) Administrative Removal.--If an officer on the reserve
active-status list is discharged or dropped from the rolls,
transferred to a retired status, or found to have been
erroneously included in a zone of consideration, after having
been recommended for promotion to a higher grade under this
chapter or after having been found qualified for Federal
recognition in the higher grade under title 32, but before
being promoted, the officer shall be administratively removed
from the promotion list under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary concerned.''.

SEC. 505. ELIGIBILITY OF OFFICERS TO SERVE ON BOARDS OF
INQUIRY FOR SEPARATION OF REGULAR OFFICERS FOR
SUBSTANDARD PERFORMANCE AND OTHER REASONS.

(a) Active Duty.--Section 1187 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraphs (2) and (3)
and inserting the following new paragraphs:
``(2) Each member of the board shall be senior in rank or
grade to the officer being required to show cause for
retention on active duty.
``(3) At least one member of the board--
``(A) shall be in or above the grade of major or lieutenant
commander, if the grade of the officer being required to show
cause for retention on active duty is below the grade of
major or lieutenant commander; or
``(B) shall be in a grade above lieutenant colonel or
commander, if the grade of the officer being required to show
cause for retention on active duty is major or lieutenant
commander or above.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``that officer--'' and
all that follows through the period at the end and inserting
``that officer meets the grade requirements of subsection
(a)(2).''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) Regulations.--The Secretary of a military department
may prescribe regulations limiting the eligibility of
officers to serve on a board convened under this chapter to
officers who, while otherwise qualified, are in the opinion
of the Secretary best suited for that duty by reason of age,
education, training, experience, length of service, or
temperament.''.
(b) Reserves.--Section 14906 of such title is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraphs (2) and (3)
and inserting the following new paragraphs:
``(2) Each member of the board shall be senior in rank or
grade to the officer being required to show cause for
retention in an active status.
``(3) At least one member of the board--
``(A) shall be in or above the grade of major or lieutenant
commander, if the grade of the officer being required to show
cause for retention in an active status is below the grade of
major or lieutenant commander; or
``(B) shall be in a grade above lieutenant colonel or
commander, if the grade of the officer being required to show
cause for retention in an active status is major or
lieutenant commander or above.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Regulations.--The Secretary of a military department
may prescribe regulations limiting the eligibility of
officers to serve on a board convened under this chapter to
officers who, while otherwise qualified, are in the opinion
of the Secretary best suited for that duty by reason of age,
education, training, experience, length of service, or
temperament.''.

SEC. 506. TEMPORARY AUTHORITY TO REDUCE MINIMUM LENGTH OF
ACTIVE SERVICE AS A COMMISSIONED OFFICER
REQUIRED FOR VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT AS AN
OFFICER.

(a) Army.--Section 3911(b)(2) of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``January 6, 2006, and ending on
December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``the date of the enactment
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011 and ending on September 30, 2013''.

[[Page 9548]]

(b) Navy and Marine Corps.--Section 6323(a)(2)(B) of such
title is amended by striking ``January 6, 2006, and ending on
December 31, 2008'' and inserting ``the date of the enactment
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2011 and ending on September 30, 2013''.
(c) Air Force.--Section 8911(b)(2) of such title is amended
by striking ``January 6, 2006, and ending on December 31,
2008'' and inserting ``the date of the enactment of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 and
ending on September 30, 2013''.

Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

SEC. 511. PRESEPARATION COUNSELING FOR MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE
COMPONENTS.

(a) Requirement; Exception.--Subsection (a)(1) of section
1142 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the first sentence--
(A) by striking ``Within'' and inserting ``(A) Within'';
and
(B) by striking ``of each member'' and all that follows
through the period at the end of the sentence and inserting
the following: ``of--
``(i) each member of the armed forces whose discharge or
release from active duty is anticipated as of a specific
date; and
``(ii) each member of a reserve component not covered by
clause (i) whose discharge or release from service is
anticipated as of a specific date.''; and
(2) in the second sentence, by striking ``A notation of the
provision of such counseling'' and inserting the following:
``(B) A notation of the provision of preseparation
counseling''.
(b) Clarification of Covered Matters.--Subsection (b)(7) of
such section is amended by striking ``from active duty''.

SEC. 512. MILITARY CORRECTION BOARD REMEDIES FOR NATIONAL
GUARD MEMBERS.

Subsection (a) of section 1552 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``military record of the
Secretary's department'' and inserting ``military record of
an armed force, including reserve components thereof, under
the jurisdiction of the Secretary''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) In the case of a member of the National Guard, the
authority to correct any military record of the member under
this section extends only to records generated while the
member was in Federal service and does not apply to matters
related to State government policy and procedures related to
its National Guard.''.

SEC. 513. REMOVAL OF STATUTORY DISTRIBUTION LIMITS ON NAVY
RESERVE FLAG OFFICER ALLOCATION.

Section 12004(c) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking paragraphs (2), (3), and (5); and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (2).

SEC. 514. ASSIGNMENT OF AIR FORCE RESERVE MILITARY
TECHNICIANS (DUAL STATUS) TO POSITIONS OUTSIDE
AIR FORCE RESERVE UNIT PROGRAM.

Section 10216(d) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Paragraph (1) does not apply to a military technician
(dual status) who is employed by the Air Force Reserve in an
area other than the Air Force Reserve unit program, except
that not more than 50 of such technicians may be assigned
outside of the unit program at the same time.''.

SEC. 515. TEMPORARY AUTHORITY FOR TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF
NON-DUAL STATUS MILITARY TECHNICIANS.

Section 10217 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and
inserting ``; or'' ; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) is hired as a temporary employee pursuant to the
exception for temporary employment provided by subsection (d)
and subject to the terms and conditions of such
subsection.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Exception for Temporary Employment.--(1)
Notwithstanding section 10218 of this title, the Secretary of
the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force may employ, for a
period not to exceed two years, a person to fill a vacancy
created by the mobilization of a military technician (dual
status) occupying a position under section 10216 of this
title.
``(2) The duration of the temporary employment of a person
in a military technician position under this subsection may
not exceed the shorter of the following:
``(A) The period of mobilization of the military technician
(dual status) whose vacancy is being filled by the temporary
employee.
``(B) Two years.
``(3) No persons may be hired under the authority of this
subsection after the end of the two-year period beginning on
the date of the enactment of this subsection.''.

SEC. 516. REVISED STRUCTURE AND FUNCTIONS OF RESERVE FORCES
POLICY BOARD.

(a) Revised Structure and Functions.--Section 10301 of
title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 10301. Reserve Forces Policy Board

``(a) Functions.--As provided in section 175 of this title,
there is in the Office of the Secretary of Defense a Reserve
Forces Policy Board. The Board shall serve as an independent
adviser to the Secretary of Defense to provide advice and
recommendations to the Secretary on strategies, policies, and
practices designed to improve and enhance the capabilities,
efficiency, and effectiveness of the reserve components. The
Board shall report directly to the Secretary to provide
independent advice and recommendations to the Secretary on
matters relating to the and reserve components.
``(b) Membership.--The Board consists of 20 members,
appointed or designated as follows:
``(1) A civilian chairman appointed by the Secretary of
Defense, who shall be a person who the Secretary determines
has the knowledge of, and experience in, policy matters
relevant to national security and reserve component matters
required to carry out the duties of chairman.
``(2) Two reserve general officers designated by the
Secretary of Defense upon the recommendation of the Secretary
of the Army, one of whom shall be a member of the Army
National Guard of the United States and one of whom shall be
a member of the Army Reserve.
``(3) Two reserve officers designated by the Secretary of
Defense upon the recommendation of the Secretary of the Navy,
one of whom shall be a Navy Reserve flag officer and one of
whom shall be a Marine Corps Reserve general officer.
``(4) Two reserve general officers designated by the
Secretary of Defense upon the recommendation of the Secretary
of the Air Force, one of whom shall be a member of the Air
National Guard of the United States and one of whom shall be
a member of the Air Force Reserve.
``(5) One Coast Guard flag officer designated by the
Secretary of Homeland Security when the Coast Guard is not
operating as a service within the Department of the Navy, or
designated by the Secretary of Defense, upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of the Navy, when the Coast
Guard is operating as a service in the Navy under section 3
of title 14.
``(6) Ten persons appointed or designated by the Secretary
of Defense, each of whom shall be a United States citizen and
have significant knowledge of and experience in policy
matters relevant to national security and reserve component
matters and shall be one of the following:
``(A) An individual not employed in any Federal or State
department or agency.
``(B) An individual employed by a Federal or State
department or agency.
``(C) An officer of a regular component on active duty, or
an officer of a reserve component in an active status, who
has served or is serving in a senior position on the Joint
Staff, a combatant command headquarters staff, or a service
headquarters staff.
``(7) A reserve officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or
Marine Corps who is a general or flag officer recommended by
the chairman and designated by the Secretary of Defense, who
shall serve without vote--
``(A) as military adviser to the chairman;
``(B) as military executive officer of the Board; and
``(C) as supervisor of the Board operations and staff.
``(8) A senior enlisted member of a reserve component
recommended by the chairman and appointed by the Secretary of
Defense, who shall serve without vote as enlisted military
adviser to the chairman.
``(c) Independent Advice.--In the case of a member of the
Board who is an officer or employee of the Department of
Defense or a member of the armed forces, the advice provided
in that member's capacity as a member of the Board shall be
rendered independently of the Board member's other duties as
an officer or employee of the Department of Defense or member
of the armed forces.
``(d) Matters to Be Acted on.--The Board shall act on those
matters referred to it by the chairman and on any matter
raised by a member of the Board.
``(e) Staff.--The Board shall be supported by a staff
consisting of one full-time officer from each of the reserve
components listed in paragraphs (1) through (6) of section
10101 of this title who holds the grade of colonel, or in the
case of the Navy the grade of captain, or who has been
selected for promotion to that grade. These officers shall
also serve as liaisons between their respective components
and the Board. They shall perform their staff and liaison
duties under the supervision of the military executive in an
independent manner reflecting the independent nature of the
Board.
``(f) Relationship to Service Reserve Policy Committees and
Boards.--This section does not affect the committees and
boards prescribed within the military departments by sections
10302 through 10305 of this title, and a member of such a
committee or board may, if otherwise eligible, be a member of
the Board.''.
(b) Board Membership Transition Provision.--The members of
the Reserve Forces Policy Board as of the date of the
enactment of this Act shall continue to serve on the Board in
accordance with their respective terms of service as of such
date, and except to ensure that the positions of chairman and
military executive of the Board continue to be filled, and to
ensure that the reserve components listed in paragraphs (1)
through (7) of section 10101 of title 10, United States Code,
continue to have representation, no appointment or
designation of a member of the Board may be made after such
date

[[Page 9549]]

until the number of voting members of the Board is fewer than
18. Once the number of voting members is fewer than 18,
vacancies in the Board membership shall be filled in
accordance with section 10301 of title 10, United States
Code, as amended by subsection (a).
(c) Revision to Annual Report Requirement.--Section
113(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``the reserve programs of the Department of Defense
and on any other matters'' and inserting ``any reserve
component matter''.

SEC. 517. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD AND JUDICIAL
REMEDIES FOR NATIONAL GUARD TECHNICIANS.

(a) Elimination of Restricted Right of Appeal.--
(1) Current restriction to adjutant general.--Subsection
(f) of section 709 of title 32, United States Code, is
amended by striking paragraph (4).
(2) Stylistic and conforming amendments.--Such subsection
is further amended--
(A) by striking the material preceding paragraph (1);
(B) by capitalizing the first word in paragraphs (1), (2),
(3), and (5);
(C) by striking the semicolon at the end of paragraphs (1),
(2), and (3) and inserting a period;
(D) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4); and
(E) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) This subsection shall be carried out under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned.''.
(b) Application of Certain Title 5 Provisions.--Section
709(g) of title 32, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``Sections 2108, 3502, 7511, and 7512'' and
inserting ``Section 2108''.
(c) Application of Adverse Actions Subchapter.--Section
7511(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (5); and
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (10) as
paragraphs (5) through (9), respectively.

Subtitle C--Joint Qualified Officers and Requirements

SEC. 521. TECHNICAL REVISIONS TO DEFINITION OF JOINT MATTERS
FOR PURPOSES OF JOINT OFFICER MANAGEMENT.

Section 668(a) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``multiple'' in the matter preceding
subparagraph (A) and inserting ``integrated''; and
(B) by striking ``and'' at the end of the subparagraph (D)
and inserting ``or''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
``(2) In the context of joint matters, the term `integrated
military forces' refers to military forces that are involved
in the planning or execution (or both) of operations
involving participants from--
``(A) more than one military department; or
``(B) a military department and one or more of the
following:
``(i) Other departments and agencies of the United States.
``(ii) The military forces or agencies of other countries.
``(iii) Non-governmental persons or entities.''.

SEC. 522. CHANGES TO PROCESS INVOLVING PROMOTION BOARDS FOR
JOINT QUALIFIED OFFICERS AND OFFICERS WITH
JOINT STAFF EXPERIENCE.

(a) Board Composition.--Subsection (c) of section 612 of
title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(c)(1) Each selection board convened under section 611(a)
of this title that will consider an officer described in
paragraph (2) shall include at least one officer designated
by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who is a joint
qualified officer.
``(2) Paragraph (1) applies with respect to an officer
who--
``(A) is serving in, or has served in, a joint duty
assignment;
``(B) is serving on, or has served on, the Joint Staff; or
``(C) is a joint qualified officer.
``(3) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement in
paragraph (1) in the case of--
``(A) any selection board of the Marine Corps; or
``(B) any selection board that is considering officers in
specialties identified in paragraph (2) or (3) of section
619a(b) of this title.''.
(b) Information Furnished to Selection Boards.--Section 615
of such title is amended by striking ``in joint duty
assignments of officers who are serving, or have served, in
such assignments'' in subsections (b)(5) and (c) and
inserting ``of officers who are serving on, or have served
on, the Joint Staff or are joint qualified officers''.
(c) Action on Report of Selection Boards.--Section 618(b)
of such title is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``are serving, or have
served, in joint duty assignments'' and inserting ``are
serving on, or have served on, the Joint Staff or are joint
qualified officers'';
(2) in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2), by
striking ``in joint duty assignments of officers who are
serving, or have served, in such assignments'' and inserting
``of officers who are serving on, or have served on, the
Joint Staff or are joint qualified officers''; and
(3) in paragraph (4), by striking ``in joint duty
assignments'' and inserting ``who are serving on, or have
served on, the Joint Staff or are joint qualified officers''.

Subtitle D--General Service Authorities

SEC. 531. EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY AUTHORITY TO ORDER RETIRED
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES TO ACTIVE DUTY IN
HIGH-DEMAND, LOW-DENSITY ASSIGNMENTS.

(a) Extension of Authority.--Section 688a(f) of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``December 31,
2010'' and inserting ``December 31, 2012''.
(b) Report Required.--Not later than April 1, 2011, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report containing an assessment by the Secretary of the need
to extend the authority provided by section 688a of title 10,
United States Code, beyond December 31, 2012. The report
shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) A list of the current types of high-demand, low-density
capabilities (as defined in such section) for which the
authority is being used to address operational requirements.
(2) For each high-demand, low-density capability included
in the list under paragraph (1), the number of retired
members of the Armed Forces who have served on active duty at
any time during each of fiscal years 2007 through 2010 under
the authority.
(3) A plan to increase the required active duty strength
for the high-demand, low-density capabilities included in the
list under paragraph (1) to eliminate the need to use the
authority.

SEC. 532. CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS.

(a) Improved Documentation of Correction Board Decisions.--
Section 1552(a)(3) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(3)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(B) In establishing correction procedures under
subparagraph (A), the Secretary of a military department
shall require that a board established under subsection
(a)(1) present its findings and conclusions in an orderly and
itemized fashion, with specific attention given to each issue
presented by the claimant (or heir or representative) who
requested the correction. This requirement applies to a
request for correction received after the date of the
enactment of this subparagraph, both during initial
consideration of the request and upon subsequent
consideration due to appeal or other circumstances.''.
(b) Improved Documentation of Review Board Decisions
Regarding Discharge or Dismissal.--Section 1553(b) of such
title is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) In establishing review procedures for use by a board
established under this section, the Secretary of a military
department shall require that the board present its findings
and conclusions in an orderly and itemized fashion, with
specific attention given to each issue presented by the
person who requested the review. This requirement applies to
a request for review received after the date of the enactment
of this paragraph, both during initial consideration of the
request and upon subsequent consideration due to appeal or
other circumstances.''.
(c) Boards Reviewing Retirement or Separation Without Pay
for Physical Disability.--
(1) Members eligible to request review.--Subsection (a) of
section 1554 of such title is amended--
(A) by striking ``an officer'' and inserting ``a member or
former member of the uniformed services''; and
(B) by striking ``his case'' and inserting ``the member's
case''.
(2) Improved documentation of board decisions.--Subsection
(b) of such section is amended--
(A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) In establishing review procedures for use by a board
established under this section, the Secretary of a military
department shall require that the board present its findings
and conclusions in an orderly and itemized fashion, with
specific attention given to each issue presented by the
person who requested the review. This requirement applies to
a request for review received after the date of the enactment
of this paragraph, both during initial consideration of the
request and upon subsequent consideration due to appeal or
other circumstances.''.
(d) Limitation on Reduction in Personnel Assigned to Duty
With Service Review Agency.--1559(a) of such title is amended
by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting ``December
31, 2013''.

SEC. 533. MODIFICATION OF CERTIFICATE OF RELEASE OR DISCHARGE
FROM ACTIVE DUTY (DD FORM 214) TO SPECIFICALLY
IDENTIFY A SPACE FOR INCLUSION OF EMAIL
ADDRESS.

The Secretary of Defense shall modify the Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) to
include a new Block, 19c., titled ``electronic mailing (e-
mail) address after separation'' in order to permit a member
of the Armed Forces to include an email address at which the
member may be reached after the member's discharge or
release.

SEC. 534. RECOGNITION OF ROLE OF FEMALE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REVIEW OF
MILITARY OCCUPATIONAL SPECIALTIES AVAILABLE TO
FEMALE MEMBERS.

(a) Findings.--Congress make the following findings:

[[Page 9550]]

(1) Women are and have historically been an import part of
all United States war efforts, voluntarily serving in every
military conflict in United States history, including the
Revolutionary War.
(2) Approximately 34,000 women served in the Armed Forces
in World War I, approximately 400,000 served in World War II,
approximately 120,000 served in the Korean War, over 7,000
served in the Vietnam War, and more than 41,000 served in the
first Gulf War.
(3) Over 350,000 women serving in the Armed Forces make up
approximate 15 percent of all active duty personnel, 15
percent of Reserves, and 17 percent of the National Guard.
(4) Over 225,349 women have served in Operation Iraqi
Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom as members of the Armed
Forces.
(5) At least 120 female members of the Armed Forces have
been killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, and, of the women killed,
66 were killed in combat.
(6) The nature of war has changed in Iraq and Afghanistan,
and, despite the prohibition on female members of the Armed
Forces serving in combat, so has the role of female members
of the Armed Forces.
(b) Official Recognition.--Congress--
(1) honors women who have served, and women who are
currently serving, as members of the Armed Forces; and
(2) encourages all people in the United States to recognize
the service and achievements of female members of the Armed
Forces and female veterans.
(c) Reviews Required.--
(1) Reviews; elements.--The Secretary of Defense shall
conduct a review of military occupational positions available
to female members of the Armed Forces for the purpose of
ensuring that female members have the maximum opportunity to
compete and excel in the Armed Forces. The Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military
departments, also shall review the collocation policy and
other policies and regulations that restrict the service of
female members to determine whether changes are needed,
including legislative change, if necessary, to enhance the
ability of women to serve in the Armed Forces.
(2) Submission of results.--Not later than February 1,
2011, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committee a report containing the
results of the reviews.

Subtitle E--Military Justice and Legal Matters

SEC. 541. CONTINUATION OF WARRANT OFFICERS ON ACTIVE DUTY TO
COMPLETE DISCIPLINARY ACTION.

Section 580 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) A warrant officer subject to discharge or retirement
under this section, but against whom any action has been
commenced with a view to trying the officer by court-martial,
may be continued on active duty, without prejudice to such
action, until the completion of such action.''.

SEC. 542. ENHANCED AUTHORITY TO PUNISH CONTEMPT IN MILITARY
JUSTICE PROCEEDINGS.

(a) In General.--Section 848 of title 10, United States
Code (article 48 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is
amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 848. Art. 48. Contempts

``(a) Authority to Punish Contempt.--A military judge
detailed to a court-martial, a court of inquiry, the Court of
Appeals for the Armed Forces, a Court of Criminal Appeals, a
provost court, or a military commission (other than a
military commission established under chapter 47A of this
title) may punish for contempt any person who--
``(1) uses any menacing word, sign, or gesture in the
presence of the military judge during the proceedings of the
court-martial, court, or military commission;
``(2) disturbs the proceedings of the court-martial, court,
or military commission by any riot or disorder; or
``(3) willfully disobeys its lawful writ, process, order,
rule, decree, or command.
``(b) Punishment.--A person punished for contempt under
this section may be confined for not more than 30 days, fined
in an amount of not more than $1,000, or both.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Section 848 of title 10, United States
Code (article 48 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), as
amended by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to acts
of contempt committed after the date of the enactment of this
Act.

SEC. 543. LIMITATIONS ON USE IN PERSONNEL ACTION OF
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE
REPORT OR IN INDEX MAINTAINED FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT RETRIEVAL AND ANALYSIS.

(a) Limitations.--Chapter 53 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 1034 the
following new section:

``Sec. 1034a. Criminal investigative report or index
maintained for law enforcement retrieval and analysis:
limitations on use in personnel actions

``(a) Prohibition on Use in Personnel Actions.--Except as
provided in subsection (b), information relating to the
titling or indexing of a member of the armed forces contained
in any criminal investigative report prepared by any entity
of the Department of Defense or index maintained by any
entity of the Department of Defense for the purpose of
potential retrieval and analysis by Department law
enforcement organizations may not be used in connection with
any personnel action involving the member.
``(b) Authorized Exceptions.--The prohibition in subsection
(a) does not preclude the use of information relating to the
titling or indexing of a member--
``(1) in connection with law enforcement activities;
``(2) in a judicial or administrative action involving the
member regarding the alleged offense referenced in the
criminal investigative report or index; or
``(3) in a personnel action if--
``(A) the member has been adjudged guilty of the alleged
offense referenced in the criminal investigative report or
index by military non-judicial or judicial proceedings or by
civilian judicial proceedings;
``(B) a record of the proceedings is presented in
connection with the personnel action; and
``(C) the member is provided the opportunity to present
additional information in response to the record of the
proceedings.
``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Indexing.--The term `indexing' refers to the
procedure whereby a Department of Defense criminal
investigative agency submits identifying information
concerning subjects, victims, or incidentals of
investigations for addition to the Defense Clearance and
Investigations Index.
``(2) Titling.--The term `titling' refers to the process by
which a Department of Defense criminal investigative agency
places the name of a person in the title block of a criminal
investigative report at a time when the agency has credible
information that the person committed a criminal offense. The
titling, however, does not connote any degree of guilt or
innocence.
``(3) Personnel action.--The term `personnel action', with
respect to a member, means any recommendation, action, or
decision impacting or affecting any aspect of the military
service of the member.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1034 the following new item:

``1034a. Criminal investigative report or index maintained for law
enforcement retrieval and analysis: limitations on use in
personnel actions.''.

SEC. 544. PROTECTION OF CHILD CUSTODY ARRANGEMENTS FOR
PARENTS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES
DEPLOYED IN SUPPORT OF A CONTINGENCY OPERATION.

(a) Child Custody Protection.--Title II of the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 521 et seq.)
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 208. CHILD CUSTODY PROTECTION.

``(a) Restriction on Change of Custody.--If a motion for
change of custody of a child of a servicemember is filed
while the servicemember is deployed in support of a
contingency operation, no court may enter an order modifying
or amending any previous judgment or order, or issue a new
order, that changes the custody arrangement for that child
that existed as of the date of the deployment of the
servicemember, except that a court may enter a temporary
custody order if the court finds that it is in the best
interest of the child.
``(b) Completion of Deployment.--In any preceding covered
under subsection (a), a court shall require that, upon the
return of the servicemember from deployment in support of a
contingency operation, the custody order that was in effect
immediately preceding the date of the deployment of the
servicemember is reinstated, unless the court finds that such
a reinstatement is not in the best interest of the child,
except that any such finding shall be subject to subsection
(c).
``(c) Exclusion of Military Service From Determination of
Child's Best Interest.--If a motion for the change of custody
of the child of a servicemember is filed, no court may
consider the absence of the servicemember by reason of
deployment, or possibility of deployment, in determining the
best interest of the child.
``(d) No Federal Right of Action.--Nothing in this section
shall create a Federal right of action.
``(e) Preemption.--In any case where State or Federal law
applicable to a child custody proceeding under State or
Federal law provides a higher standard of protection to the
rights of the parent who is a servicemember than the rights
provided under this section, the State or Federal court shall
apply the State or Federal standard.
``(f) Contingency Operation Defined.--In this section, the
term `contingency operation' has the meaning given that term
in section 101(a)(13) of title 10, United States Code, except
that the term may include such other deployments as the
Secretary may prescribe.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
1(b) of such Act is amended by adding at the end of the items
relating to title II the following new item:

``208. Child custody protection.''.

SEC. 545. IMPROVEMENTS TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE PROGRAMS.

(a) Immediate Actions Required.--
(1) Entry of data into law enforcement systems.--The
Secretary of Defense shall ensure that all command actions
related to domestic violence incidents involving members of
the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps are entered into
all Department of Defense law enforcement systems.
(2) Issuance of family advocacy program guidance.--The
Secretary of Defense shall issue Department of Defense Family
Advocacy Program guidance.

[[Page 9551]]

(b) Implementation of Outstanding Comptroller General
Recommendations.--Consistent with the recommendations
contained in the report of the Comptroller General of the
United States titled ``Status of Implementation of GAO's 2006
Recommendations on the Department of Defense's Domestic
Violence Program'' (GAO-10-577R), the Secretary of Defense
shall complete, not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, implementation of actions to address
the following recommendations:
(1) Defense incident-based reporting system.--The Secretary
of Defense shall develop a comprehensive management plan to
address deficiencies in the data captured in the Defense
Incident-Based Reporting System to ensure the system can
provide an accurate count of the domestic violence incidents
that are reported throughout the Department of Defense.
(2) Adequate personnel.--The Secretary of Defense shall
develop a plan to ensure that adequate personnel are
available to implement recommendations made by the Defense
Task Force on Domestic Violence.
(3) Domestic violence training data for chaplains.--The
Secretary of Defense shall develop a plan to collect domestic
violence training data for chaplains.
(4) Oversight framework.--The Secretary of Defense shall
develop an oversight framework for Department of Defense
domestic violence programs, to include oversight of
implementation of recommendations made by the Defense Task
Force on Domestic Violence, budgeting, and policy compliance.
(c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report containing
the planned actions required under subsections (a) and (b).

SEC. 546. PUBLIC RELEASE OF RESTRICTED ANNEX OF DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW
RELATED TO FORT HOOD PERTAINING TO OVERSIGHT OF
THE ALLEGED PERPETRATOR OF THE ATTACK.

(a) Release Required.--Not later than 10 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall release publicly the restricted annex, described in
subsection (b), that was part of the January 2010 Department
of Defense Report of the Independent Review Related to Fort
Hood and the attack there on November 5, 2009.
(b) Material Subject to Release; Exception.--The restricted
annex referred to in subsection (a) is the document described
on page 9 of the January 2010 Department of Defense Report of
the Independent Review Related to Fort Hood, which provided
the detailed findings, recommendations, and complete
supporting discussions of the Independent Review pertaining
to the oversight of the alleged perpetrator of the November
2009 attack. No part of the restricted annex shall be
exempted from public release, except--
(1) materials that the Secretary of Defense determines may
imperil, if disclosed, any criminal investigation or
prosecution related to the attack; and
(2) in accordance with section 1102 of title 10, United
States Code, the memorandum summarizing the results of the
medical quality assurance records relating to the care
provided patients by the alleged perpetrator of the attack.

Subtitle F--Member Education and Training Opportunities and
Administration

SEC. 551. REPAYMENT OF EDUCATION LOAN REPAYMENT BENEFITS.

(a) Enlisted Members on Active Duty in Specified Military
Specialties.--Section 2171 of title 10, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsections:
``(g) Except a person described in subsection (e) who
transfers to service making the person eligible for repayment
of loans under section 16301 of this title, a member of the
armed forces who fails to complete the period of service
required to qualify for loan repayment under this section
shall be subject to the repayment provisions of section
303a(e) of title 37.
``(h) The Secretary of Defense may prescribe, by
regulations, procedures for implementing this section,
including standards for qualified loans and authorized payees
and other terms and conditions for making loan repayments.
Such regulations may include exceptions that would allow for
the payment as a lump sum of any loan repayment due to a
member under a written agreement that existed at the time of
a member's death or disability.''.
(b) Members of Selected Reserve.--Section 16301 of such
title is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsections:
``(h) Except a person described in subsection (e) who
transfers to service making the person eligible for repayment
of loans under section 2171 of this title, a member of the
armed forces who fails to complete the period of service
required to qualify for loan repayment under this section
shall be subject to the repayment provisions of section
303a(e) of title 37.
``(i) The Secretary of Defense may prescribe, by
regulations, procedures for implementing this section,
including standards for qualified loans and authorized payees
and other terms and conditions for making loan repayments.
Such regulations may include exceptions that would allow for
the payment as a lump sum of any loan repayment due to a
member under a written agreement that existed at the time of
a member's death or disability.''.

SEC. 552. ACTIVE DUTY OBLIGATION FOR GRADUATES OF THE
MILITARY SERVICE ACADEMIES PARTICIPATING IN THE
ARMED FORCES HEALTH PROFESSIONS SCHOLARSHIP AND
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

(a) United States Military Academy Graduates.--Section
4348(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding
at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) That if an appointment described in paragraph (2) or
(3) is tendered and the cadet participates in the Armed
Forces Health Professions Scholarship and Financial
Assistance program under subchapter I of chapter 105 of this
title, the cadet will fulfill any unserved obligation
incurred under this section on active duty, regardless of the
type of appointment held, upon completion of, and in addition
to, any service obligation incurred under section 2123 of
this title for participation in the program.''.
(b) United States Naval Academy Graduates.--Section 6959(a)
of such title is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(4) That if an appointment described in paragraph (2) or
(3) is tendered and the midshipman participates in the Armed
Forces Health Professions Scholarship and Financial
Assistance program under subchapter I of chapter 105 of this
title, the midshipman will fulfill any unserved obligation
incurred under this section on active duty, regardless of the
type of appointment held, upon completion of, and in addition
to, any service obligation incurred under section 2123 of
this title for participation in the program.''.
(c) United States Air Force Academy Graduates.--Section
9348(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(4) That if an appointment described in paragraph (2) or
(3) is tendered and the cadet participates in the Armed
Forces Health Professions Scholarship and Financial
Assistance program under subchapter I of chapter 105 of this
title, the cadet will fulfill any unserved obligation
incurred under this section on active duty, regardless of the
type of appointment held, upon completion of, and in addition
to, any service obligation incurred under section 2123 of
this title for participation in the program.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply with respect to appointments to the United States
Military Academy, the United States Naval Academy, and the
United States Air Force Academy beginning with the first
class of candidates nominated for appointment to these
military service academies after the date of the enactment of
this Act.

SEC. 553. WAIVER OF MAXIMUM AGE LIMITATION ON ADMISSION TO
SERVICE ACADEMIES FOR CERTAIN ENLISTED MEMBERS
WHO SERVED DURING OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM OR
OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM.

(a) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of the military
department concerned may waive the maximum age limitation
specified in section 4346(a), 6958(a)(1), or 9346(a) of title
10, United States Code, for the admission of an enlisted
member of the Armed Forces to the United States Military
Academy, the United States Naval Academy, or the United
States Air Force Academy, if the member, otherwise satisfies
the eligibility requirements for admission to that academy,
and--
(1) as a result of service on active duty in a theater of
operations for Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring
Freedom, was or is prevented from being admitted to that
academy before the member reached the maximum age specified
in such sections; or
(2) possesses an exceptional overall record that the
Secretary concerned determines sets the candidate apart from
all other candidates.
(b) Limitation of Waiver.--
(1) Maximum age.--A waiver may not be granted under
subsection (a) to a member of the Armed Forces described in
such subsection if the member would pass the member's twenty-
sixth birthday by July 1 of the year in which the member
would enter the military service academy.
(2) Maximum number.--No more than five members of the Armed
Forces may attend each of the military service academies at
any one time pursuant to a waiver granted under subsection
(a)(2).
(c) Duration of Waiver Authority.--The authority to grant a
waiver under subsection (a) expires on September 30, 2015.

SEC. 554. REPORT OF FEASIBILITY AND COST OF EXPANDING
ENROLLMENT AUTHORITY OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF
THE AIR FORCE TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF
THE ARMED FORCES.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
report, prepared in consultation with the Secretary of the
Air Force, evaluating the feasibility and cost of authorizing
enlisted members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Coast
Guard to enroll in Community College of the Air Force
programs offered under section 9315 of title 10, United
States Code.

Subtitle G--Defense Dependents' Education

SEC. 561. CONTINUATION OF AUTHORITY TO ASSIST LOCAL
EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES THAT BENEFIT DEPENDENTS OF
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.

(a) Assistance to Schools With Significant Numbers of
Military Dependent Students.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2011 pursuant to section 301(5)
for

[[Page 9552]]

operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities,
$50,000,000 shall be available only for the purpose of
providing assistance to local educational agencies under
subsection (a) of section 572 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163;
119 Stat. 3271; 20 U.S.C. 7703b).
(b) Assistance to Schools With Enrollment Changes Due to
Base Closures, Force Structure Changes, or Force
Relocations.--Of the amount authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal year 2011 pursuant to section 301(5) for operation and
maintenance for Defense-wide activities, $15,000,000 shall be
available only for the purpose of providing assistance to
local educational agencies under subsection (b) of such
section 572.
(c) Local Educational Agency Defined.--In this section, the
term ``local educational agency'' has the meaning given that
term in section 8013(9) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7713(9)).

SEC. 562. ENROLLMENT OF DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES WHO RESIDE IN TEMPORARY HOUSING IN
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DOMESTIC DEPENDENT
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS.

Section 2164(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3)(A) The Secretary may, at the discretion of the
Secretary, permit dependents of members of the armed forces
described in subparagraph (B) to enroll in an educational
program provided by the Secretary pursuant to this subsection
without regard to the requirement in paragraph (1) with
respect to residence on a military installation.
``(B) Subparagraph (A) applies only if--
``(i) the dependents reside in temporary housing
(regardless of whether the temporary housing is on Federal
property) in lieu of permanent living quarters on a military
installation; and
``(ii) the Secretary determines that the circumstances of
such living arrangements justify extending the enrollment
authority to include such dependents.
``(C) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to ensure
consistent application of this paragraph.''.

Subtitle H--Decorations, Awards, and Commemorations

SEC. 571. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FOR DETERMINATION MADE IN
RESPONSE TO REVIEW OF PROPOSAL FOR AWARD OF A
MEDAL OF HONOR NOT PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED IN
TIMELY FASHION.

Section 1130(b) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) If a determination under this section includes a
favorable recommendation for the award of the Medal of Honor,
submission of the detailed discussion of the rationale
supporting the determination shall be made through the
Secretary of Defense.''.

SEC. 572. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RECOGNITION OF SPOUSES OF
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Establishment and Presentation of Lapel Buttons.--
Chapter 57 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
inserting after section 1126 the following new section:

``Sec. 1126a. Spouse of combat veteran lapel button:
eligibility and presentation

``(a) Design and Eligibility.--A lapel button, to be known
as the spouse-of-a-combat-veteran lapel button, shall be
designed, as approved by the Secretary of Defense, to
identify and recognize the spouse of a member of the armed
forces who is serving or has served in a combat zone for a
period of more than 30 days.
``(b) Presentation.--The Secretary concerned may authorize
the use of appropriated funds to procure spouse-of-a-combat-
veteran lapel buttons and to provide for their presentation
to eligible spouses of members.
``(c) Exception to Time Period Requirement.--The 30-day
periods specified in subsections (a) and (b) do not apply if
the member is killed or wounded in the combat zone before the
expiration the period.
``(d) License To Manufacture and Sell Lapel Buttons.--
Section 901(c) of title 36 shall apply with respect to the
spouse-of-a-combat-veteran lapel button authorized by this
section.
``(e) Combat Zone Defined.--In this section, the term
`combat zone' has the meaning given that term in section
112(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out this
section. The Secretary shall ensure that the regulations are
uniform for each armed force to the extent practicable.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1126 the following new item:

``1126a. Spouse-of-a-combat-veteran lapel button: eligibility and
presentation.''.
(c) Implementation.--It is the sense of Congress that, as
soon as practicable once the spouse-of-a-combat-veteran lapel
button become available, the Secretary of Defense--
(1) should widely announce the availability of spouse-of-a-
combat-veteran lapel buttons through military and public
information channels; and
(2) should encourage commanders at all levels to conduct
ceremonies recognizing the support provided by spouses of
members of the Armed Forces and to use the ceremonies as an
opportunity for members to present their spouses with a
spouse-of-a-combat-veteran lapel button.

SEC. 573. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RECOGNITION OF CHILDREN OF
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Establishment and Presentation of Lapel Buttons.--
Chapter 57 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
inserting after section 1126a, as added by section 572, the
following new section:

``Sec. 1126b. Children of members commemorative lapel button:
eligibility and presentation

``(a) Design and Eligibility.--A lapel button, to be known
as the children of military service members commemorative
lapel button, shall be designed, as approved by the Secretary
of Defense, to identify and recognize an eligible child
dependent of a member of the armed forces who serves on
active duty for a period of more than 30 days.
``(b) Presentation.--The Secretary concerned may authorize
the use of appropriated funds to procure children of military
service members commemorative lapel buttons and to provide
for their presentation to eligible child dependents.
``(c) License To Manufacture and Sell Lapel Buttons.--
Section 901(c) of title 36 shall apply with respect to the
children of military service members commemorative lapel
button authorized by this section.
``(d) Eligible Child Dependent Defined.--In this section,
the term `eligible child dependent' means a dependent of a
member of the armed forces described in subparagraph (D) or
(I) of section 1072(2) of this title.
``(e) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out this
section. The Secretary shall ensure that the regulations are
uniform for each armed force to the extent practicable.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1126a the following new item:

``1126b. Children of members commemorative lapel button: eligibility
and presentation.''.
(c) Implementation.--It is the sense of Congress that, as
soon as practicable once the children of military service
members commemorative lapel button become available, the
Secretary of Defense--
(1) should widely announce the availability of children of
military service members commemorative lapel buttons through
military and public information channels; and
(2) should encourage commanders at all levels to conduct
ceremonies recognizing the support provided by children of
members of the Armed Forces and to use the ceremonies as an
opportunity for members to present their children with a
children of military service members commemorative lapel
button.

SEC. 574. CLARIFICATION OF PERSONS ELIGIBLE FOR AWARD OF
BRONZE STAR MEDAL.

(a) Limitation on Eligible Persons.--Section 1133 of title
10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 1133. Bronze Star: limitation on persons eligible to
receive

``The decoration known as the `Bronze Star' may only be
awarded to a member of a military force who--
``(1) at the time of the events for which the decoration is
to be awarded, was serving in a geographic area in which
special pay is authorized under section 310 or paragraph (1)
or (3) of section 351(a) of title 37; or
``(2) receives special pay under section 310 or paragraph
(1) or (3) of section 351(a) of title 37 as a result of those
events.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 57 of such title is amended by striking
the item relating to section 1133 and inserting the following
new item:

``1133.Bronze Star: limitation on persons eligible to receive.''.
(c) Application of Amendment.--The amendment made by
subsection (a) applies to the award of the Bronze Star after
October 30, 2000.

SEC. 575. AWARD OF VIETNAM SERVICE MEDAL TO VETERANS WHO
PARTICIPATED IN MAYAGUEZ RESCUE OPERATION.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of the military department
concerned shall, upon the application of an individual who is
an eligible veteran, award that individual the Vietnam
Service Medal, notwithstanding any otherwise applicable
requirements for the award of that medal. Any such award
shall be made in lieu of any Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal
awarded the individual for the individual's participation in
the Mayaguez rescue operation.
(b) Eligible Veteran.--For purposes of this section, the
term ``eligible veteran'' means a member or former member of
the Armed Forces who was awarded the Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal for participation in military operations
known as the Mayaguez rescue operation of May 12-15, 1975.

SEC. 576. AUTHORIZATION FOR AWARD OF MEDAL OF HONOR TO
CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE ARMY FOR ACTS OF VALOR
DURING THE CIVIL WAR, KOREAN WAR, OR VIETNAM
WAR.

(a) Authorization.--Notwithstanding the time limitations
specified in section 3744 of title 10, United States Code, or
any other time limitation with respect to the awarding of
certain medals to persons who served in the Armed Forces, the
President is authorized to award the Medal of Honor under
section 3741 of such title to the following former members of
the Army for conspicuous acts of gallantry and intrepidity at

[[Page 9553]]

the risk of their life and beyond the call of duty, as
described in subsection (b):
(1) First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing, Civil War.
(2) Private John A. Sipe, Civil War.
(3) Chaplain (Captain) Emil J. Kapaun, Korean War.
(4) Specialist Four Robert L. Towles, Vietnam War.
(b) Acts of Valor Described.--
(1) First lieutenant alonzo h. cushing.--In the case of
First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing, the acts of valor
referred to in subsection (a) are the actions of then First
Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing while in command of Battery A,
4th United States Artillery, Army of the Potomac, at
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on July 3, 1863, during the
American Civil War.
(2) Private john a. sipe.--In the case of Private John A.
Sipe, the acts of valor referred to in subsection (a) are the
actions of then Private John A. Sipe of Company I of the
205th Regiment Pennsylvania Volunteers, part of the 2d
Brigade, 3d Division, 9th Corps, Army of the Potomac, on
March 25, 1865, during the American Civil War.
(3) Chaplain emil j. kapaun.--In the case of Chaplain
(Captain) Emil J. Kapaun, the acts of valor referred to in
subsection (a) are the actions of Chaplain Emil J. Kapaun of
3d Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division
during the Battle of Unsan on November 1 and 2, 1950, and
while a prisoner of war until his death on May 23, 1952,
during the Korean War.
(4) Specialist four robert l. towles.--In the case of
Specialist Four Robert L. Towles, the acts of valor referred
to in subsection (a) are the actions of then Specialist Four
Robert L. Towles of Company D, 2d Battalion, 7th Cavalry, 1st
Cavalry Division on November 17, 1965, during the Vietnam War
for which he was originally awarded the Bronze Star with
``V'' Device.

SEC. 577. AUTHORIZATION AND REQUEST FOR AWARD OF
DISTINGUISHED-SERVICE CROSS TO JAY C. COPLEY
FOR ACTS OF VALOR DURING THE VIETNAM WAR.

(a) Authorization.--Notwithstanding the time limitations
specified in section 3744 of title 10, United States Code, or
any other time limitation with respect to the awarding of
certain medals to persons who served in the Armed Forces, the
Secretary of the Army is authorized and requested to award
the Distinguished-Service Cross under section 3742 of such
title to former Captain Jay C. Copley of the United States
Army for the acts of valor during the Vietnam War described
in subsection (b).
(b) Acts of Valor Described.--The acts of valor referred to
in subsection (a) are the actions of then Captain Jay C.
Copley on May 5, 1968, as commander of Company C of the 1st
Battalion, 50th Infantry, 173d Airborne Brigade during an
engagement with a regimental-size enemy force in Bin Dinh
Province, South Vietnam.

SEC. 578. PROGRAM TO COMMEMORATE 60TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE
KOREAN WAR.

(a) Commemorative Program Authorized.--The Secretary of
Defense may establish and conduct a program to commemorate
the 60th anniversary of the Korean War (in this section
referred to as the ``commemorative program''). In conducting
the commemorative program, the Secretary shall coordinate and
support other programs and activities of the Federal
Government, State and local governments, and other persons
and organizations in commemoration of the Korean War.
(b) Schedule.--If the Secretary of Defense establishes the
commemorative program, the Secretary shall determine the
schedule of major events and priority of efforts for the
commemorative program to achieve the commemorative objectives
specified in subsection (c). The Secretary may establish a
committee to assist the Secretary in determining the schedule
and conducting the commemorative program.
(c) Commemorative Activities and Objectives.--The
commemorative program may include activities and ceremonies
to achieve the following objectives:
(1) To thank and honor veterans of the Korean War,
including members of the Armed Forces who were held as
prisoners of war or listed as missing in action, for their
service and sacrifice on behalf of the United States.
(2) To thank and honor the families of veterans of the
Korean War for their sacrifices and contributions, especially
families who lost a loved one in the Korean War.
(3) To highlight the service of the Armed Forces during the
Korean War and the contributions of Federal agencies and
governmental and non-governmental organizations that served
with, or in support of, the Armed Forces.
(4) To pay tribute to the sacrifices and contributions made
on the home front by the people of the United States during
the Korean War.
(5) To provide the people of the United States with a clear
understanding and appreciation of the lessons and history of
the Korean War.
(6) To highlight the advances in technology, science, and
medicine related to military research conducted during the
Korean War.
(7) To recognize the contributions and sacrifices made by
the allies of the United States during the Korean War.
(d) Use of The United States of America Korean War
Commemoration and Symbols.--Subsection (c) of section 1083 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998
(Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1918), as amended by section
1067 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261; 112 Stat. 2134) and
section 1052 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 764), shall
apply to the commemorative program.
(e) Commemorative Fund.--
(1) Establishment of new account.--If the Secretary of
Defense establishes the commemorative program, the Secretary
the Treasury shall establish in the Treasury of the United
States an account to be known as the ``Department of Defense
Korean War Commemoration Fund'' (in this section referred to
as the ``Fund'').
(2) Administration and use of fund.--The Fund shall be
available to, and administered by, the Secretary of Defense.
The Secretary shall use the assets of the Fund only for the
purpose of conducting the commemorative program and shall
prescribe such regulations regarding the use of the Fund as
the Secretary considers to be necessary.
(3) Deposits.--There shall be deposited into the Fund the
following:
(A) Amounts appropriated to the Fund.
(B) Proceeds derived from the use by the Secretary of
Defense of the exclusive rights described in subsection (c)
of section 1083 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1918).
(C) Donations made in support of the commemorative program
by private and corporate donors.
(4) Availability.--Subject to paragraph (5), amounts in the
Fund shall remain available until expended.
(5) Treatment of unobligated funds; transfer.--If
unobligated amounts remain in the Fund as of September 30,
2013, the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer the
amounts to the Department of Defense Vietnam War
Commemorative Fund established pursuant to section 598(e) of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 113 note). The transferred
amounts shall be merged with, and available for the same
purposes as, other amounts in the Department of Defense
Vietnam War Commemorative Fund.
(f) Acceptance of Voluntary Services.--
(1) Authority to accept services.--Notwithstanding section
1342 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of
Defense may accept from any person voluntary services to be
provided in furtherance of the commemorative program. The
Secretary shall prohibit the solicitation of any voluntary
services if the nature or circumstances of such solicitation
would compromise the integrity or the appearance of integrity
of any program of the Department of Defense or of any
individual involved in the program.
(2) Compensation for work-related injury.--A person
providing voluntary services under this subsection shall be
considered to be a Federal employee for purposes of chapter
81 of title 5, United States Code, relating to compensation
for work-related injuries. The person shall also be
considered a special governmental employee for purposes of
standards of conduct and sections 202, 203, 205, 207, 208,
and 209 of title 18, United States Code. A person who is not
otherwise employed by the Federal Government shall not be
considered to be a Federal employee for any other purpose by
reason of the provision of voluntary services under this
subsection.
(3) Reimbursement of incidental expenses.--The Secretary
may provide for reimbursement of incidental expenses incurred
by a person providing voluntary services under this
subsection. The Secretary shall determine which expenses are
eligible for reimbursement under this paragraph.
(g) Report Required.--If the Secretary of Defense conducts
the commemorative program, the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense shall submit to Congress, not later
than 60 days after the end of the commemorative program, a
report containing an accounting of--
(1) all of the funds deposited into and expended from the
Fund;
(2) any other funds expended under this section; and
(3) any unobligated funds remaining in the Fund as of
September 30, 2013, that are transferred to the Department of
Defense Vietnam War Commemorative Fund pursuant to subsection
(e)(5).
(h) Limitation on Expenditures.--Using amounts appropriated
to the Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense may
not expend more than $5,000,000 to carry out the
commemorative program.

Subtitle I--Military Family Readiness Matters

SEC. 581. APPOINTMENT OF ADDITIONAL MEMBER OF DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE MILITARY FAMILY READINESS COUNCIL.

(a) Inclusion of Spouse of General or Flag Officer.--
Subsection (b) of section 1781a of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (F);
and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new
subparagraph:
``(E) The spouse of a general or flag officer.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``subparagraphs (C) and
(D)'' and inserting ``subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E)''.
(b) Clarification of Appointment Options for Existing
Member.--Subparagraph (F) of subsection (b)(1) of such
section, as redesignated by subsection (a)(1)(A), is amended
to read as follows:
``(F) In addition to the representatives appointed under
subparagraphs (B) and (C), the

[[Page 9554]]

senior enlisted advisor, or the spouse of a senior enlisted
member, from each of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air
Force.''.
(c) Appointment by Secretary of Defense.--Subsection (b) of
such section is further amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``, who shall be
appointed by the Secretary of Defense'';
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``, who shall be
appointed by the Secretary of Defense'' both places it
appears; and
(C) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``by the Secretary of
Defense''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) The Secretary of Defense shall appoint the members of
the Council required by subparagraphs (B) through (F) of
paragraph (1).''.

SEC. 582. DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR
MILITARY FAMILIES WITH SPECIAL NEEDS.

Subsection (c) of section 1781c of title 10, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Director.--(1) The head of the Office shall be the
Director of the Office of Community Support for Military
Families With Special Needs, who shall be a member of the
Senior Executive Service or a general officer or flag
officer.
``(2) In the discharge of the responsibilities of the
Office, the Director shall be subject to the supervision,
direction, and control of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness.''.

SEC. 583. PILOT PROGRAM OF PERSONALIZED CAREER DEVELOPMENT
COUNSELING FOR MILITARY SPOUSES.

(a) Pilot Program Required.--Section 1784a of title 10,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections
(e) and (f), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new
subsection (d):
``(d) Personalized Career Development Counseling.--
``(1) Pilot program required.--The Secretary of Defense
shall conduct a pilot program designed to provide
personalized career development counseling to the spouses of
members of the armed forces eligible for assistance under
this section, including the development of strategies, step-
by-step guidelines, and customizable milestones--
``(A) to promote a comprehensive, introspective review of
personal skills, experience, goals, and requirements with a
view to developing a personalized plan for career
development;
``(B) to identify career options that are portable,
personally rewarding, and compatible with personal strengths,
skills, and experience;
``(C) to instruct and encourage the use of sound personal
and professional management practices; and
``(D) to plan career attainment progression objectives and
measure progress.
``(2) Incentives to fill critical civilian specialties.--In
conducting the pilot program, the Secretary shall consider
methods to provide incentives for program participants to
fill critical civilian specialties needed in the Department
of Defense, including the following:
``(A) Mental health and other health care.
``(B) Social work.
``(C) Family welfare.
``(D) Contract and acquisition management.
``(E) Personal financial management.
``(F) Day care services.
``(G) Education.
``(H) Military resale system.
``(I) Morale, welfare and recreation activities.
``(J) Law enforcement.
``(3) Process reviews.--The Secretary shall include in the
pilot program a periodic review, to be conducted by
counselors, of progress made by participants to determine if
changes to personal career strategies may be necessary.
``(4) Number of participants.--The Secretary of Defense
shall enroll at least 75 military spouses in the pilot
program, but not more than 150 military spouses.
``(5) Geographic coverage of pilot program.--The pilot
program shall be conducted in at least three separate
geographic areas, as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
``(6) Counselors.--The Secretary of Defense may enter into
contracts with career counselors to provide counseling
services under the pilot program. There shall be at least one
counselor in each of the geographic areas of the pilot
program.
``(7) Annual evaluation.--The Secretary of Defense shall
conduct an annual evaluation of the pilot program to
determine the following:
``(A) The effectiveness of the pilot program in improving
the ability of participants to identify, develop, and obtain
employment in portable career fields.
``(B) The self-reported levels of professional satisfaction
of participants.
``(C) The quality of careers selected and pursued.
``(D) The rates of success--
``(i) as determined and evaluated by participants; and
``(ii) as determined by the Secretary.
``(8) Annual report.--
``(A) Report required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives an annual report containing--
``(i) the results of the most-recent annual evaluation
conducted under paragraph (7); and
``(ii) the matters required by subparagraph (B).
``(B) Contents.--Each report under this paragraph shall
contain, at a minimum, the following:
``(i) The number of participants in the pilot program.
``(ii) Recommendations for adjustments to the pilot
program.
``(iii) Recommendations for extending the pilot program or
implementing a permanent comprehensive career development for
military spouses.
``(C) Time for submission.--The first report under this
subsection shall be submitted not later than one year after
the date of the commencement of counseling services under the
pilot program. Subsequent reports shall be submitted for each
year of the pilot program, with the final report being
submitted not later than 90 days after the termination of the
pilot program.
``(9) Termination.--The pilot program shall terminate at
the end of the three-year period beginning on the date on
which the Secretary of Defense notifies the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives
of the commencement of counseling services under the pilot
program.''.
(b) Implementation Plan.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to Committees on Armed Services of the Senate
and the House of Representatives a plan to implement the
pilot program under subsection (d) of section 1784a of title
10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a).

SEC. 584. MODIFICATION OF YELLOW RIBBON REINTEGRATION
PROGRAM.

(a) Office for Reintegration Programs.--Subsection (d)(1)
of section 582 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 10101 note)
is amended--
(1) by striking ``The Under'' and inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--The Under''; and
(2) in the last sentence--
(A) by striking ``The office may also'' and inserting the
following:
``(B) Partnerships and access.--The office may'';
(B) by inserting ``and the Department of Veterans Affairs''
after ``Administration''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new sentence:
``Service and State-based programs may provide access to
curriculum, training, and support for services to members and
families from all components.''.
(b) Center for Excellence in Reintegration.--Subsection
(d)(2) of such section is amended by adding at the end the
following new sentence: ``The Center shall develop and
implement a process for evaluating the effectiveness of the
Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program in supporting the health
and well-being of members of the Armed Forces and their
families throughout the deployment cycle described in
subsection (g)''.
(c) State Deployment Cycle Support Teams.--Subsection
(f)(3) of such section is amended by inserting ``and
community-based organizations'' after ``service providers''.
(d) Operation of Program During Deployment and Post-
deployment-reconstitution Phases.--Subsection (g) of such
section is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``and to decrease the
isolation of families during deployment'' after ``combat
zone''; and
(2) in paragraph (5)(A), by inserting ``, providing
information on employment opportunities,'' after
``communities''.
(e) Additional Outreach Service.--Subsection (h) of such
section, as amended by section 595(1) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 110-84;
123 Stat. 2338), is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(15) Resiliency training to promote comprehensive
programs for members of the Armed Forces to build mental and
emotional resiliency for successfully meeting the demands of
the deployment cycle.''.

SEC. 585. IMPORTANCE OF OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR
MILITARY FAMILIES WITH SPECIAL NEEDS.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Office of Community Support for Military Families with
Special Needs, as established pursuant to section 1781c of
title 10, United States Code, as added by section 563 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2304), is the best structure--
(1) to determine what medical, educational, and other
support services are required by military families with
children who have a medical or educational special need; and
(2) to ensure that those services are made available to
military families with special needs.
(b) Specific Budgeting for Office.--Effective with the
Program Objective Memorandum to be issued for fiscal year
2012 and thereafter and containing recommended programming
and resource allocations for the Department of Defense, the
Secretary of Defense shall specifically address the Office of
Community Support for Military Families with Special Needs to
ensure that a separate line of funding is allocated to the
Office.

SEC. 586. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR MILITARY
FAMILIES WITH SPECIAL NEEDS.

(a) Report Required.--The Comptroller General of the United
States shall prepare a report identifying--
(1) the progress made in implementing the Office of
Community Support for Military Families

[[Page 9555]]

with Special Needs, as established pursuant to section 1781c
of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 563 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2304);
(2) the policies governing the operation of the Office; and
(3) any gaps that still exist in ensuring that members of
the Armed Forces who have dependents with special needs
receive the support and services they deserve.
(b) Elements of Report.--In the report required by
subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall specifically
address the following:
(1) The implementation of the responsibilities and duties
assigned to the Office of Community Support for Military
Families With Special Needs pursuant to subsections (d), (e),
and (f) of section 1781c of title 10, United States Code.
(2) The manner in which the Department of Defense and the
military departments intend to ensure that feedback is
provided to the Office of Community Support for Military
Families With Special Needs to ensure that the services and
policy put in place are appropriate.
(c) Recommendations.--The Comptroller General shall include
in the report required by subsection (a) specific
recommendations on the establishment, reporting requirements,
internal monitoring, and oversight of the Office of Community
Support for Military Families With Special Needs by the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to ensure
that the mission of the Office is being accomplished.
(d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
the report required by subsection (a) to the congressional
defense committees.

SEC. 587. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON EXCEPTIONAL FAMILY
MEMBER PROGRAM.

(a) Assessment Required.--The Comptroller General of the
United States shall conduct an assessment of the Exceptional
Family Member Program of the Department of Defense to review
the operation of the program in each of the Armed Forces,
including program policies, best practices, execution,
implementation and strategic planning, to determine program
variances and to make recommendations to improve and
standardize program effectiveness and support for members of
the Armed Forces who have dependents with special needs.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report containing
the results of the assessment and review under subsection
(a).

SEC. 588. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
MILITARY SPOUSE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS.

(a) Comptroller General Review.--The Comptroller General of
the United States shall carry out a review of all Department
of Defense spouse employment programs.
(b) Elements of Review.--At a minimum, the review shall
address the following:
(1) The efficacy and effectiveness of Department of Defense
spouse employment programs.
(2) All current Department of Defense programs that are in
place to support military spouses or dependents for the
purposes of employment assistance.
(3) The types of military spouse employment programs that
have been considered or used in the past by the Department of
Defense.
(4) The ways in which military spouse employment programs
have changed in recent years.
(5) The benefits or programs that are specifically
available to support military spouses of members of the Armed
Forces serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation
Enduring Freedom.
(6) The existing feedback mechanisms available for military
spouses to express their views on the effectiveness and
future direction of relevant Department of Defense programs
and policies.
(7) The degree of oversight provided by the Office of
Personnel and Management regarding military spouse
preferences.
(c) Submission of Results.--Not later than March 1, 2011,
the Comptroller General shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report containing--
(1) the results of the review;
(2) the assumptions upon which the review was based and the
validity and completeness of such assumptions; and
(3) such recommendations as the Comptroller General
considers necessary for improving Department of Defense
spouse employment programs.

SEC. 589. REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE MILITARY SPOUSE
EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

(a) Review Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall carry
out a review of all Department of Defense education programs
designed to support spouses of members of the Armed Forces.
(b) Elements of Review.--At a minimum, the review shall
evaluate the following:
(1) All current Department of Defense programs that are in
place to advance military spouse education opportunities.
(2) The efficacy and effectiveness of Department of Defense
spouse education programs.
(3) The effect that a lack military spouse education
opportunities has on the ability to retain members of the
Armed Forces.
(4) A comparison of the costs associated with providing
military spouse education opportunities to retain members
rather than recruiting or training new members.
(c) Submission of Results.--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 containing--
(1) the results of the review; and
(2) such recommendations as the Secretary considers
necessary for improving Department of Defense spouse
education programs.

Subtitle J--Other Matters

SEC. 591. ESTABLISHMENT OF JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICERS' TRAINING
CORPS UNITS FOR STUDENTS IN GRADES ABOVE SIXTH
GRADE.

Section 2031 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(g)(1) In addition to units of the Junior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps established at public and private
secondary educational institutions under subsection (a), the
Secretary of each military department may carry out a pilot
program to establish and support units at public and private
educational institutions that are not secondary educational
institutions to permit the enrollment of students in the
Corps who, notwithstanding the limitation in subsection
(b)(1), are in a grade above the sixth grade. Under the pilot
program, the Secretary may authorize a course of military
instruction of not less than two academic years' duration,
notwithstanding subsection (b)(3).
``(2) Except as provided in paragraph (1), a unit of the
Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps established and
supported under the pilot program must meet the requirements
of this section.
``(3) The Secretary of the military department concerned
shall conduct a review of the pilot program. The review shall
include an evaluation of what impacts, if any, the pilot
program may have on the operation of the Junior Reserve
Officers' Training Corps in secondary educational
institutions.''.

SEC. 592. INCREASE IN NUMBER OF PRIVATE SECTOR CIVILIANS
AUTHORIZED FOR ADMISSION TO NATIONAL DEFENSE
UNIVERSITY.

Section 2167(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``20 full-time student positions'' and inserting
``35 full-time student positions''.

SEC. 593. ADMISSION OF DEFENSE INDUSTRY CIVILIANS TO ATTEND
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE INSTITUTE OF
TECHNOLOGY.

(a) Admission Authority.--Chapter 901 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by inserting after section 9314 the
following new section:

``Sec. 9314a. United States Air Force Institute of
Technology: admission of defense industry civilians

``(a) Admission Authorized.--(1) The Secretary of the Air
Force may permit defense industry employees described in
subsection (b) to receive instruction at the United States
Air Force Institute of Technology in accordance with this
section. Any such defense industry employee may be enrolled
in, and may be provided instruction in, a program leading to
a graduate degree in a defense focused curriculum related to
aeronautics and astronautics, electrical and computer
engineering, engineering physics, mathematics and statistics,
operational sciences, or systems and engineering management.
``(2) No more than 125 defense industry employees may be
enrolled at the United States Air Force Institute of
Technology at any one time under the authority of paragraph
(1).
``(3) Upon successful completion of the course of
instruction at the United States Air Force Institute of
Technology in which a defense industry employee is enrolled,
the defense industry employee may be awarded an appropriate
degree under section 9314 of this title.
``(b) Eligible Defense Industry Employees.--For purposes of
this section, an eligible defense industry employee is an
individual employed by a private firm that is engaged in
providing to the Department of Defense significant and
substantial defense-related systems, products, or services. A
defense industry employee admitted for instruction at the
United States Air Force Institute of Technology remains
eligible for such instruction only so long at that person
remains employed by the same firm.
``(c) Annual Determination by the Secretary of the Air
Force.--Defense industry employees may receive instruction at
the United States Air Force Institute of Technology during
any academic year only if, before the start of that academic
year, the Secretary of the Air Force, or the designee of the
Secretary, determines that providing instruction to defense
industry employees under this section during that year--
``(1) will further the military mission of the United
States Air Force Institute of Technology; and
``(2) will be done on a space-available basis and not
require an increase in the size of the faculty of the school,
an increase in the course offerings of the school, or an
increase in the laboratory facilities or other infrastructure
of the school.
``(d) Program Requirements.--The Secretary of the Air Force
shall ensure that--
``(1) the curriculum in which defense industry employees
may be enrolled under this section is not readily available
through other schools and concentrates on the areas of focus
specified in subsection (a)(1) that are conducted by military
organizations and defense contractors working in close
cooperation; and
``(2) the course offerings at the United States Air Force
Institute of Technology continue to be determined solely by
the needs of the Department of Defense.

[[Page 9556]]

``(e) Tuition.--(1) The United States Air Force Institute
of Technology shall charge tuition for students enrolled
under this section at a rate not less than the rate charged
for employees of the United States outside the Department of
the Air Force.
``(2) Amounts received by the United States Air Force
Institute of Technology for instruction of students enrolled
under this section shall be retained by the school to defray
the costs of such instruction. The source, and the
disposition, of such funds shall be specifically identified
in records of the school.
``(f) Standards of Conduct.--While receiving instruction at
the United States Air Force Institute of Technology, defense
industry employees enrolled under this section, to the extent
practicable, are subject to the same regulations governing
academic performance, attendance, norms of behavior, and
enrollment as apply to Government civilian employees
receiving instruction at the school.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 9314 the following new item:

``9314a. United States Air Force Institute of Technology: admission of
defense industry civilians.''.

SEC. 594. DATE FOR SUBMISSION OF ANNUAL REPORT ON DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE STARBASE PROGRAM.

Section 2193b(g) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``90 days after the end of each fiscal
year'' and inserting ``March 31 of each year''.

SEC. 595. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF FINAL
REPORT OF MILITARY LEADERSHIP DIVERSITY
COMMISSION.

Section 596(e)(1) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
122 Stat. 4478) is amended by striking ``12 months'' and
inserting ``18 months''.

SEC. 596. ENHANCED AUTHORITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES
AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND COAST GUARD
CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES AND THEIR FAMILIES TO ACCEPT
GIFTS FROM NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES.

(a) Codification and Expansion of Existing Authority to
Cover Additional Members and Employees.--
(1) Codification and expansion.--Chapter 155 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
2601 the following new section:

``Sec. 2601a. Direct acceptance of gifts by members of the
armed forces and Department of Defense and Coast Guard
employees and their families

``(a) Regulations Governing Acceptance of Gifts.--(1) The
Secretary of Defense (and the Secretary of Homeland Security
in the case of the Coast Guard) shall issue regulations to
provide that, subject to such limitations as may be specified
in such regulations, the following individuals may accept
gifts from nonprofit organizations, private parties, and
other sources outside the Department of Defense or the
Department of Homeland Security:
``(A) A member of the armed forces described in subsection
(c).
``(B) A civilian employee of the Department of Defense or
Coast Guard described in subsection (d).
``(C) The family members of such a member or employee.
``(D) Survivors of such a member or employee who is killed.
``(2) The regulations required by this subsection shall
apply uniformly to all elements of the Department of Defense
and, to the maximum extent feasible, to the Coast Guard.
``(b) Exception to Gift Ban.--A member of the armed forces
described in subsection (c) and a civilian employee described
in subsection (d) may accept gifts as provided in the
regulations issued under subsection (a) notwithstanding
section 7353 of title 5.
``(c) Covered Members.--This section applies to a member of
the armed forces who, while performing active duty, full-time
National Guard duty, or inactive-duty training on or after
September 11, 2001, incurred an injury or illness--
``(1) as described in section 1413a(e)(2) of this title;
``(2) in an operation or area designated as a combat
operation or a combat zone by the Secretary of Defense in
accordance with the regulations issued under subsection (a);
or
``(3) under other circumstances determined by the Secretary
concerned to warrant treatment analogous to members covered
by paragraph (1) or (2).
``(d) Covered Employees.--This section applies to a
civilian employee of the Department of Defense or Coast Guard
who, while an employee on or after September 11, 2001,
incurred an injury or illness under a circumstance described
in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (c).
``(e) Gifts From Certain Sources Prohibited.--The
regulations issued under subsection (a) may not authorize the
acceptance of a gift from a foreign government or
international organization or their agents.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 2601 the following new item:

``2601a. Direct acceptance of gifts by members of the armed forces and
Department of Defense and Coast Guard employees and their
families.''.

(b) Repeal of Superceded Provision.--Section 8127 of the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 (division A of
Public Law 109-148; 119 Stat. 2730; 10 U.S.C. 2601 note
prec.) is repealed.
(c) Application of Existing Regulations.--Pending the
issuance of the regulations required by subsection (a) of
section 2601a of title 10, United States Code, as added by
subsection (a), the regulations prescribed under section 8127
of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006
(division A of Public Law 109-148; 119 Stat. 2730; 10 U.S.C.
2601 note prec.) shall apply to the acceptance of gifts under
such section 2601a.
(d) Retroactive Applicability of Regulations.--The
regulations issued under subsection (a) of section 2601a of
title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a),
shall, to the extent provided in such regulations, also apply
to the acceptance of gifts during the period beginning on
September 11, 2001, and ending on the date on which such
regulations go into effect.

SEC. 597. REPORT ON PERFORMANCE AND IMPROVEMENTS OF
TRANSITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

(a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
prepare a report on the Transition Assistance Program of the
Department of Defense.
(b) Elements.--The report shall include the following:
(1) A statement and analysis of the rates of post-
separation employment rates compared with the general
population annually since September 11, 2001.
(2) A chronological summary of the evolution and
development of the Transition Assistance Program since
September 11, 2001.
(3) A description of efforts to transform the Transition
Assistance Program from one of end-of-service transition to a
life-cycle model, in which transition is considered
throughout the career of a member of the Armed Forces.
(4) An analysis of current and future challenges members
continue to face upon entering the civilian work force,
including a survey of the following individuals and
organizations to identify strengths and shortcomings in the
Transition Assistance Program:
(A) A representational population of transitioning or
recently separated members.
(B) Employers with a track record of employing retired or
separating members.
(C) Veterans service organizations and advocacy groups.
(5) Any recommendations, including recommendations for
legislative action, that the Secretary of Defense considers
appropriate to improve the organization, policies,
consistency of quality, and efficacy of the Transition
Assistance Program.
(c) Consultation.--The Secretary of Defense shall prepare
the report in consultation with the Secretary of Labor.
(d) Submission of Report.--Not later than 270 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit the report to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

SEC. 598. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ASSISTING MEMBERS OF
THE ARMED FORCES TO PARTICIPATE IN
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Some members of the Armed Forces who are separated or
released from active duty are having difficulty finding
employment after their separation or release.
(2) Some members who have served for long periods on active
duty have the additional difficulty of translating their
military experience into skill sets for civilian employment.
(3) Apprenticeship programs bring immense value to the
American workforce and to individuals who participate in such
programs.
(4) Apprenticeship programs assist in the building of
resumes and skills of participants and help connect
participants with employers and job opportunities.
(5) Military units returning from deployment often operate
at a reduced readiness status, which would allow members who
are assigned to the unit, but who are in the process of being
separated or released from active duty, to be available to
participate in apprenticeship programs.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
commanders of units of the Armed Forces should make every
effort to permit members of the Armed Forces who are assigned
to the unit, but who are in the process of being separated or
released from active duty, to participate in an
apprenticeship program that is registered under the Act of
Aug. 16, 1937 (commonly known as the National Apprenticeship
Act; 29 U.S.C. 50 et seq.).
(c) Armed Forces Defined.--In this section, the term
``Armed Forces'' means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine
Corps.

TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

SEC. 601. FISCAL YEAR 2011 INCREASE IN MILITARY BASIC PAY.

(a) Waiver of Section 1009 Adjustment.--The adjustment to
become effective during fiscal year 2011 required by section
1009 of title 37, United States Code, in the rates of monthly
basic pay authorized members of the uniformed services shall
not be made.
(b) Increase in Basic Pay.--Effective on January 1, 2011,
the rates of monthly basic pay for members of the uniformed
services are increased by 1.9 percent.

[[Page 9557]]

SEC. 602. BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING FOR TWO-MEMBER COUPLES
WHEN ONE OR BOTH MEMBERS ARE ON SEA DUTY.

(a) In General.--Subparagraph (C) of section 403(f)(2) of
title 37, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(C) Notwithstanding section 421 of this title, a member
of a uniformed service in a pay grade below pay grade E-6 who
is assigned to sea duty and is married to another member of a
uniformed service is entitled to a basic allowance for
housing subject to the limitations of subsection (e).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on January 1, 2011.

SEC. 603. ALLOWANCES FOR PURCHASE OF REQUIRED UNIFORMS AND
EQUIPMENT.

(a) Initial Allowance for Officers.--Section 415 of title
37, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (4) as
subparagraphs (A) through (D), respectively;
(B) by inserting ``Allowance for Officers in the Armed
Forces.--(1)'' after ``(a)'';
(C) by striking ``$400'' and inserting ``$500''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) The Secretary of a military department, with the
approval of the Secretary of Defense, may increase the
maximum amount of the allowance specified in paragraph (1)
for officers of an armed force under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary. The Secretary of Homeland Security, in the case of
the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the
Navy, may increase the maximum amount of the allowance
specified in paragraph (1) for officers of the Coast
Guard.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``Exception.--'' after
``(b)''; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
(B) by striking ``An allowance of $250'' and inserting
``Public Health Service Allowance.--(1) An allowance of
$300''; and
(C) by inserting ``(2)'' before ``An officer''.
(b) Additional Allowances.--Section 416 of such title is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``$200'' and inserting
``$250''; and
(2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``$400'' and
inserting ``$500''.

SEC. 604. INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF FAMILY SEPARATION ALLOWANCE.

(a) Increase.--Section 427(a)(1) of title 37, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``$250'' and inserting ``$285''.
(b) Application of Amendment.--The amendment made by
subsection (a) shall take effect on October 1, 2010, and
apply with respect to months beginning on or after that date.

SEC. 605. ONE-TIME SPECIAL COMPENSATION FOR TRANSITION OF
ASSISTANTS PROVIDING AID AND ATTENDANCE CARE TO
MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES WITH
CATASTROPHIC INJURIES OR ILLNESSES.

(a) Transition Compensation Authorized.--Section 439 of
title 37, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (e) through (h) as
subsections (f) through (i), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new
subsection (e):
``(e) One-time Transitional Compensation Authorized.--In
addition to monthly special compensation payable under
subsection (a), the Secretary concerned may pay to a member
eligible for monthly special compensation a one-time payment
of not more than $3,500 for the transition of assistants
providing aid and attendance care to the member as described
in subsection (b)(2).''.
(b) Conforming and Clerical Amendments.--Such section is
further amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by inserting ``of Monthly
Compensation'' after ``Amount'';
(2) in subsection (d), by inserting ``of Monthly
Compensation'' after ``Duration''; and
(3) in subsection (f), as redesignated by subsection
(a)(1), by striking ``Monthly special compensation payable to
a member under this section'' and inserting ``Special
compensation paid to a member under subsection (a) or (e)''.

SEC. 606. EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF SENIOR ENLISTED MEMBER
TO INCLUDE SENIOR ENLISTED MEMBER SERVING
WITHIN A COMBATANT COMMAND.

(a) Basic Pay.--On and after January 1, 2011, for purposes
of establishing the rates of monthly basic pay for members of
the uniformed services, the senior enlisted member of the
Armed Forces serving within a combatant command (as defined
in section 161(c) of title 10, United States Code) shall be
treated in the same manner as the Sergeant Major of the Army,
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, Chief Master Sergeant
of the Air Force, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, Master
Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard, and Senior Enlisted
Advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
(b) Rate of Basic Pay Used to Determine Retired Pay Base.--
Section 1406(i)(3)(B) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(vii) Senior enlisted member serving within a combatant
command (as defined in section 161(c) of this title).''.
(c) Pay During Terminal Leave and While Hospitalized.--
Section 210(c) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(7) The senior enlisted member serving within a combatant
command (as defined in section 161(c) of title 10).''.

SEC. 607. INELIGIBILITY OF CERTAIN FEDERAL CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES
FOR RESERVIST INCOME REPLACEMENT PAYMENTS ON
ACCOUNT OF AVAILABILITY OF COMPARABLE BENEFITS
UNDER ANOTHER PROGRAM.

(a) Ineligibility for Payments.--Section 910(b) of title
37, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(3) A member of a reserve component who is otherwise
entitled to a payment under this section is not entitled to
the payment for any month during which the member is also a
civilian employee of the Federal Government entitled to--
``(A) a differential payment under section 5538 of title 5;
or
``(B) a comparable benefit under an administratively
established program for civilian employees absent from a
position of employment with the Federal Government in order
to perform active duty in the uniformed services.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Subsection (b)(3) of section 910 of
title 37, United States Code, as added by subsection (a),
shall apply with respect to payments under such section for
months beginning on or after the date of the enactment of
this Act.

Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

SEC. 611. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUS AND SPECIAL PAY
AUTHORITIES FOR RESERVE FORCES.

The following sections of title 37, United States Code, are
amended by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting
``December 31, 2011'':
(1) Section 308b(g), relating to Selected Reserve
reenlistment bonus.
(2) Section 308c(i), relating to Selected Reserve
affiliation or enlistment bonus.
(3) Section 308d(c), relating to special pay for enlisted
members assigned to certain high-priority units.
(4) Section 308g(f)(2), relating to Ready Reserve
enlistment bonus for persons without prior service.
(5) Section 308h(e), relating to Ready Reserve enlistment
and reenlistment bonus for persons with prior service.
(6) Section 308i(f), relating to Selected Reserve
enlistment and reenlistment bonus for persons with prior
service.
(7) Section 910(g), relating to income replacement payments
for reserve component members experiencing extended and
frequent mobilization for active duty service.

SEC. 612. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUS AND SPECIAL PAY
AUTHORITIES FOR HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS.

(a) Title 10 Authorities.--The following sections of title
10, United States Code, are amended by striking ``December
31, 2010'' and inserting ``December 31, 2011'':
(1) Section 2130a(a)(1), relating to nurse officer
candidate accession program.
(2) Section 16302(d), relating to repayment of education
loans for certain health professionals who serve in the
Selected Reserve.
(b) Title 37 Authorities.--The following sections of title
37, United States Code, are amended by striking ``December
31, 2010'' and inserting ``December 31, 2011'':
(1) Section 302c-1(f), relating to accession and retention
bonuses for psychologists.
(2) Section 302d(a)(1), relating to accession bonus for
registered nurses.
(3) Section 302e(a)(1), relating to incentive special pay
for nurse anesthetists.
(4) Section 302g(e), relating to special pay for Selected
Reserve health professionals in critically short wartime
specialties.
(5) Section 302h(a)(1), relating to accession bonus for
dental officers.
(6) Section 302j(a), relating to accession bonus for
pharmacy officers.
(7) Section 302k(f), relating to accession bonus for
medical officers in critically short wartime specialties.
(8) Section 302l(g), relating to accession bonus for dental
specialist officers in critically short wartime specialties.

SEC. 613. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF SPECIAL PAY AND BONUS
AUTHORITIES FOR NUCLEAR OFFICERS.

The following sections of title 37, United States Code, are
amended by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting
``December 31, 2011'':
(1) Section 312(f), relating to special pay for nuclear-
qualified officers extending period of active service.
(2) Section 312b(c), relating to nuclear career accession
bonus.
(3) Section 312c(d), relating to nuclear career annual
incentive bonus.

SEC. 614. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO TITLE
37 CONSOLIDATED SPECIAL PAY, INCENTIVE PAY, AND
BONUS AUTHORITIES.

The following sections of title 37, United States Code, are
amended by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting
``December 31, 2011'':
(1) Section 331(h), relating to general bonus authority for
enlisted members.
(2) Section 332(g), relating to general bonus authority for
officers.
(3) Section 333(i), relating to special bonus and incentive
pay authorities for nuclear officers.
(4) Section 334(i), relating to special aviation incentive
pay and bonus authorities for officers.

[[Page 9558]]

(5) Section 335(k), relating to special bonus and incentive
pay authorities for officers in health professions.
(6) Section 351(i), relating to hazardous duty pay.
(7) Section 352(g), relating to assignment pay or special
duty pay.
(8) Section 353(j), relating to skill incentive pay or
proficiency bonus.
(9) Section 355(i), relating to retention incentives for
members qualified in critical military skills or assigned to
high priority units.

SEC. 615. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO
PAYMENT OF OTHER TITLE 37 BONUSES AND SPECIAL
PAYS.

The following sections of chapter 5 of title 37, United
States Code, are amended by striking ``December 31, 2010''
and inserting ``December 31, 2011'':
(1) Section 301b(a), relating to aviation officer retention
bonus.
(2) Section 307a(g), relating to assignment incentive pay.
(3) Section 308(g), relating to reenlistment bonus for
active members.
(4) Section 309(e), relating to enlistment bonus.
(5) Section 324(g), relating to accession bonus for new
officers in critical skills.
(6) Section 326(g), relating to incentive bonus for
conversion to military occupational specialty to ease
personnel shortage.
(7) Section 327(h), relating to incentive bonus for
transfer between armed forces.
(8) Section 330(f), relating to accession bonus for officer
candidates.

SEC. 616. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO
PAYMENT OF REFERRAL BONUSES.

The following sections of title 10, United States Code, are
amended by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting
``December 31, 2011'':
(1) Section 1030(i), relating to health professions
referral bonus.
(2) Section 3252(h), relating to Army referral bonus.

SEC. 617. TREATMENT OF OFFICERS TRANSFERRING BETWEEN ARMED
FORCES FOR RECEIPT OF AVIATION CAREER SPECIAL
PAY.

Section 301b of title 37, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (h), (i), and (j) as
subsections (i), (j), and (k), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (g) the following new
subsection (h):
``(h) Treatment of Officers Transferring From One Armed
Force to Another.--(1) An officer who transfers from one
armed force to another armed force shall receive the same
compensation under this section as other officers in that
armed force with the same number of years of aviation service
performing similar aviation duties in the same weapon system,
notwithstanding any additional active duty service obligation
incurred as a result of the transfer.
``(2) Until December 31, 2015, the Secretary concerned
shall continue, regardless of the number of years of aviation
service of an officer, to pay compensation under this section
to an officer who transferred or transfers from one armed
force to an armed force under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary concerned until the officer receives the same
number of years of benefits as officers in that armed force
with the same number of years of aviation service performing
similar aviation duties in the same weapon system. In
calculating the years of benefits received, the Secretary
concerned shall include any year during which the officer
received compensation under this section before the transfer.
``(3) An officer may not receive compensation under
paragraph (2) for any period during which the officer is not
qualified for compensation under subsection (b).''.

SEC. 618. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SPECIAL PAY FOR DUTY
SUBJECT TO HOSTILE FIRE OR IMMINENT DANGER OR
FOR DUTY IN FOREIGN AREA DESIGNATED AS AN
IMMINENT DANGER AREA.

(a) Special Pay for Duty Subject to Hostile Fire or
Imminent Danger.--Section 310(b)(1) of title 37, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``$225 a month'' and
inserting ``$260 a month''.
(b) Hazardous Duty Pay.--Section 351(b)(3) of such title is
amended by striking ``$250 per month'' and inserting ``$260
per month''.
(c) Application of Amendments.--The amendments made by this
section shall take effect on October 1, 2010, and apply with
respect to months beginning on or after that date.

SEC. 619. SPECIAL PAYMENT TO MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND
CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
KILLED OR WOUNDED IN ATTACKS DIRECTED AT
MEMBERS OR EMPLOYEES OUTSIDE OF COMBAT ZONE,
INCLUDING THOSE KILLED OR WOUNDED IN CERTAIN
2009 ATTACKS.

(a) Treatment of Members and Civilians Killed or Wounded in
Certain 2009 Attacks.--
(1) Treatment.--For purposes of all applicable Federal
laws, regulations, and policies, a member of the Armed Forces
or civilian employee of the Department of Defense who was
killed or wounded in an attack described in paragraph (2)
shall be deemed as follows:
(A) In the case of a member, to have been killed or wounded
in a combat zone as the result of an act of an enemy of the
United States.
(B) In the case of a civilian employee of the Department of
Defense, to have been killed or wounded as the result of an
act of an enemy of the United States while serving with the
Armed Forces in a contingency operation.
(2) Attacks described.--Paragraph (1) applies to--
(A) the attack that occurred at Fort Hood, Texas, on
November 5, 2009; and
(B) the attack that occurred at a recruiting station in
Little Rock, Arkansas, on June 1, 2009.
(3) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a member
of the Armed Forces or a civilian employee of the Department
of Defense whose death or wound as described in paragraph (1)
is the result of the misconduct of the member or employee, as
determined by the Secretary of Defense.
(b) New Special Payment.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 17 of title 37, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 911. Special payment to members of the armed forces
and civilian employees of the Department of Defense killed
or wounded in attacks directed at members or employees
outside of combat zone

``(a) Special Payment Required.--The Secretary of Defense
shall pay to a member of the armed forces or a civilian
employee of the Department of Defense who is wounded in an
attack under the circumstances described in subsection (b),
or to an eligible survivor if the member or employee is
killed in the attack or dies from wounds sustained in the
attack, an amount of compensation equal to the amount
determined in subsection (c) that would have accrued--
``(1) in the case of a member, on behalf of a member killed
or wounded in a combat zone; and
``(2) in the case of an employee, on behalf of an employee
killed or wounded while serving with the Armed Forces in a
contingency operation.
``(b) Covered Attacks.--
``(1) Attacks described.--Except as provided in paragraph
(2), an attack covered by subsection (a) is any assault or
battery resulting in bodily injury or death committed by an
individual who the Secretary of Defense determines knowingly
targeted--
``(A) a member of the armed forces on account of the
military service of the member or the status of member as a
member of the Armed Forces; or
``(B) a civilian employee of the Department of Defense on
account of the employee's employment with the Department of
Defense or affiliation with the Department of Defense.
``(2) Geographic exclusion.--Subsection (a) does not apply
to any attack that--
``(A) occurs in a combat zone; or
``(B) in the case of a civilian employee of the Department,
occurs while the employee is serving with the armed forces in
a contingency operation.
``(c) Calculation of Compensation Amount.--The Secretary of
Defense shall identify, in consultation with all relevant
Federal agencies, including the Department of Veterans
Affairs and the Internal Revenue Service, all Federal
benefits provided to members of the armed forces and civilian
employees of the Department of Defense killed or wounded in a
combat zone, including special pays and the value of Federal
tax advantages accruing because certain benefits are not
subject to Federal income tax. The Secretary shall exclude
from the calculation any Federal benefits provided regardless
of the geographic location or circumstances of the death or
injuries.
``(d) Exclusion of Certain Individuals.--Subsection (a)
shall not apply to a member of the armed forces or civilian
employee of the Department of Defense whose death or wound as
described in subsection (b) is the result of the misconduct
of the member or employee, as determined by the Secretary of
Defense.
``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `armed forces' means the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marine Corps.
``(2) The term `combat zone' means a combat operation or
combat zone designated by the Secretary of Defense.
``(3) The term `eligible survivor' refers to the persons
eligible to receive a death gratuity payment under section
1477 of title 10. In the case of a deceased member or
employee, the eligible survivor who will receive the payment
under subsection (a) shall be determined as provided in such
section.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``911. Special payment to members of the armed forces and civilian
employees of the Department of Defense killed or wounded
in attacks directed at members or employees outside of
combat zone.''.

(3) Retroactive application.--Section 911 of title 37,
United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), shall apply to
any attack described in subsection (b) of such section
occurring on or after November 6, 2009.
(c) Purple Heart.--This section and the amendments made by
this section shall not be construed to prohibit, authorize,
or require the award of the Purple Heart to any member of the
Armed Forces.

[[Page 9559]]

Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

SEC. 631. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE TRAVEL AND
TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR INACTIVE DUTY
TRAINING OUTSIDE OF NORMAL COMMUTING DISTANCES.

Section 408a(e) of title 37, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting ``December
31, 2011''.

SEC. 632. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR ATTENDANCE
OF DESIGNATED PERSONS AT YELLOW RIBBON
REINTEGRATION EVENTS.

(a) Payment of Travel Costs Authorized.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 7 of title 37, United States Code,
is amended by inserting after section 411k the following new
section:

``Sec. 411l. Travel and transportation allowances: attendance
of designated persons at Yellow Ribbon Reintegration events

``(a) Allowance to Facilitate Attendance.--Under uniform
regulations prescribed by the Secretaries concerned, travel
and transportation described in subsection (c) may be
provided for a person designated pursuant to subsection (b)
to attend an event conducted under the Yellow Ribbon
Reintegration Program established pursuant to section 582 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 10101 note) if the Secretary
concerned determines that the presence of the person may
contribute to the purposes of the event.
``(b) Covered Persons.--A member of the uniformed services
who is eligible to attend a Yellow Ribbon Reintegration
Program event may designate one or more persons, including
another member of the uniformed services, for purposes of
receiving travel and transportation described in subsection
(c) to attend a Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program event.
The designation of a person for purposes of this section may
be changed at any time.
``(c) Authorized Travel and Transportation.--(1) The
transportation authorized by subsection (a) for a person
designated under subsection (b) is round-trip transportation
between the home or place of business of the person and the
location of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program event.
``(2) In addition to the transportation authorized by
subsection (a), the Secretary concerned may provide a per
diem allowance or reimbursement for the actual and necessary
expenses of the travel, or a combination thereof, but not to
exceed the rates established under section 404(d) of this
title.
``(3) The transportation authorized by subsection (a) may
be provided by any of the following means:
``(A) Transportation in-kind.
``(B) A monetary allowance in place of transportation in-
kind at a rate to be prescribed by the Secretaries concerned.
``(C) Reimbursement for the commercial cost of
transportation.
``(4) An allowance payable under this subsection may be
paid in advance.
``(5) Reimbursement payable under this subsection may not
exceed the cost of Government-procured commercial round-trip
air travel.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item related to section 411k the following new item:

``411l. Travel and transportation allowances: attendance of designated
persons at Yellow Ribbon Reintegration events.''.

(b) Applicability.--No reimbursement may be provided under
section 411l of title 37, United States Code, as added by
subsection (a), for travel and transportation costs incurred
before September 30, 2010.

SEC. 633. MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT FOR USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED
VEHICLES.

(a) Use of Single Standard Mileage Rate Established by
IRS.--Section 5704(a)(1) of title 5, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``shall not exceed'' and inserting
``shall be equal to''.
(b) Prescription of Mileage Reimbursement Rates.--Section
5707(b) of such title is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking subparagraph (A) and
inserting the following new subparagraph:
``(A) The Administrator of General Services shall conduct
periodic investigations of the cost of travel and the
operation of privately owned airplanes and privately owned
motorcycles by employees while engaged on official business,
and shall report the results of such investigations to
Congress at least once a year.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking clause (i) and
inserting the following new clause:
``(i) shall prescribe a mileage reimbursement rate for
privately owned automobiles which equals, as provided in
section 5704(a)(1) of this title, the single standard mileage
rate established by the Internal Revenue Service, and''.

Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits

SEC. 641. ELIMINATION OF CAP ON RETIRED PAY MULTIPLIER FOR
MEMBERS WITH GREATER THAN 30 YEARS OF SERVICE
WHO RETIRE FOR DISABILITY.

(a) Computation of Retired Pay.--The table in section
1401(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the column designated ``Column 2'', by inserting ``,
not to exceed 75%,'' after ``percentage of disability'' both
places it appears; and
(2) by striking column 4.
(b) Recomputation of Retired or Retainer Pay to Reflect
Later Active Duty of Members Who First Became Members Before
September 8, 1980.--The table in section 1402(d) of such
title is amended--
(1) in the column designated ``Column 2'', by inserting ``,
not to exceed 75%,'' after ``percentage of disability''; and
(2) by striking column 4.
(c) Recomputation of Retired or Retainer Pay to Reflect
Later Active Duty of Members Who First Became Members After
September 7, 1980.--The table in section 1402a(d) of such
title is amended--
(1) in the column designated ``Column 2'', by inserting ``,
not to exceed 75 percent,'' after ``percentage of
disability''; and
(2) by striking column 4.
(d) Application of Amendments.--The tables in sections
1401(a), 1402(d), and 1402a(d) of title 10, United States
Code, as in effect on the day before the date of the
enactment of this Act, shall continue to apply to the
computation or recomputation of retired or retainer pay for
persons who first became entitled to retired or retainer pay
under subtitle A of such title on or before the date of the
enactment of this Act. The amendments made by this section
shall apply only with respect to persons who first become
entitled to retired or retainer pay under such subtitle after
that date.

SEC. 642. EQUITY IN COMPUTATION OF DISABILITY RETIRED PAY FOR
RESERVE COMPONENT MEMBERS WOUNDED IN ACTION.

Section 1208(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``However,
in the case of such a member who is retired under this
chapter, or whose name is placed on the temporary disability
retired list under this chapter, because of a disability
incurred after the date of the enactment of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, for which the
member is awarded the Purple Heart, the member shall be
credited, for the purposes of this chapter, with the number
of years of service that would be counted if computing the
member's years of service under section 12732 of this
title.''.

SEC. 643. ELIMINATION OF THE AGE REQUIREMENT FOR HEALTH CARE
BENEFITS FOR NON-REGULAR SERVICE RETIREES.

Section 1074(b) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``(1)''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (2).

SEC. 644. CLARIFICATION OF EFFECT OF ORDERING RESERVE
COMPONENT MEMBER TO ACTIVE DUTY TO RECEIVE
AUTHORIZED MEDICAL CARE ON REDUCING ELIGIBILITY
AGE FOR RECEIPT OF NON-REGULAR SERVICE RETIRED
PAY.

Section 12731(f)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iii) If a member described in subparagraph (A) is
wounded or otherwise injured or becomes ill while serving on
active duty pursuant to a call or order to active duty under
a provision of law referred to in the first sentence of
clause (i) or in clause (ii), and the member is then ordered
to active duty under section 12301(h)(1) of this title to
receive medical care for the wound injury, or illness, each
day of active duty under that order for medical care shall be
treated as a continuation of the original call or order to
active duty for purposes of reducing the eligibility age of
the member under this paragraph.''.

SEC. 645. SPECIAL SURVIVOR INDEMNITY ALLOWANCE FOR RECIPIENTS
OF PRE-SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN ANNUITY AFFECTED
BY REQUIRED OFFSET FOR DEPENDENCY AND INDEMNITY
COMPENSATION.

Section 644 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 10 U.S.C. 1448 note) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and (e) as
subsections (d), (e), and (f), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection:
``(c) Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance.--(1) The
Secretary concerned shall pay a monthly special survivor
indemnity allowance under this subsection to a qualified
surviving spouse described in subsection (a) if--
``(A) the surviving spouse is entitled to dependency and
indemnity compensation under section 1311(a) of title 38,
United States Code; and
``(B) the amount of the annuity to which the surviving
spouse is entitled under subsection (b) is affected by
paragraph (2)(A) of such subsection.
``(2) Subject to paragraph (3), the amount of the special
survivor indemnity allowance paid to surviving spouse under
paragraph (1) for a month shall be equal to--
``(A) for months during fiscal year 2009, $50;
``(B) for months during fiscal year 2010, $60;
``(C) for months during fiscal year 2011, $70;
``(D) for months during fiscal year 2012, $80;
``(E) for months during fiscal year 2013, $90;
``(F) for months during fiscal year 2014, $150;
``(G) for months during fiscal year 2015, $200;
``(H) for months during fiscal year 2016, $275; and
``(I) for months during fiscal year 2017, $310.
``(3) The amount of the special survivor indemnity
allowance paid to an eligible survivor under paragraph (1)
for any month may not exceed the amount of the annuity for
that month that is subject to offset under subsection
(b)(2)(A).
``(4) A special survivor indemnity allowance paid under
paragraph (1) does not constitute an

[[Page 9560]]

annuity, and amounts so paid are not subject to adjustment
under any other provision of law.
``(5) The special survivor indemnity allowance shall be
paid under paragraph (1) from amounts in the Department of
Defense Military Retirement Fund established under section
1461 of title 10, United States Code.
``(6) Subject to paragraph (7), this subsection shall only
apply with respect to the month that began on October 1,
2008, and subsequent months through the month ending on
September 30, 2017. As soon as practicable after the date of
the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2011, the Secretary concerned shall pay, in a
lump sum, the total amount of the special survivor indemnity
allowances due under paragraph (1) to a qualified surviving
spouse for months since October 1, 2008, through the month in
which the first allowance is paid under paragraph (1) to the
qualified surviving spouse.
``(7) Effective on October 1, 2017, the authority provided
by this subsection shall terminate. No special survivor
indemnity allowance may be paid to any person by reason of
this subsection for any period before October 1, 2008, or
beginning on or after October 1, 2017.''.

SEC. 646. PAYMENT DATE FOR RETIRED AND RETAINER PAY.

(a) Setting Payment Date.--Section 1412 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``Amounts'' and inserting ``(a) Rounding.--
Amounts''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(b) Payment Date.--Amounts of retired pay and retainer
pay due a retired member of the uniformed services shall be
paid on the first day of each month beginning after the month
in which the right to such pay accrues.''.
(b) Clerical Amendments.--
(1) Section heading.--The heading of such section is
amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 1412. Administrative provisions''.

(2) Table of sections.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 71 of such title is amended by striking
the item relating to section 1412 and inserting the following
new item:

``1412. Administrative provisions.''.

(c) Effective Date.--Subsection (b) of section 1412 of
title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a),
shall apply beginning with the first month that begins more
than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality
Benefits and Operations

SEC. 651. SHARED CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR SHOPPING MALLS OR
SIMILAR FACILITIES CONTAINING A COMMISSARY
STORE AND ONE OR MORE NONAPPROPRIATED FUND
INSTRUMENTALITY ACTIVITIES.

Section 2484(h)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C)
and, in such subparagraph, by striking ``subparagraph (A)''
and inserting ``this paragraph'';
(2) in the first sentence of subparagraph (A), by inserting
``the Defense Commissary Agency or'' after ``may authorize'';
(3) by designating the second sentence of subparagraph (A)
as subparagraph (B) and, in such subparagraph, by striking
``The Secretary may'' and inserting the following: ``If the
construction contract is entered into by a nonappropriated
fund instrumentality, the Secretary of Defense may''; and
(4) by adding at the end of subparagraph (B), as designated
by paragraph (3), the following new sentence: ``If the
construction contract is entered into by the Defense
Commissary Agency, the Secretary may authorize the Defense
Commissary Agency accept reimbursement from a nonappropriated
fund instrumentality for the portion of the cost of the
contract that is attributable to construction for
nonappropriated fund instrumentality activities.''.

SEC. 652. ADDITION OF DEFINITION OF MORALE, WELFARE, AND
RECREATION TELEPHONE SERVICES FOR USE IN
CONTRACTS TO PROVIDE SUCH SERVICES FOR MILITARY
PERSONNEL SERVING IN COMBAT ZONES.

Section 885 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 265; 10
U.S.C. 2304 note) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(c) Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Telephone Services
Defined.--In this section, the term `morale, welfare, and
recreation telephone services' means unofficial telephone
calling center services supporting calling centers provided
by the Army and Air Force Exchange Service, Navy Exchange
Service Command, Marine Corps exchanges, or any other
nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the United States
under the jurisdiction of the Armed Forces which is conducted
for the comfort, pleasure, contentment, or physical or mental
improvement of members of the Armed Forces.''.

SEC. 653. FEASIBILITY STUDY ON ESTABLISHMENT OF FULL EXCHANGE
STORE IN THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS.

(a) Study Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct
a study to determine the feasibility of replacing the
``Shoppette'' of the Army and Air Force Exchange Service in
the Northern Mariana Islands with a full-service exchange
store. In conducting the study, the Secretary shall consider
the welfare of members of the Armed Forces serving in the
Northern Mariana Islands and dependents of members residing
in the Northern Mariana Islands.
(b) Submission of Results.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to Congress a report containing the
results of the study conducted under subsection (a).

Subtitle F--Alternative Career Track Pilot Program

SEC. 661. PILOT PROGRAM TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE CAREER TRACK
FOR COMMISSIONED OFFICERS TO FACILITATE AN
INCREASED COMMITMENT TO ACADEMIC AND
PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION AND CAREER-BROADENING
ASSIGNMENTS.

(a) Program Authorized.--Chapter 39 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by inserting after section 672 the
following new section:

``Sec. 673. Alternative career track for commissioned
officers pilot program

``(a) Program Authorized.--(1) Under regulations prescribed
pursuant to subsection (g) and approved by the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of a military department may establish
a pilot program for an armed force under the jurisdiction of
the Secretary under which an eligible commissioned officer,
while on active duty--
``(A) participates in a separate career track characterized
by expanded career opportunities extending over a longer
career;
``(B) agrees to an additional active duty service
obligation of at least five years to be served concurrently
with other active duty service obligations; and
``(C) would be required to accept further active duty
service obligations, as determined by the Secretary, to be
served concurrently with other active duty service
obligations, including the active duty service obligation
accepted under subparagraph (B), in connection with the
officer's entry into education programs, selection for career
broadening assignments, acceptance of additional special and
incentive pays, or selection for promotion.
``(2) The Secretary of the military department concerned
may waive an active duty service obligation accepted under
subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1) to facilitate the
separation or retirement of a participant in the program.
``(3) The program shall be known as the `Alternative Career
Track Pilot Program' (in this section referred to as the
`program').
``(b) Eligible Officers.--Commissioned officers with
between 13 and 18 years of service are eligible to volunteer
to participate in the program.
``(c) Number of Participants.--No more than 50 officers of
each armed force may be selected per year to participate in
the program.
``(d) Alternative Career Elements of Program.--(1) The
Secretaries of the military departments may establish
separate basic pay and special and incentive pay and
promotion systems unique to the officers participating in the
program, without regard to the requirements of this title or
title 37.
``(2) The Secretaries of the military departments may
establish separation and retirement policies for officers
participating in the program without regard to grade and
years of service requirements established under this title.
``(3) Participants serving in a grade below brigadier
general or rear admiral (lower half) may serve in the grade
without regard to the limits on the number of officers in the
grade established under this title.
``(e) Treatment of General and Flag Officer Participants.--
(1) A participant serving in a grade above colonel, or
captain in the Navy, but below lieutenant general or vice
admiral, shall be--
``(A) counted for purposes of general officer and flag
officer limits on grade and the total number serving as
general officers and flag officers, if the participant is
serving in a position requiring the assignment of a military
officer; but
``(B) excluded from limits on grade and the total number
serving as general officers and flag officers, if the
participant is serving in a position not typically occupied
by a military officer.
``(2) A participant serving in the grade of lieutenant
general, vice admiral, general, or admiral shall be counted
for purposes of general officer and flag officer limits on
grade and the total number serving as general officers and
flag officers.
``(f) Return to Standard Career Path; Effect.--(1) The
Secretaries of the military departments retain the authority
to involuntarily return an officer to the standard career
path.
``(2) The Secretary of the military department concerned
may return an officer to the standard career path at the
request of the officer.
``(3) If the program is terminated pursuant to paragraph
(4) or (5) of subsection (i), officers participating in the
program at the time of the termination shall be returned to
the standard career path.
``(4) An officer returned to the standard career path under
paragraph (1), (2), or (3) shall retain the grade, date-of-
rank, and basic pay level earned while a participant in the
program but shall revert to the special and incentive pay
authorities established in title 37 upon the expiration of
the agreement between the Secretary and the officer providing
any special and incentive pays under the program. Subsequent
increases in the officer's rate of monthly basic pay shall
conform to the annual percentage increases in basic pay rates
provided in the basic pay table.
``(g) Annual Report.--(1) The Secretaries of the military
departments, in cooperation with

[[Page 9561]]

the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives an
annual report containing the findings and recommendations of
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military
departments concerning the progress of the program for each
armed force.
``(2) The Secretary of a military department, with the
consent of the Secretary of Defense, may include in the
report for a year a recommendation that the program be made
permanent for an armed force under the jurisdiction of that
Secretary.
``(h) Regulations.--The Secretary of each military
department shall prescribe regulations to carry out the
program. The regulations shall be subject to the approval of
the Secretary of Defense.
``(i) Commencement; Duration.--(1) Before authorizing the
commencement of the program for an armed force, the Secretary
of the military department concerned, with the consent of the
Secretary of Defense, shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report
containing the detailed program structure of the alternative
career track, associated personnel and compensation policies,
implementing instructions and regulations, and a summary of
the specific provisions of this title and title 37 to be
waived under the program. The authority to conduct the
program for that armed force commences 120 days after the
date of the submission of the report.
``(2) The Secretary of the military department concerned,
with the consent of the Secretary of Defense, may authorize
revision of the program structure, associated personnel and
compensation policies, implementing instructions and
regulations, or laws waived, as submitted by the Secretary
under paragraph (1). The Secretary of the military department
concerned, with the consent of the Secretary of Defense,
shall submit the proposed revisions to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives.
The revisions shall take effect 120 days after the date of
their submission.
``(3) If the program for an armed force has not commenced
before December 31, 2015, as provided in paragraph (1), the
authority to commence the program for that armed force
terminates.
``(4) No officer may be accepted to participate in the
program after December 31, 2026.
``(5) The Secretary of the military department concerned,
with the consent of the Secretary of Defense, may terminate
the pilot program for an armed force before the date
specified in paragraph (4). Not later than 90 days after
terminating the pilot program, the Secretary of the military
department concerned, in cooperation with the Secretary of
Defense, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and House of Representatives a report containing
the reasons for the termination.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 672 the following new item:

``673. Alternative career track for commissioned officers pilot
program.''.

Subtitle G--Other Matters

SEC. 671. PARTICIPATION OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES HEALTH
PROFESSIONS SCHOLARSHIP AND FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN ACTIVE DUTY HEALTH
PROFESSION LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM.

Section 2173(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) The person is enrolled in the Armed Forces Health
Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance program
under subchapter I of chapter 105 of this title for a number
of years less than the number of years required to complete
the normal length of the course of study required for the
specific health profession.''.

SEC. 672. RETENTION OF ENLISTMENT, REENLISTMENT, AND STUDENT
LOAN BENEFITS RECEIVED BY MILITARY TECHNICIANS
(DUAL STATUS).

(a) Treatment of Enlistment, Reenlistment, and Student Loan
Benefits.--Section 10216 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(h) Retention of Bonuses and Other Benefits.--If an
individual is first employed as a military technician (dual
status) while the individual is already a member of a reserve
component, the Secretary concerned may not--
``(1) require the individual to repay any enlistment,
reenlistment, or affiliation bonus provided to the individual
in connection with the individual's enlistment or
reenlistment before such employment; or
``(2) terminate the individual's participation in an
educational loan repayment program under chapter 1609 of this
title if the individual began such participation before such
employment.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Subsection (h) of section 10216 of
title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a),
shall apply only with respect to individuals who are first
employed as a military technician (dual status), as described
in subsection (a)(1) of such section 10216, more than 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 673. CANCELLATION OF LOANS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES MADE FROM STUDENT LOAN FUNDS.

Section 465(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1087ee(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(8) For the purpose of this subsection, the term `year of
service' where applied to service by a member of the Armed
Forces described in paragraph (2)(D) means a qualified tour
of duty that--
``(A) is for 6 months or longer; or
``(B) was less than 6 months because the member was
discharged or released from active duty in the Armed Forces
for an injury or disability incurred in or aggravated by
service in the Armed Forces.''.

TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Improvements to Health Benefits

SEC. 701. EXTENSION OF PROHIBITION ON INCREASES IN CERTAIN
HEALTH CARE COSTS.

(a) Charges Under Contracts for Medical Care.--Section
1097(e) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``September 30, 2009'' and inserting ``September 30,
2011''.
(b) Charges for Inpatient Care.--Section 1086(b)(3) of such
title is amended by striking ``September 30, 2010'' and
inserting ``September 30, 2011''.

SEC. 702. EXTENSION OF DEPENDENT COVERAGE UNDER TRICARE.

(a) Dependent Coverage.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 55 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 1110b. TRICARE program: extension of dependent
coverage

``(a) In General.--In accordance with subsection (c), an
individual described in subsection (b) shall be deemed to be
a dependent (as described in section 1072(2)(D) of this
title) for purposes of TRICARE coverage.
``(b) Individual Described.--An individual described in
this subsection is an individual who--
``(1) with respect to a member or former member of a
uniformed service, is--
``(A) a child who has not attained the age of 26 and is not
eligible to enroll in an eligible employer-sponsored plan (as
defined in section 5000A(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986); or
``(B) a person who--
``(i) is placed in the legal custody of the member or
former member as a result of an order of a court of competent
jurisdiction in the United States (or possession of the
United States) for a period of at least 12 consecutive
months;
``(ii) has not attained the age of 26;
``(iii) is not eligible to enroll in an eligible employer-
sponsored plan (as defined in section 5000A(f)(2) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986);
``(iv) resides with the member or former member unless
separated by the necessity of military service or to receive
institutional care as a result of disability or
incapacitation or under such other circumstances as the
administering Secretary may by regulation prescribe;
``(v) is not otherwise a dependent of a member or a former
member under any subparagraph of section 1072(2) of this
title; and
``(vi) is not the child of a dependent who is described in
subparagraph (D) or (I) of section 1072(2) and is a covered
beneficiary; and
``(2) meets other criteria specified in regulations
prescribed by the Secretary.
``(c) Premium.--(1) The Secretary shall prescribe by
regulation a premium for TRICARE coverage provided pursuant
to this section to an individual described in subsection (b).
``(2) The monthly amount of the premium in effect for a
month for TRICARE coverage pursuant to this section shall be
an amount not to exceed the cost of coverage that the
Secretary determines on an appropriate actuarial basis.
``(3) The Secretary shall prescribe the requirements and
procedures applicable to the payment of premiums under this
subsection.
``(4) Amounts collected as premiums under this paragraph
shall be credited to the appropriation available for the
Defense Health Program Account under section 1100 of this
title, shall be merged with sums in such Account that are
available for the fiscal year in which collected, and shall
be available under subsection (b) of such section for such
fiscal year.
``(d) TRICARE Coverage Defined.--In this section, the term
`TRICARE coverage' means health care to which a dependent
described in section 1072(2)(D) of this title is entitled
under section 1076d, 1076e, 1079, 1086, or 1097 of this
title.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1110a the following new item:

``1110b. TRICARE program: extension of dependent coverage.''.

(b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (1) of section 1086(c)
of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after ``of this title'' the following: ``(or an individual
described in section 1110b(b) who meets the requirements for
a dependent under paragraph (1) or (2) of such section
1076(b))''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on October 1, 2010.

SEC. 703. SURVIVOR DENTAL BENEFITS.

Paragraph (2) of section 1076a(k) of title 10, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Such term includes any such dependent of a member who
dies--
``(A) while on active duty for a period of more than 30
days; or
``(B) while such member is a member of the Ready
Reserve.''.

SEC. 704. AURAL SCREENINGS FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 1074f(b) of title
10, United States Code, is

[[Page 9562]]

amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) An aural screening, including an assessment of
tinnitus.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Section 1074f(b)(2) of title 10,
United States Code, as added by subsection (a) of this
section, shall apply to members of the Armed Forces who are
deployed or return from deployment on or after the date that
is 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 705. TEMPORARY PROHIBITION ON INCREASE IN COPAYMENTS
UNDER RETAIL PHARMACY SYSTEM OF PHARMACY
BENEFITS PROGRAM.

During the period beginning on October 1, 2010, and ending
on September 30, 2011, the cost sharing requirements
established under paragraph (6) of section 1074g(a) of title
10, United States Code, for pharmaceutical agents available
through retail pharmacies covered by paragraph (2)(E)(ii) of
such section may not exceed amounts as follows:
(1) In the case of generic agents, $3.
(2) In the case of formulary agents, $9.
(3) In the case of nonformulary agents, $22.

Subtitle B--Health Care Administration

SEC. 711. ADMINISTRATION OF TRICARE.

Subsection (a) of section 1073 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``Except'' and inserting ``(1) Except'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the
Secretary of Defense shall have sole responsibility for
administering the TRICARE program and making any decision
affecting such program.''.

SEC. 712. UPDATED TERMINOLOGY FOR THE ARMY MEDICAL SERVICE
CORPS.

Paragraph (5) of section 3068 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``Pharmacy, Supply,
and Administration'' and inserting ``Administrative Health
Services'';
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``Sanitary
Engineering'' and inserting ``Preventive Medicine Sciences'';
and
(3) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``Optometry'' and
inserting ``Clinical Health Sciences''.

SEC. 713. CLARIFICATION OF LICENSURE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE
TO MILITARY HEALTH-CARE PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE
MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL GUARD PERFORMING DUTY
WHILE IN TITLE 32 STATUS.

Section 1094(d) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or (3)'' after
``paragraph (2)'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``as being described in
this paragraph'' after ``paragraph (1)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) A health-care professional referred to in paragraph
(1) as being described in this paragraph is a member of the
National Guard who--
``(A) has a current license to practice medicine,
osteopathic medicine, dentistry, or another health
profession; and
``(B) is performing training or duty under title 32 in
response to an actual or potential disaster.''.

SEC. 714. ANNUAL REPORT ON JOINT HEALTH CARE FACILITIES OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS.

(a) Annual Reports.--Section 1073b of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(c) Annual Report on Joint Health Care Facilities of the
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans
Affairs.--(1) At the same time that the budget of the
President is submitted under section 1105(a) of title 31 for
each fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs shall jointly submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a report on joint facilities.
``(2) Each report under paragraph (1) shall include the
following:
``(A) A list of each military medical treatment facility of
the Department of Defense that the Secretary of Defense is
considering as a potential joint facility.
``(B) A list of each medical facility of the Department of
Veterans Affairs that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs is
considering as a potential joint facility.
``(C) A list of each military medical treatment facility of
the Department of Defense and medical facility of the
Department of Veterans Affairs that has been established as a
joint facility.
``(3)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), no funds
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2012 or any fiscal year thereafter for military
medical treatment facilities of the Department of Defense may
be obligated or expended to establish a joint facility unless
both the military medical treatment facility of the
Department of Defense and the medical facility of the
Department of Veterans Affairs were included in a report
under paragraph (1).
``(B) The Secretary of Defense may waive the limitation in
subparagraph (A) with respect to establishing a joint
facility not included in a report under paragraph (1) if--
``(i) the Secretary and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
jointly submit to the appropriate congressional committees--
``(I) written certification that the Secretaries began
considering such joint facility after the most recent report
under subsection (a) was submitted to the appropriate
congressional committees; and
``(II) a report on such joint facility, including the
location and the estimated cost; and
``(ii) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on
which the certification and report under clause (i) are
submitted to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(4) In this subsection:
``(A) The term `appropriate congressional committees'
means--
``(i) the congressional defense committees;
``(ii) the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the House of
Representatives; and
``(iii) the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate.
``(B) The term `joint facility' means a military medical
treatment facility of the Department of Defense and a medical
facility of the Department of Veterans Affairs that are
combined, operated jointly, or otherwise operated in such a
manner that a facility of one department is operating in or
with a facility of the other department.
``(C) The term `medical facility', with respect to a
facility of the Department of Veterans Affairs, has the
meaning given that term in section 8101(3) of title 38.''.
(b) Title 38.--
(1) In general.--Subchapter IV of chapter 81 of title 38,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:

``Sec. 8159. Limitation on establishment of joint facilities
of the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of
Defense

``(a) Limitation.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no
funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made
available for fiscal year 2012 or any fiscal year thereafter
for medical facilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs
may be obligated or expended to establish a joint facility
unless both the medical facility of the Department of
Veterans Affairs and the military medical treatment facility
of the Department of Defense were included in a report
submitted by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the
Secretary of Defense to the appropriate congressional
committees under section 1073b(c) of title 10.
``(b) Waiver.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may waive
the limitation in subsection (a) with respect to establishing
a joint facility not included in a report under section
1073b(c) of title 10 if--
``(1) the Secretary and the Secretary of Defense jointly
submit to the appropriate congressional committees--
``(A) written certification that the Secretaries began
considering such joint facility after the most recent report
under section 1073b(c) of title 10 was submitted to the
appropriate congressional committees; and
``(B) a report on such joint facility, including the
location and the estimated cost; and
``(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on
which the certification and report under paragraph (1) are
submitted to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `appropriate congressional committees'
means--
``(A) the congressional defense committees (as defined in
section 101(a)(16) of title 10);
``(B) the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the House of
Representatives; and
``(C) the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate.
``(2) The term `joint facility' means a military medical
treatment facility of the Department of Defense and a medical
facility of the Department of Veterans Affairs that are
combined, operated jointly, or otherwise operated in such a
manner that a facility of one department is operating in or
with a facility of the other department.
``(3) The term `medical facility' has the meaning given
that term in section 8101(3) of this title.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 8158 the following new item:

``8159. Limitation on establishment of joint facilities of the
Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of
Defense.''.

SEC. 715. IMPROVEMENTS TO OVERSIGHT OF MEDICAL TRAINING FOR
MEDICAL CORPS OFFICERS.

(a) Review of Training Programs for Medical Officers.--The
Secretary of Defense shall conduct a review of training
programs for medical officers (as defined in section
101(b)(14) of title 10, United States Code) to ensure that
the academic and military performance of such officers has
been completely documented in military personnel records. The
programs reviewed shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) Programs at the Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences that award a medical doctor degree.
(2) Selected residency programs at military medical
treatment facilities, as determined by the Secretary, to
include at least one program in each of the specialties of--
(A) anesthesiology;
(B) emergency medicine;
(C) family medicine;
(D) general surgery;
(E) obstetrics/gynecology;
(F) pathology;
(G) pediatrics; and
(H) psychiatry.
(b) Report.--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 on the
findings of the review under subsection (a).

[[Page 9563]]

SEC. 716. STUDY ON REIMBURSEMENT FOR COSTS OF HEALTH CARE
PROVIDED TO INELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study
on the costs incurred by the United States on behalf of
individuals--
(1) who are not covered beneficiaries; and
(2) who receive health care services from a health care
provider under the TRICARE program.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the study under
subsection (a), including recommendations for legislative
action that the Secretary considers appropriate to--
(1) prevent individuals who are not covered beneficiaries
from receiving health care services from a health care
provider under the TRICARE program; and
(2) recoup the costs of such health care from such
individuals.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``covered beneficiary'' has the meaning given
that term in section 1072(5) of title 10, United States Code.
(2) The term ``TRICARE program'' has the meaning given that
term in section 1072(7) of such title.

SEC. 717. LIMITATION ON TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE-DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL
FACILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

The Secretary of Defense may not transfer any funds
authorized to be appropriated by this Act for fiscal year
2011 to the Joint Department of Defense-Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund
established in section 1704 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat. 2571) unless, before any such transfer--
(1) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense
committees, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the House
of Representatives, and the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of
the Senate a report providing--
(A) notice of the proposed transfer; and
(B) the exact amount and source of funds to be transferred;
and
(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed (excluding days of
which either House of Congress is not in session) after the
report is submitted under paragraph (1).

SEC. 718. ENTERPRISE RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEALTH INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct an
enterprise risk assessment methodology study of all health
information technology programs of the Department of Defense.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report containing the
results of the study required under subsection (a).

Subtitle C--Other Matters

SEC. 721. IMPROVING AURAL PROTECTION FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES.

(a) In General.--In accordance with section 721 of the
Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4506), the Secretary
of Defense shall examine methods to improve the aural
protection for members of the Armed Forces in combat.
(b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report on the methods to improve aural protection examined
under subsection (a).

SEC. 722. COMPREHENSIVE POLICY ON NEUROCOGNITIVE ASSESSMENT
BY THE MILITARY HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

(a) Comprehensive Policy Required.--Not later than
September 30, 2011, the Secretary of Defense shall develop
and implement a comprehensive policy on pre- and post-
deployment neurocognitive assessment.
(b) Scope of Policy.--The policy required by subsection (a)
shall cover each of the following:
(1) Require the administration of the same pre-deployment
and post-deployment neurocognitive assessments to all members
of the military who are preparing to deploy or have returned
from deployment.
(2) Require the standardization of testing procedures for
neurocognitive assessments.
(3) Provide for follow-up neurocognitive assessments as
needed to create a longitudinal neurocognitive assessment
record for the on-going care of members of the Armed Forces.
(4) Ensure the neurocognitive assessment results and
reports be made available to members of the Armed Forces and
veterans for their personal use in health management.
(c) Updates.--The Secretary shall revise the policy
required by subsection (a) on a periodic basis in accordance
with experience and evolving best practice guidelines.
(d) Annual Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, and on September 30 of each year
thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the policy
required by subsection (a).
(2) Elements.--Each report required by paragraph (1) shall
include the following:
(A) A description of the policy implemented under
subsection (b), and any revisions to such policy under
subsection (d).
(B) A description of the performance measures used to
determine the effectiveness of the policy in improving the
use of neurocognitive assessments throughout the Department
of Defense.

SEC. 723. NATIONAL CASUALTY CARE RESEARCH CENTER.

(a) Designation.--Not later than October 1, 2011, the
Secretary of Defense may designate a center to be known as
the ``National Casualty Care Research Center'' (in this
section referred to as the ``Center''), which shall consist
of the program known as the combat casualty care research
program of the Army Medical Research and Materiel Command.
(b) Director.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
commanding general of the Army Medical Research and Materiel
Command, shall appoint a director of the Center.
(c) Activities of the Center.--In addition to other
functions performed by the combat casualty care research
program, the Center shall--
(1) provide a public-private partnership for funding
clinical and experimental studies in combat injury;
(2) integrate laboratory and clinical research to hasten
improvements in care to members of the Armed Forces who are
injured;
(3) ensure that data from both military and civilian
entities, including the Joint Theater Trauma Registry and the
National Trauma Data Bank, are optimally used to establish
research agendas and measure improvements in outcomes;
(4) fund the full range of injury research and evaluation,
including--
(A) laboratory, translational, and clinical research;
(B) point of wounding and pre-hospital care;
(C) early resuscitative management;
(D) initial and definitive surgical care; and
(E) rehabilitation and reintegration into society; and
(5) coordinate the collaboration of civilian and military
institutions conducting trauma research.

SEC. 724. REPORT ON FEASIBILITY OF STUDY ON BREAST CANCER
AMONG FEMALE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Report.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees
a report on the feasibility of conducting a case-control
study described in subsection (b).
(b) Case-control Study.--A case-control study described in
this subsection is a case-control study on the incidence of
breast cancer among covered members in order to determine
whether covered members were at an elevated risk of having
breast cancer, including the following:
(1) A determination of the number of covered members who
have been diagnosed with breast cancer.
(2) A sample of covered members who have not been diagnosed
with breast cancer who could serve as an appropriate
comparison group.
(3) A determination of demographic information and
potential breast cancer risk factors regarding covered
members who are included in the study, including--
(A) race;
(B) ethnicity;
(C) age;
(D) possible exposure to hazardous elements or chemical or
biological agents (including any vaccines) and where such
exposure occurred;
(E) known breast cancer risk factors, including familial,
reproductive, and anthropometric parameters;
(F) the locations of duty stations that such member was
assigned;
(G) the locations in which such member was deployed; and
(H) the geographic area of residence prior to deployment.
(4) An analysis of the clinical characteristics of breast
cancer diagnosed in covered members (including the stage,
grade, and other details of the cancer).
(5) Other information the Secretary considers appropriate.
(c) Covered Members Defined.--In this section, the term
``covered members'' means female members of the Armed Forces
(including members of the National Guard and reserve
components) who served in Operation Enduring Freedom or
Operation Iraqi Freedom.

SEC. 725. ASSESSMENT OF POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER BY
MILITARY OCCUPATION.

(a) Assessment.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct an
assessment of post-traumatic stress disorder incidence by
military occupation, including identification of military
occupations with a high incidence of such disorder.
(b) 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 on the assessment
under subsection (a).

SEC. 726. VISITING NIH SENIOR NEUROSCIENCE FELLOWSHIP
PROGRAM.

(a) Authority to Establish.--The Secretary of Defense may
establish a program to be known as the Visiting NIH Senior
Neuroscience Fellowship Program at--
(1) the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; and
(2) the Defense Center of Excellence for Psychological
Health and Traumatic Brain Injury.
(b) Activities of the Program.--In establishing the
Visiting NIH Senior Neuroscience Fellowship Program under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall require the program to--
(1) provide a partnership between the National Institutes
of Health and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
to enable identification and funding of the broadest range of
innovative, highest quality clinical and experimental
neuroscience studies for the benefit of members of the Armed
Forces;

[[Page 9564]]

(2) provide a partnership between the National Institutes
of Health and the Defense Center of Excellence for
Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury that will
enable identification and funding of clinical and
experimental neuroscience studies for the benefit of members
of the Armed Forces;
(3) use the results of the studies described in paragraph
(1) and (2) to enhance the mission of the National Institutes
of Health for the benefit of the public; and
(4) provide a military and civilian collaborative
environment for neuroscience-based medical problem-solving in
critical areas affecting both military and civilian life,
particularly post-traumatic stress disorder.
(c) Period of Fellowship.--The period of any fellowship
under the Program shall not last more than 2 years and shall
not continue unless agreed upon by the parties concerned.

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS

Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management

SEC. 801. DISCLOSURE TO LITIGATION SUPPORT CONTRACTORS.

(a) In General.--Section 2320 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(2)--
(A) by inserting ``or covered litigation support
contractor'' after ``covered Government support contractor'';
and
(B) by inserting after ``oversight of'' the following: ``,
or preparation for litigation relating to,''; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
``(g) In this section, the term `covered litigation support
contractor' means a contractor (including an expert or
technical consultant) under contract with the Department of
Defense to provide litigation support, which contractor
executes a contract with the Government agreeing to and
acknowledging--
``(1) that proprietary or nonpublic technical data
furnished will be accessed and used only for the purposes
stated in that contract;
``(2) that the covered litigation support contractor will
take all reasonable steps to protect the proprietary and
nonpublic nature of the technical data furnished to the
covered litigation support contractor; and
``(3) that such technical data provided to the covered
litigation support contractor under the authority of this
section shall not be used by the covered litigation support
contractor to compete against the third party for Government
or non-Government contracts.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date that is 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 802. DESIGNATION OF F135 AND F136 ENGINE DEVELOPMENT AND
PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS AS MAJOR SUBPROGRAMS.

(a) Designation as Major Subprograms.--Not later than 30
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall designate each of the engine
development and procurement programs described in subsection
(b) as a major subprogram of the F-35 Lightning II aircraft
major defense acquisition program, in accordance with section
2430a of title 10, United States Code.
(b) Description.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
engine development and procurement programs are the
following:
(1) The F135 engine development and procurement program.
(2) The F136 engine development and procurement program.
(c) Original Baseline.--For purposes of reporting
requirements referred to in section 2430a(b) of title 10,
United States Code, for the major subprograms designated
under subsection (a), the Secretary shall use the Milestone B
decision for each subprogram as the original baseline for the
subprogram.
(d) Actions Following Critical Cost Growth.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), to the extent
that the Secretary elects to restructure the F-35 Lightning
II aircraft major defense acquisition program subsequent to a
reassessment and actions required by subsections (a) and (c)
of section 2433a of title 10, United States Code, during
fiscal year 2010, and also conducts such reassessment and
actions with respect to the F135 and F136 engine development
and procurement programs (including related reporting based
on the original baseline as defined in subsection (c)), the
requirements of section 2433a of such title with respect to a
major subprogram designated under subsection (a) shall be
considered to be met with respect to the major subprogram.
(2) Limitation.--Actions taken in accordance with paragraph
(1) shall be considered to meet the requirements of section
2433a of title 10, United States Code, with respect to a
major subprogram designated under subsection (a) only to the
extent that designation as a major subprogram would require
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a reassessment and take
actions pursuant to such section 2433a for such a subprogram
upon enactment of this Act. The requirements of such section
2433a shall not be considered to be met with respect to such
a subprogram in the event that additional programmatic
changes, following the date of the enactment of this Act,
cause the program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit
cost of such a subprogram to increase by a percentage equal
to or greater than the critical cost growth threshold (as
defined in section 2433(a)(5) of such title) for the
subprogram.

SEC. 803. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS RELATING TO INCLUSION OF
MAJOR SUBPROGRAMS TO MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION
PROGRAMS UNDER VARIOUS ACQUISITION-RELATED
REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Conforming Amendments to Section 2366a.--Section 2366a
of such title is amended--
(1) in subsections (a), (b)(1), and (b)(2)--
(A) by inserting ``or designated major subprogram'' after
``major defense acquisition program''; and
(B) by inserting ``or subprogram'' after ``program'' each
place it appears (other than after ``major defense
acquisition program'', after ``space program'' , before
``requirements'', and before ``manager''); and
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and (5) as
paragraphs (3), (4), (5), and (6), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph (2):
``(2) The term `designated major subprogram' means a major
subprogram of a major defense acquisition program as
designated under section 2430a(a)(1) of this title.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments to Section 2366b.--Section 2366b
of such title is amended--
(1) in subsections (a), (b)(1), and (c)(1)--
(A) by inserting ``or designated major subprogram'' after
``major defense acquisition program''; and
(B) by inserting ``or subprogram'' after ``program'' each
place it appears (other than after ``major defense
acquisition program'', after ``future-years defense
program'', and after ``space program''); and
(2) in subsection (g)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) as
paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph (2):
``(2) The term `designated major subprogram' means a major
subprogram of a major defense acquisition program as
designated under section 2430a(a)(1) of this title.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments to Section 2399.--Subsection (a)
of section 2399 of such title is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Condition for Proceeding Beyond Low-rate Initial
Production.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall provide that
a covered major defense acquisition program or a covered
designated major subprogram may not proceed beyond low-rate
initial production until initial operational test and
evaluation of the program or subprogram is completed.
``(2) In this subsection:
``(A) The term `covered major defense acquisition program'
means a major defense acquisition program that involves the
acquisition of a weapon system that is a major system within
the meaning of that term in section 2302(5) of this title.
``(B) The term `covered designated major subprogram' means
a major subprogram designated under section 2430a(a)(1) of
this title that is a major subprogram of a covered major
defense acquisition program.''.
(d) Conforming Amendments to Section 2434.--Section 2434(a)
of such title is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Secretary of
Defense''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) The provisions of this section shall apply to any
major subprogram of a major defense acquisition program (as
designated under section 2430a(a)(1) of this title) in the
same manner as those provisions apply to a major defense
acquisition program, and any reference in this section to a
program shall be treated as including such a subprogram.''.

SEC. 804. ENHANCEMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORITY TO
RESPOND TO COMBAT AND SAFETY EMERGENCIES
THROUGH RAPID ACQUISITION AND DEPLOYMENT OF
URGENTLY NEEDED SUPPLIES.

(a) Requirement to Establish Procedures.--Subsection (a) of
section 806 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (10 U.S.C. 2302 note) is amended by
striking ``items that are--'' and inserting ``supplies that
are--''.
(b) Issues to Be Addressed.--Subsection (b) of such section
is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``items'' and
inserting ``supplies''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``items'' and inserting ``supplies'';
(B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``an item'' and
inserting ``the supplies'';
(C) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``an item'' and
inserting ``the supplies''; and
(D) in subparagraph (C), by inserting ``and utilization''
after ``deployment''.
(c) Response to Combat Emergencies.--Subsection (c) of such
section is amended--
(1) by striking ``equipment'' each place it appears and
inserting ``supplies'';
(2) by striking ``combat capability'' each place it
appears;
(3) by inserting ``, or could result,'' after ``that has
resulted'' each place it appears;
(4) by striking ``fatalities'' each place it appears and
inserting ``casualties'';
(5) in paragraphs (1) and (2)(A), by striking ``is'' each
place it appears and inserting ``are'';
(6) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``The authority of this section may not be
used to acquire equipment in an amount aggregating more than
$100,000,000 during any fiscal year.''; and

[[Page 9565]]

(B) by inserting ``in an amount aggregating no more than
$200,000,000'' after ``for that fiscal year'';
(7) in paragraph (4), by striking ``Each such notice'' and
inserting ``For each such determination, the notice under the
preceding sentence''; and
(8) in paragraph (5), by striking ``that equipment'' and
inserting ``those supplies''.
(d) Waiver of Certain Statues and Regulations.--Subsection
(d)(1) of such section is amended by striking ``equipment''
in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) and inserting
``supplies''.
(e) Testing Requirement.--Subsection (e) of such section is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``an item'' in the matter preceding
subparagraph (A) and inserting ``the supplies''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``of the item'' and
all that follows through ``requirements document'' and
inserting ``of the supplies in meeting the original
requirements for the supplies (as stated in a statement of
the urgent operational need'';
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking ``an item'' and inserting ``supplies''; and
(B) by striking ``the item'' and inserting ``the
supplies''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``If items'' and inserting ``If the
supplies''; and
(B) by striking ``items'' each place it appears and
inserting ``supplies''.
(f) Limitation.--Subsection (f) of such section is amended
to read as follows:
``(f) Limitation.--In the case of supplies that are part of
a major system for which a low-rate initial production
quantity determination has been made pursuant to section 2400
of title 10, United States Code, the quantity of such
supplies acquired using the procedures prescribed pursuant to
this section may not exceed an amount consistent with
complying with limitations on the quantity of articles
approved for low-rate initial production for such system. Any
such supplies shall be included in any relevant calculation
of quantities for low-rate initial production for the system
concerned.''.

SEC. 805. PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTS WITH ENTITIES ENGAGING IN
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IN THE ENERGY SECTOR OF
IRAN.

(a) Prohibition on Contracts.--
(1) Prohibition.--The Secretary of Defense may not enter
into any contract with--
(A) an entity that engages in commercial activity in the
energy sector of Iran; or
(B) a successor entity to the entity described in
subparagraph (A).
(2) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, an entity
engages in commercial activity in the energy sector of Iran
if the entity, with actual knowledge, engages in an activity
for which sanctions have been imposed under section 5(a) of
the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note).
(b) Duration of Prohibition.--The prohibition under
subsection (a) shall apply with respect to an entity (or
successor entity)--
(1) for a period of not less than 2 years beginning on the
date on which the prohibition is imposed; or
(2) until such time as the Secretary of Defense determines
and certifies to the congressional defense committees that--
(A) the entity whose activities were the basis for imposing
the prohibition is no longer engaging in such activities; and
(B) the Secretary has received reliable assurances that
such entity (or successor entity) will not knowingly engage
in such activities in the future, except that such
prohibition shall remain in effect for a period of at least 1
year.
(c) Waiver.--
(1) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the
prohibition under subsection (a) with respect to a contract
if the Secretary determines that the contract is in the
interest of national security.
(2) Notification.--Upon issuing a waiver under paragraph
(1) with respect to a contract, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and House of Representatives, the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs
of the House of Representatives a notification that
identifies the entity involved, the nature of the contract,
and the rationale for issuing the waiver.

Subtitle B--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures,
and Limitations

SEC. 811. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO PROCURE CERTAIN FIBERS;
LIMITATION ON SPECIFICATION.

(a) Extension.--Section 829 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181;
122 Stat. 229; 10 U.S.C. 2533a note) is amended in subsection
(f) by striking ``on the date that is five years after the
date of the enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``on
January 1, 2021''.
(b) Prohibition on Specification in Solicitations.--No
solicitation issued before January 1, 2021, by the Department
of Defense may include a requirement that proposals submitted
pursuant to such solicitation must include the use of fire
resistant rayon fiber.

SEC. 812. SMALL ARMS PRODUCTION INDUSTRIAL BASE MATTERS.

Section 2473 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``subsection (d)'' and
inserting ``subsection (c)'';
(2) by striking subsection (c);
(3) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections
(c) and (d), respectively; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new subsection (e):
``(e) Competitive Procedures.--If the Secretary determines
under subsection (a) that the requirement to procure property
or services described in subsection (b) for the Department of
Defense from a firm in the small arms production industrial
base is not necessary to preserve such industrial base, any
such procurement shall be awarded through the use of
competitive procedures that afford such industrial base a
fair opportunity to be considered for such procurement.''.

SEC. 813. ADDITIONAL DEFINITION RELATING TO PRODUCTION OF
SPECIALTY METALS WITHIN THE UNITED STATES.

Section 2533b(m) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(11) The term `produced', as used in subsections (a) and
(b), means melted, or processed in a manner that results in
physical or chemical property changes that are the equivalent
of melting. The term does not include finishing processes
such as rolling, heat treatment, quenching, tempering,
grinding, or shaving.''.

Subtitle C--Studies and Reports

SEC. 821. STUDIES TO ANALYZE ALTERNATIVE MODELS FOR
ACQUISITION AND FUNDING OF TECHNOLOGIES
SUPPORTING NETWORK-CENTRIC OPERATIONS.

(a) Studies Required.--
(1) Independent study.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall enter into a contract with an independent federally
funded research and development center to carry out a
comprehensive study of policies, procedures, organization,
and regulatory constraints affecting the acquisition of
technologies supporting network-centric operations. The
contract shall be funded from amounts appropriated pursuant
to an authorization of appropriations in this Act or
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2011 for operation
and maintenance for Defense-wide activities.
(2) Joint chiefs of staff study.--The Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff shall carry out a comprehensive study of the
same subjects covered by paragraph (1). The study shall be
independent of the study required by paragraph (1) and shall
be carried out in conjunction with the military departments
and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense.
(b) Matters To Be Addressed.--Each study required by
subsection (a) shall address the following matters:
(1) Development of a system for understanding the various
foundational components that contribute to network-centric
operations, such as data transport, processing, storage, data
collection, and dissemination of information.
(2) Determining how acquisition and funding programs that
are in place as of the date of the enactment of this Act
relate to the system developed under paragraph (1).
(3) Development of acquisition and funding models using the
system developed under paragraph (1), including--
(A) a model under which a joint entity independent of any
military department (such as the Joint Staff) is established
with responsibility and control of all funding for the
acquisition of technologies for network-centric operations,
and with authority to oversee the incorporation of such
technologies into the acquisition programs of the military
departments;
(B) a model under which an executive agent is established
to manage and oversee the acquisition of technologies for
network-centric operations, but would not have exclusive
control of the funding for such programs;
(C) a model under which the acquisition and funding
programs that are in place as of the date of the enactment of
this Act are maintained; and
(D) any other model that the entity carrying out the study
considers relevant.
(4) An analysis of each of the models developed under
paragraph (3) with respect to potential benefits in--
(A) collecting, processing, and disseminating information;
(B) network commonality;
(C) common communications;
(D) interoperability;
(E) mission impact and success; and
(F) cost-effectiveness.
(5) An evaluation of each of the models developed under
paragraph (3) with respect to feasibility, including
identification of legal, policy, or regulatory barriers that
may impede the implementation of such model.
(c) Report Required.--Not later than September 30, 2011,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the results of the studies
required by subsection (a). The report shall include the
findings and recommendations of the studies and any
observations and comments that the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(d) Network-centric Operations Defined.--In this section,
the term ``network-centric operations'' refers to the ability
to exploit all human and technical elements of the Joint
Force and mission partners through the full integration of
collected information, awareness, knowledge, experience, and
decisionmaking, enabled by secure access and distribution,
all to achieve agility and effectiveness in a dispersed,
decentralized, dynamic, or uncertain operational environment.

[[Page 9566]]

SEC. 822. ANNUAL JOINT REPORT AND COMPTROLLER GENERAL REVIEW
ON CONTRACTING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 258; 10 U.S.C. 2302 note) is
amended by adding at the end of subtitle F of title VIII the
following new section (and conforming the table of sections
for such subtitle at the beginning of title VIII and at the
beginning of such Act accordingly):

``SEC. 865. ANNUAL JOINT REPORT AND COMPTROLLER GENERAL
REVIEW ON CONTRACTING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

``(a) Joint Report Required.--
``(1) In general.--Every 12 months, the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of State, and the Administrator of the
United States Agency for International Development shall
submit to the relevant committees of Congress a joint report
on contracts in Iraq or Afghanistan.
``(2) Matters covered.--A report under this subsection
shall, at a minimum, cover--
``(A) any significant developments or issues with respect
to contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan during the reporting
period; and
``(B) the plans of the departments and agency for
strengthening interagency coordination of contracts in Iraq
and Afghanistan or in future contingency operations,
including plans related to the common databases identified
under section 861(b)(4).
``(3) Reporting period.--A report under this subsection
shall cover a period of not less than 12 months.
``(4) Submission of reports.--The Secretaries and the
Administrator shall submit an initial report under this
subsection not later than February 1, 2011, and shall submit
an updated report by February 1 of every year thereafter
until February 1, 2013. If the total annual amount of
obligations for contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan combined is
less than $250 million for the reporting period, for the
departments and agency combined, the Secretaries and the
Administrator may submit a letter documenting this in place
of a report.
``(b) Comptroller General Review and Report.--
``(1) In general.--Within 180 days after submission of each
annual joint report required under subsection (a), but in no
case later than August 5 of each year until 2013, the
Comptroller General shall review the joint report and
interagency coordination of contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan and submit to the relevant committees of Congress
a report on such review.
``(2) Matters covered.--A report under this subsection
shall, at minimum--
``(A) review how the Department of Defense, the Department
of State, and the United States Agency for International
Development are using the data contained in the common
databases identified under section 861(b)(4) in managing,
overseeing, and coordinating contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan; and
``(B) assess the plans of the departments and agency for
strengthening interagency coordination of contracts in Iraq
and Afghanistan or in future contingency operations,
particularly any plans related to the common databases
identified under section 861(b)(4).
``(3) Access to databases and other information.--The
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, and the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development shall provide to the Comptroller General full
access to information on contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan
for the purposes of the review carried out under this
subsection, including the common databases identified under
section 861(b)(4).''.

SEC. 823. EXTENSION OF COMPTROLLER GENERAL REVIEW AND REPORT
ON CONTRACTING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

Section 863 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 258; 10
U.S.C. 2302 note) is amended by striking ``2010'' in
subsection (a)(3) and inserting ``2011''.

SEC. 824. INTERIM REPORT ON REVIEW OF IMPACT OF COVERED
SUBSIDIES ON ACQUISITION OF KC-45 AIRCRAFT.

(a) Interim Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the congressional defense committees an interim report on
any review of a covered subsidy initiated pursuant to
subsection (a) of section 886 of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 122 Stat. 4561) not later than 60 days after the
date of the initiation of the review.
(b) Report Contents.--The report required by subsection (a)
shall contain detailed findings relating to the impact of the
covered subsidy that led to the initiation of the review on
the source selection process for the KC-45 Aerial Refueling
Aircraft Program or any successor to such program and whether
the covered subsidy would provide an unfair competitive
advantage to any bidder in the source selection process.

SEC. 825. REPORTS ON JOINT CAPABILITIES INTEGRATION AND
DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM.

(a) Independent Analyses.--
(1) In general.--A comprehensive analysis of the Joint
Capabilities Integration and Development System shall be
independently performed by each of the following:
(A) The Secretary of Defense.
(B) A federally funded research and development center
selected by the Secretary of Defense.
(2) Matters covered.--Each such analysis shall--
(A) evaluate the entire Joint Capabilities Integration and
Development System and the problems associated with it, with
particular emphasis on the problems relating to the length of
time and the costs involved in identifying, assessing, and
validating joint military capability needs; and
(B) identify the best solutions to the problems evaluated
under subparagraph (A) and develop recommendations to carry
out those solutions.
(3) Reports.--Not later than six months after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives--
(A) a report by the Secretary on the analysis performed by
the Secretary under paragraph (1), with particular emphasis
on continuous process improvement; and
(B) a report by the federally funded research and
development center selected under paragraph (1)(B) on the
analysis performed by the center under paragraph (1),
together with such comments as the Secretary considers
necessary on the report.
(b) Implementation.--
(1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense--
(A) shall develop and begin implementing a plan to address
the problems with the Joint Capabilities Integration and
Development System, taking into account the recommendations
developed in the analyses required under subsection (a) and
as part of a program to manage performance in establishing
joint military requirements; and
(B) shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the plan,
including, at a minimum, a timeline, objectives, milestones,
and projected resource requirements.
(2) Report format.--The report required under paragraph
(1)(B) may be included as part of any report relating to a
program to manage performance in establishing joint military
requirements.

Subtitle D--Other Matters

SEC. 831. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION
CHALLENGE PROGRAM.

Section 2359b(k) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``2012'' and inserting ``2017''.

SEC. 832. ENERGY SAVINGS PERFORMANCE CONTRACTS.

(a) Competition Requirements for Task or Delivery Orders
Under Energy Savings Performance Contracts.--Section 801 of
the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8287)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Task or Delivery Orders.--(1) The head of a Federal
agency may issue a task or delivery order under an energy
savings performance contract by--
``(A) notifying all contractors that have received an award
under such contract that the agency proposes to discuss
energy savings performance services for some or all of its
facilities and, following a reasonable period of time to
provide a proposal in response to the notice, soliciting from
such contractors the submission of expressions of interest
in, and contractor qualifications for, performing site
surveys or investigations and feasibility designs and
studies, and including in the notice summary information
concerning energy use for any facilities that the agency has
specific interest in including in such task or delivery
order;
``(B) reviewing all expressions of interest and
qualifications submitted pursuant to the notice under
subparagraph (A);
``(C) selecting two or more contractors (from among those
reviewed under subparagraph (B)) to conduct discussions
concerning the contractors' respective qualifications to
implement potential energy conservation measures, including--
``(i) requesting references and specific detailed examples
with respect to similar efforts and the resulting energy
savings of such similar efforts; and
``(ii) requesting an explanation of how such similar
efforts relate to the scope and content of the task or
delivery order concerned;
``(D) selecting and authorizing--
``(i) more than one contractor (from among those selected
under subparagraph (C)) to conduct site surveys,
investigations, feasibility designs and studies or similar
assessments for the energy savings performance contract
services (or for discrete portions of such services), for the
purpose of allowing each such contractor to submit a firm,
fixed-price proposal to implement specific energy
conservation measures; or
``(ii) one contractor (from among those selected under
subparagraph (C)) to conduct a site survey, investigation, a
feasibility design and study or similar assessment for the
purpose of allowing the contractor to submit a firm, fixed-
price proposal to implement specific energy conservation
measures;
``(E) providing a debriefing to any contractor not selected
under subparagraph (D);
``(F) negotiating a task or delivery order for energy
savings performance contracting services with the contractor
or contractors selected under subparagraph (D) based on the
energy conservation measures identified; and
``(G) issuing a task or delivery order for energy savings
performance contracting services to such contractor or
contractors.
``(2) The issuance of a task or delivery order for energy
savings performance contracting services pursuant to
paragraph (1) is deemed to

[[Page 9567]]

satisfy the task and delivery order competition requirements
in section 2304c(d) of title 10, United States Code, and
section 303J(d) of the Federal Property and Administrative
Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253j(d)).
``(3) The Secretary may issue guidance as necessary to
agencies issuing task or delivery orders pursuant to
paragraph (1).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
is inapplicable to task or delivery orders issued before the
date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 833. CONSIDERATION OF SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES IN
PROCUREMENT OF PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.

(a) Consideration of Sustainable Practices.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop and
issue guidance directing the Secretary of each military
department and the head of each defense agency to consider
sustainable practices in the procurement of products and
services. Such guidance shall ensure that strategies for
acquiring products or services to meet departmental or agency
performance requirements favor products or services described
in paragraph (2) if such products or services can be acquired
on a life cycle cost-neutral basis.
(2) Products or services.--A product or service described
in this paragraph is a product or service that is energy-
efficient, water-efficient, biobased, environmentally
preferable, non-ozone-depleting, contains recycled content,
is non-toxic, or is less toxic than alternative products or
services.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the
acquisition of weapon systems or components of weapon
systems.

SEC. 834. DEFINITION OF MATERIALS CRITICAL TO NATIONAL
SECURITY.

Section 187 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `materials critical to national security'
means materials--
``(A) upon which the production or sustainment of military
equipment is dependent; and
``(B) the supply of which could be restricted by actions or
events outside the control of the Government of the United
States.
``(2) The term `military equipment' means equipment used
directly by the armed forces to carry out military
operations.''.

SEC. 835. DETERMINATION OF STRATEGIC OR CRITICAL RARE EARTH
MATERIALS FOR DEFENSE APPLICATIONS.

(a) Assessment Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
undertake an assessment of the supply chain for rare earth
materials and determine which, if any, rare earth materials
are strategic materials and which rare earth materials are
materials critical to national security. For the purposes of
the assessment--
(1) the Secretary may consider the views of other Federal
agencies, as appropriate;
(2) any study conducted by the Director, Industrial Policy
during fiscal year 2010 may be considered as partial
fulfillment of the requirements of this section;
(3) any study conducted by the Comptroller General of the
United States during fiscal year 2010 may be considered as
partial fulfillment of the requirements of this section; and
(4) the Secretary shall consider the sources of rare earth
materials (both in terms of source nations and number of
vendors) including rare earth elements, rare earth metals,
rare earth magnets, and other components containing rare
earths.
(b) Plan.--In the event that the Secretary determines that
a rare earth material is a strategic material or a material
critical to national security, the Secretary shall develop a
plan to ensure the long-term availability of such rare earth
material, with a goal of establishing domestic sources of
such material by December 31, 2015. In developing the plan,
the Secretary shall consider all relevant components of the
value-chain, including mining, processing, refining, and
manufacturing. The plan shall include consideration of
numerous options with respect to the material, including--
(1) an assessment of including the material in the National
Defense Stockpile;
(2) in consultation with the United States Trade
Representative, the identification of any trade practices
known to the Secretary that limit the Secretary's ability to
ensure the long-term availability of such material or the
ability to meet the goal of establishing domestic sources of
such material by December 31, 2015;
(3) an assessment of the availability of financing to
industry, academic institutions, or not-for-profit entities
to provide the capacity required to ensure the availability
of the material and potential mechanisms to increase the
availability of such financing;
(4) the benefits, if any, of Defense Production Act funding
to support the establishment of a domestic rare earth
manufacturing capability for military components;
(5) funding for research and development of any aspect of
the rare earth supply-chain;
(6) any other risk mitigation method determined appropriate
by the Secretary that is consistent with the goal of
establishing domestic sources by December 31, 2015; and
(7) for components of the rare earth material supply-chain
for which no other risk mitigation method, in accordance with
paragraphs (1) through (6), will ensure the establishment of
a domestic source by December 31, 2015, a specific plan to
eliminate supply-chain vulnerability by the earliest date
practicable.
(c) Report.--
(1) Requirement.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the congressional committees described in paragraph
(2) a report containing the findings of the assessment under
subsection (a) and the plan (if any) developed under
subsection (b).
(2) Congressional committees.--The congressional committees
described in this paragraph are as follows:
(A) The congressional defense committees.
(B) The Committee on Financial Services and the Committee
on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives.
(C) The Committee on Finance and the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Strategic material.--The term ``strategic material''
means a material--
(A) which is essential for military equipment;
(B) which is unique in the function it performs; and
(C) for which there are no viable alternatives.
(2) Materials critical to national security.--The term
``materials critical to national security'' has the meaning
provided by section 187(e) of title 10, United States Code,
as amended by section 827 of this Act.

SEC. 836. REVIEW OF NATIONAL SECURITY EXCEPTION TO
COMPETITION.

(a) Review Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall review
the implementation by the Department of Defense of the
national security exception to full and open competition
provided in section 2304(c)(6) of title 10, United States
Code.
(b) Matters Reviewed.--The review of the implementation of
the national security exception required by subsection (a)
shall include--
(1) the pattern of usage of such exception by acquisition
organizations within the Department to determine which
organizations are commonly using the exception and the
frequency of such usage;
(2) the range of items or services being acquired through
the use of such exception;
(3) the process for reviewing and approving justifications
involving such exception;
(4) whether the justifications for use of such exception
typically meet the relevant requirements of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation applicable to the use of such
exception;
(5) issues associated with follow-on procurements for items
or services acquired using such exception; and
(6) potential additional instances where such exception
could be applied and any authorities available to the
Department of Defense other than such exception that could be
applied in such instances.
(c) Report.--Not later than 270 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and of the
House of Representatives a report on the review required by
subsection (a), including a discussion of each of the matters
specified in subsection (b). The report shall include any
recommendations relating to the matters reviewed that the
Secretary considers appropriate. The report shall be
submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified
annex.
(d) Regulations.--
(1) Requirement.--Not later than 270 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the congressional committees described in paragraph
(2) draft regulations on the implementation of the national
security exception to full and open competition provided in
section 2304(c)(6) of title 10, United States Code, taking
into account the results of the review required by subsection
(a).
(2) Congressional committees.--The congressional committees
described in this paragraph are the following:
(A) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate.
(B) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives.

SEC. 837. INCLUSION OF BRIBERY IN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF
THE FEDERAL AWARDEE PERFORMANCE AND INTEGRITY
INFORMATION SYSTEM.

(a) Inclusion of Bribery in Disclosure Requirements.--
Section 872(c) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
122 Stat. 4556) is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(8) To the maximum extent practical, information similar
to the information covered by paragraph (1) in connection
with any law relating to bribery of a country which is a
signatory of the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign
Public Officials in International Business Transactions,
signed at Paris on December 17, 1997.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall take effect not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 838. REQUIREMENT FOR ENTITIES WITH FACILITY CLEARANCES
THAT ARE NOT UNDER FOREIGN OWNERSHIP CONTROL OR
INFLUENCE MITIGATION.

(a) Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense shall require
the directors of a covered entity to establish a government
security committee that shall ensure that the covered entity
employs and maintains policies and procedures that meet
requirements under the national industrial security program.
(b) Covered Entity.--A covered entity under this section is
an entity--
(1) to which the Department of Defense has granted a
facility clearance;

[[Page 9568]]

(2) that is not subject to foreign ownership control or
influence mitigation measures; and
(3) that is a corporation.
(c) Discretionary Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense
may require that the requirement in subsection (a) apply to
an entity that meets the elements described in paragraphs (1)
and (2) of subsection (b) and is a limited liability company,
sole proprietorship, nonprofit corporation, partnership,
academic institution, or any other entity holding a facility
clearance.
(d) Guidance.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop
implementing guidance for the requirement in subsection (a).
(e) Government Security Committee.--For the purposes of
this section, a government security committee is a
subcommittee of a covered entity's board of directors, made
up of resident United States citizens, that is responsible
for ensuring that the covered entity complies with the
requirements of the national industrial security program.

TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Subtitle A--Department of Defense Management

SEC. 901. REDESIGNATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY AS THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.

(a) Redesignation of the Department of the Navy as the
Department of the Navy and Marine Corps.--
(1) Redesignation of military department.--The military
department designated as the Department of the Navy is
redesignated as the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps.
(2) Redesignation of secretary and other statutory
offices.--
(A) Secretary.--The position of the Secretary of the Navy
is redesignated as the Secretary of the Navy and Marine
Corps.
(B) Other statutory offices.--The positions of the Under
Secretary of the Navy, the four Assistant Secretaries of the
Navy, and the General Counsel of the Department of the Navy
are redesignated as the Under Secretary of the Navy and
Marine Corps, the Assistant Secretaries of the Navy and
Marine Corps, and the General Counsel of the Department of
the Navy and Marine Corps, respectively.
(b) Conforming Amendments to Title 10, United States
Code.--
(1) Definition of ``military department''.--Paragraph (8)
of section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows:
``(8) The term `military department' means the Department
of the Army, the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps, and
the Department of the Air Force.''.
(2) Organization of department.--The text of section 5011
of such title is amended to read as follows: ``The Department
of the Navy and Marine Corps is separately organized under
the Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps.''.
(3) Position of secretary.--Section 5013(a)(1) of such
title is amended by striking ``There is a Secretary of the
Navy'' and inserting ``There is a Secretary of the Navy and
Marine Corps''.
(4) Chapter headings.--
(A) The heading of chapter 503 of such title is amended to
read as follows:

``CHAPTER 503--DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS''.

(B) The heading of chapter 507 of such title is amended to
read as follows:

``CHAPTER 507--COMPOSITION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY AND MARINE
CORPS''.

(5) Other amendments.--
(A) Title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking
``Department of the Navy'' and ``Secretary of the Navy'' each
place they appear other than as specified in paragraphs (1),
(2), (3), and (4) (including in section headings, subsection
captions, tables of chapters, and tables of sections) and
inserting ``Department of the Navy and Marine Corps'' and
``Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps'', respectively, in
each case with the matter inserted to be in the same typeface
and typestyle as the matter stricken.
(B)(i) Sections 5013(f), 5014(b)(2), 5016(a), 5017(2),
5032(a), and 5042(a) of such title are amended by striking
``Assistant Secretaries of the Navy'' and inserting
``Assistant Secretaries of the Navy and Marine Corps''.
(ii) The heading of section 5016 of such title, and the
item relating to such section in the table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 503 of such title, are each amended by
inserting ``and Marine Corps'' after ``of the Navy'', with
the matter inserted in each case to be in the same typeface
and typestyle as the matter amended.
(c) Other Provisions of Law and Other References.--
(1) Title 37, united states code.--Title 37, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``Department of the Navy'' and
``Secretary of the Navy'' each place they appear and
inserting ``Department of the Navy and Marine Corps'' and
``Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps'', respectively.
(2) Other references.--Any reference in any law other than
in title 10 or title 37, United States Code, or in any
regulation, document, record, or other paper of the United
States, to the Department of the Navy shall be considered to
be a reference to the Department of the Navy and Marine
Corps. Any such reference to an office specified in
subsection (b)(2) shall be considered to be a reference to
that officer as redesignated by that section.
(d) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made
by this section shall take effect on the first day of the
first month beginning more than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 902. REALIGNMENT OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE TO CARRY OUT
THE REDUCTION REQUIRED BY LAW IN THE NUMBER OF
DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARIES OF DEFENSE.

(a) Redesignation of Certain Positions in the Office of the
Secretary of Defense.--Positions in the Office of the
Secretary of Defense of the Department of Defense are hereby
redesignated as Assistant Secretaries of Defense as follows:
(1) The Director of Defense Research and Engineering is
redesignated as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering.
(2) The Director of Operational Energy Plans and Programs
is redesignated as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Operational Energy Plans and Programs.
(3) The Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation
is redesignated as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation.
(4) The Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear
and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs is redesignated
as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical,
and Biological Defense Programs.
(b) Amendments to Chapter 4 of Title 10 Relating to
Realignment.--Chapter 4 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended as follows:
(1) Repeal of separate deputy under secretary provisions.--
The following sections are repealed: section 133a, 134a, and
136a.
(2) Components of osd.--Section 131(b) is amended to read
as follows:
``(b) The Office of the Secretary of Defense is composed of
the following:
``(1) The Deputy Secretary of Defense.
``(2) The Under Secretaries of Defense, as follows:
``(A) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics.
``(B) The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
``(C) The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).
``(D) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness.
``(E) The Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence.
``(3) The Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department
of Defense.
``(4) The Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense.
``(5) The Assistant Secretaries of Defense.
``(6) Other officers who are appointed by the President, by
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, as follows:
``(A) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation.
``(B) The General Counsel of the Department of Defense.
``(C) The Inspector General of the Department of Defense.
``(7) Other officials provided for by law, as follows:
``(A) The official designated under section 1501(a) of this
title to have responsibility for Department of Defense
matters relating to missing persons as set forth in section
1501 of this title.
``(B) The official designated under section 2228(a)(2) of
this title to have responsibility for Department of Defense
policy related to the prevention and mitigation of corrosion
of the military equipment and infrastructure of the
Department of Defense and for directing the activities of the
Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight.
``(C) The officials designated under subsections (a) and
(b) of section 2438(a) of this title to have responsibility,
respectively, for developmental test and evaluation and for
systems engineering.
``(D) The official designated under section 2438a(a) of
this title to have responsibility for conducting and
overseeing performance assessments and root cause analyses
for major defense acquisition programs.
``(E) The Director of Small Business Programs, provided for
under section 2508 of this title.
``(8) Such other offices and officials as may be
established by law or the Secretary of Defense may establish
or designate in the Office.''.
(3) Principal deputy under secretaries of defense.--Section
137a is amended--
(A) in subsections (a)(1), (b), and (d), by striking
``Deputy Under'' each place it appears and inserting
``Principal Deputy Under'';
(B) in subsection (a)(2), by striking ``(A) The'' and all
that follows through ``(5) of subsection (c)'' and inserting
``The Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense'';
(C) in subsection (c)--
(i) by striking ``One of the Deputy'' in paragraphs (1),
(2), (3), (4), and (5) and inserting ``One of the Principal
Deputy'';
(ii) by striking ``appointed'' and all that follows through
``this title'' in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3);
(iii) by striking ``shall be'' in paragraphs (4) and (5)
and inserting ``is''; and
(iv) by adding at the end of paragraph (5) the following
new sentence: ``Any individual nominated for appointment as
the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence shall have extensive intelligence expertise.'';
and
(D) by adding at the end of subsection (d) the following
new sentence: ``The Principal Deputy Under Secretaries take
precedence among themselves in the order prescribed by the
Secretary of Defense.''.

[[Page 9569]]

(4) Assistant secretaries of defense.--Section 138 is
amended--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) by striking ``12'' and inserting ``17''; and
(ii) by striking ``(A) The'' and all that follows through
``The other'' and inserting ``The'';
(B) in subsection (b)--
(i) by striking ``shall be'' in paragraphs (2), (3), (4),
(5), and (6) and inserting ``is'';
(ii) by striking ``appointed pursuant to section 138a of
this title'' in paragraph (7); and
(iii) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(8) One of the Assistant Secretaries is the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. In
addition to any duties and powers prescribed under paragraph
(1), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering shall have the duties specified in section 138b
of this title.
``(9) One of the Assistant Secretaries is the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and
Programs. In addition to any duties and powers prescribed
under paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Operational Energy Plans and Programs shall have the duties
specified in section 138c of this title.
``(10) One of the Assistant Secretaries is the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation. In addition to any duties and powers prescribed
under paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation shall have the duties
specified in section 138d of this title.
``(11) One of the Assistant Secretaries is the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological
Defense Programs. In addition to any duties and powers
prescribed under paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense
Programs shall have the duties specified in section 138e of
this title.''; and
(C) in subsection (d), by striking ``and the Director of
Defense Research and Engineering'' and inserting ``the Deputy
Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense, and
the Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense''.
(5) Assistant secretary for logistics and materiel
readiness.--Section 138a(a) is amended--
(A) by striking ``There is a'' and inserting ``The''; and
(B) by striking ``, appointed from civilian life by the
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
The Assistant Secretary''.
(6) Assistant secretary for research and engineering.--
Section 139a is transferred so as to appear after section
138a, redesignated as section 138b, and amended--
(A) by striking subsection (a);
(B) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections
(a) and (b), respectively;
(C) in subsection (a), as so redesignated, by striking
``Director of Defense'' and inserting ``Assistant Secretary
of Defense for''; and
(D) in subsection (b), as so redesignated--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Director of Defense
Research and Engineering, in consultation with the Director
of Developmental Test and Evaluation'' and inserting
``Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering, in consultation with the official designated
under section 2438(a) of this title to have responsibility
for developmental test and evaluation functions''; and
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Director'' and
inserting ``Assistant Secretary''.
(7) Assistant secretary for operational energy plans and
programs.--Section 139b is transferred so as to appear after
section 138b (as transferred and redesignated by paragraph
(6)), redesignated as section 138c, and amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking ``There is a'' and all
that follows through ``The Director'' and inserting ``The
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans
and Programs'';
(B) by striking ``Director'' each place it appears and
inserting ``Assistant Secretary'';
(C) in subsection (d)(2)--
(i) by striking ``Not later than'' and all that follows
through ``military departments'' and inserting ``The
Secretary of each military department'';
(ii) by striking ``who will'' and inserting ``who shall'';
and
(iii) by inserting ``so designated'' after ``The
officials''; and
(D) in subsection (d)(4), by striking ``The initial'' and
all that follows through ``updates to the strategy'' and
inserting ``Updates to the strategy required by paragraph
(1)''.
(8) Assistant secretary for cost assessment and program
evaluation.--Section 139c is transferred so as to appear
after section 138c (as transferred and redesignated by
paragraph (7)), redesignated as section 138d, and amended--
(A) by striking subsection (a);
(B) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (a) and
in that subsection--
(i) striking ``Director of'' in paragraph (1) and inserting
``Assistant Secretary of Defense for''; and
(ii) striking ``Director'' each place it appears in
paragraphs (1)(A), (1)(B), and (2) and inserting ``Assistant
Secretary'';
(C) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
``(b) Responsibility for Specified Functions.--There shall
be within the office of the Assistant Secretary the
following:
``(1) An official with primary responsibility for cost
assessment.
``(2) An official with primary responsibility for program
evaluation.''; and
(D) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c) and
in that subsection striking ``Director of'' in the matter
preceding paragraph (1) and inserting ``Assistant Secretary
of Defense for''.
(9) Assistant secretary for nuclear, chemical, and
biological defense programs.--Section 142 is transferred so
as to appear after section 138d (as redesignated and
transferred by paragraph (8)), redesignated as section 138e,
and amended--
(A) by striking subsection (a);
(B) by striking ``(b) The Assistant to the Secretary'' and
inserting ``The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear,
Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs''; and
(C) by striking subsection (c).
(c) Other Amendments to Chapter 4 of Title 10.--Chapter 4
of title 10, United States Code, is further amended as
follows:
(1) Office of the secretary of defense.--Section 131(a) is
amended by striking ``his'' and inserting ``the
Secretary's''.
(2) Deputy secretary.--Section 132 is amended by striking
the second sentence of subsection (c).
(3) Deputy chief management officer.--Such chapter is
further amended by inserting after section 132 the following
new section:

``Sec. 132a. Deputy Chief Management Officer

``(a) There is a Deputy Chief Management Officer of the
Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
``(b) The Deputy Chief Management Officer assists the
Deputy Secretary of Defense in the Deputy Secretary's
capacity as Chief Management Officer of the Department of
Defense under section 132(c) of this title.
``(c) The Deputy Chief Management Officer takes precedence
in the Department of Defense after the Secretary of Defense,
the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Secretaries of the
military departments, and the Under Secretaries of
Defense.''.
(4) Under secretary of defense (comptroller).--Section
135(c) is amended by striking ``clauses'' and inserting
``paragraphs''.
(d) Repeal of Position Titles Specified by Law for
Statutory Positions Relating to Developmental Test and
Evaluation and Systems Engineering.--
(1) Transfer of section from chapter 4 to programmatic
chapter.--Section 139d of title 10, United States Code, is
transferred to chapter 144, inserted after section 2437, and
redesignated as section 2438.
(2) Director of developmental test and evaluation.--
Subsection (a) of such section is amended--
(A) by striking ``(a) Director of'' and all that follows
through paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(a) Developmental Test and Evaluation.--
``(1) Designation of responsible official.--The Secretary
of Defense shall designate, from among individuals with
expertise in test and evaluation, an official to be
responsible to the Secretary and the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics for
developmental test and evaluation in the Department of
Defense.
``(2) Supervision.--The official designated under paragraph
(1) shall report directly to an official of the Department
appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate.'';
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), (6), and (7) as
paragraphs (3), (4), (5), and (6), respectively;
(C) in paragraph (3), as so redesignated, by striking
Director of systems engineering'' and all that follows
through ``Director of Systems Engineering'' and inserting
``Systems engineering.--The official designated under
paragraph (1) shall closely coordinate with the official
designated under subsection (b)'';
(D) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking
``Director'' in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) and
inserting ``official designated under paragraph (1)'';
(E) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated--
(i) by striking ``Director has'' and inserting ``official
designated under paragraph (1) has'';
(ii) by striking ``Director considers'' and inserting
``designated official considers''; and
(iii) by striking ``the Director's duties'' and inserting
``that official's duties''; and
(F) in paragraph (6), as so redesignated, by striking
``serving as the Director of Developmental Test and
Evaluation'' and inserting ``official designated under
paragraph (1)''.
(3) Director of systems engineering.--Subsection (b) of
such section is amended--
(A) by striking ``(b) Director of'' and all that follows
through paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(b) Systems Engineering.--
``(1) Designation of responsible official.--The Secretary
of Defense shall designate, from among individuals with
expertise in systems engineering, an official to be
responsible to the Secretary and the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics for
systems engineering and development planning in the
Department of Defense.
``(2) Supervision.--The official designated under paragraph
(1) shall report directly to an official of the Department
appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate.'';
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) as
paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively;
(C) in paragraph (3), as so redesignated, by striking
``Director of developmental test

[[Page 9570]]

and evaluation'' and all that follows through ``Director of
Developmental Test And Evaluation'' and inserting
``Developmental test and evaluation.--The official designated
under paragraph (1) shall closely coordinate with the
official designated under subsection (a)'';
(D) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking
``Director'' in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) and
inserting ``official designated under paragraph (1)''; and
(E) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated--
(i) by striking ``Director shall'' and inserting ``official
designated under paragraph (1) shall'';
(ii) by striking ``Director considers'' and inserting
``designated official considers''; and
(iii) by striking ``the Director's duties'' and inserting
``that official's duties''.
(4) Joint annual report.--Subsection (c) of such section is
amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``beginning in 2010,'';
(B) by striking ``Director of Developmental Test and
Evaluation and the Director of Systems Engineering'' and
inserting ``officials designated under subsections (a) and
(b)'';
(C) by striking ``subsections (a) and (b)'' and inserting
``those subsections''; and
(D) by inserting ``such'' after ``Each''.
(5) Joint guidance.--Subsection (d) of such section is
amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``Director of Developmental Test and
Evaluation and the Director of Systems Engineering'' and
inserting ``officials designated under subsections (a) and
(b)''; and
(B) by striking ``section 103 of the Weapon Systems
Acquisition Reform Act of 2009'' and inserting ``section
2438a of this title''.
(6) Repeal of redundant definition.--Subsection (e) of such
section is repealed.
(e) Codification of Section 103 of Weapon Systems
Acquisition Reform Act of 2009.--
(1) Codification.--Chapter 144 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 2438 (as
transferred and redesignated by subsection (d)), a new
section 2438a consisting of--
(A) a section heading as follows:

``Sec. 2438a. Performance assessments and root cause
analyses''; and

(B) a text consisting of the text of section 103 of the
Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (Public Law
111-23; 123 Stat. 1715; 10 U.S.C. 2430 note), modified as
specified in paragraph (2).
(2) Technical amendments due to codification.--The
modifications referred to in paragraph (1)(B) to the text
specified in that paragraph are--
(A) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``section 2433a(a)(1)
of title 10, United States Code (as added by section 206(a)
of this Act)'' and inserting ``section 2433a(a)(1) of this
title'';
(B) in subsection (b)(5)--
(i) by striking ``section 2433a of title 10, United States
Code (as so added)'' and inserting ``section 2433a of this
title''; and
(ii) by striking ``prior to'' both places it appears and
inserting ``before'';
(C) in subsection (d), by striking ``section 2433a of title
10, United States Code (as so added)'' and inserting
``section 2433a of this title''; and
(D) in subsection (f), by striking ``beginning in 2010,''.
(f) Transfer of Section Providing for Director of Small
Business Programs.--Section 144 of title 10, United States
Code, is transferred to chapter 148, inserted after section
2507, and redesignated as section 2508.
(g) Repeal of Statutory Requirement for Office for Missing
Personnel in OSD.--Section 1501(a) of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking the subsection heading and inserting the
following: ``Responsibility for Missing Personnel .--'';
(2) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``establish within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense an office to have responsibility for
Department of Defense policy'' in the first sentence and
inserting ``designate within the Office of the Secretary of
Defense an official as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Affairs to have
responsibility for Department of Defense matters'';
(B) by striking the second sentence;
(C) by striking ``of the office'' and inserting ``of the
official designated under this paragraph'';
(D) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
(E) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
and
(F) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph (B):
``(B) policy, control, and oversight of the program
established under section 1509 of this title, as well as the
accounting for missing persons (including locating,
recovering, and identifying missing persons or their remains
after hostilities have ceased); and'';
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and (5) as
paragraphs (3), (4), (5), and (6), respectively;
(4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph (2):
``(2) The official designated under paragraph (1) shall
also serve as the Director, Defense Prisoner of War/Missing
Personnel Office, as established under paragraph (6)(A),
exercising authority, direction, and control over that
activity.''.
(5) in paragraph (3), as so redesignated--
(A) by striking ``of the office'' the first place it
appears; and
(B) by striking ``head of the office'' and inserting
``official designated under paragraph (1) and (2)'';
(6) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated--
(A) by striking ``office'' and inserting ``designated
official''; and
(B) by inserting after ``evasion)'' the following: ``and
for personnel accounting (including locating, recovering, and
identifying missing persons or their remains after
hostilities have ceased)'';
(7) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated, by striking
``office'' and inserting ``designated official''; and
(8) in paragraph (6), as so redesignated--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) by inserting after ``(A)'' the following: ``The
Secretary of Defense shall establish an activity to account
for personnel who are missing or whose remains have not been
recovered from the conflict in which they were lost. This
activity shall be known as the Defense Prisoner of War/
Missing Personnel Office.''; and
(ii) by striking ``office'' both places it appears and
inserting ``activity'';
(B) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking ``to the office''
and inserting ``activity'';
(C) in subparagraph (B)(ii)--
(i) by striking ``to the office'' and inserting
``activity''; and
(ii) by striking ``of the office'' and inserting ``of the
activity''; and
(D) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``office'' and
inserting ``activity''.
(h) Repeal of Statutory Requirement for Director of Office
for Corrosion Policy and Oversight in OSD.--Section 2228 of
title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking the subsection heading and inserting the
following: ``Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight and
Designation of Responsible Official'';
(B) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) The Secretary of Defense shall designate, from among
civilian employees of the Department of Defense with the
qualifications described in paragraph (4), an official to be
responsible to the Secretary of Defense and the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics for the prevention and mitigation of corrosion of
the military equipment and infrastructure of the Department
of Defense and for directing the activities of the Office of
Corrosion Policy and Oversight.'';
(C) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(4) and (5), respectively;
(D) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph (3):
``(3) The official designated under paragraph (2) shall
report directly to the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.''.
(E) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking
``assigned to the position of Director'' and inserting
``designated under paragraph (2)''; and
(F) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated, by striking ``of
Director'' and inserting ``held by the official designated
under paragraph (2)'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``Director of Corrosion Policy and
Oversight (in this section referred to as the `Director')''
in paragraph (1) and inserting ``official designated under
subsection (a)(2)''; and
(B) by striking ``Director'' in paragraphs (2), (3), (4),
and (5) and inserting ``designated official'';
(3) in subsection (c), by striking ``Additional
Authorities'' and all that follows through ``authorized to--
'' and inserting ``Additional Duties.--The official
designated under subsection (a) shall --''; and
(4) in subsection (e), by striking ``beginning with the
budget for fiscal year 2009,''.
(i) Repeal of Statutory Limitation on Number of Deputy
Under Secretaries of Defense.--Section 906(a)(2) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2426; 10 U.S.C. 137a note) is
repealed.
(j) Conforming Amendments to Title 10.--Title 10, United
States Code, is amended as follows:
(1) The following sections are amended by striking
``Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation'' and
inserting ``Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation'': sections 181(d),
2306b(i)(1)(B), 2366a(a)(4), 2366a(a)(5), 2366b(a)(1)(C),
2433a(a)(2), 2433a(b)(2)(C), 2434(b)(1)(A), and 2445c(f)(3).
(2) Section 179(c) is amended--
(A) by striking ``Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for
Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs'' in
paragraphs (2) and (3) and inserting ``Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense
Programs''; and
(B) by striking ``to the'' in paragraph (3).
(3) Section 2272 is amended by striking ``Director of
Defense Research and Engineering'' each place it appears and
inserting ``Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering''.
(4) Section 2334 is amended--
(A) by striking ``Director of Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation'' each place it appears and inserting ``Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation''; and
(B) by striking ``Director'' each place it appears (other
than as specified in subparagraph (A)) and inserting
``Assistant Secretary''.

[[Page 9571]]

(5) Section 2365 is amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking ``Director of Defense
Research and Engineering'' and inserting ``Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering'';
(B) in subsection (d)(1), by striking ``Director'' and
inserting ``Assistant Secretary'';
(C) in subsection (d)(2)--
(i) by striking ``Director of Defense Research and
Engineering'' and inserting ``Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering''; and
(ii) by striking ``Director may'' and inserting ``Assistant
Secretary may''; and
(D) in subsection (e), by striking ``Director'' and
inserting ``Assistant Secretary''.
(6) Sections 2350a(g)(3), 2366b(a)(3)(D), 2374a(a), and
2517(a) are amended by striking ``Director of Defense
Research and Engineering'' and inserting ``Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering''.
(7) Section 2902(b) is amended--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Deputy Under Secretary
of Defense for Science and Technology'' and inserting
``official within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering who is responsible for
science and technology''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``Deputy Under Secretary
of Defense'' and inserting ``official within the Office of
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics who is''.
(k) Other Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 214 of the National Defense Authorization Act
of Fiscal Year 2008 (10 U.S.C. 2521 note) is amended by
striking ``Director of Defense Research and Engineering'' and
inserting ``Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering''.
(2) Section 201(d) of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform
Act of 2009 (10 U.S.C. 181 note) is amended--
(A) by striking ``The Director of Cost Assessment and
Program Evaluation'' and inserting ``The Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation''; and
(B) by striking ``the Director'' and inserting ``the
Assistant Secretary''.
(l) Section Heading and Clerical Amendments.--
(1) Section heading amendments.--Title 10, United States
Code, is amended as follows:
(A) The heading of section 137a is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 137a. Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense''.

(B) The heading of section 138b, as transferred and
redesignated by subsection (b)(6), is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 138b. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering''.

``Sec. 138c. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational
Energy Plans and Programs''.

(D) The heading of section 138d, as transferred and
redesignated by subsection (b)(8), is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 138d. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation''.

(E) The heading of section 138e, as transferred and
redesignated by subsection (b)(9), is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 138e. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear,
Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs''.

(F) The heading of section 2228 is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 2228. Military equipment and infrastructure:
prevention and mitigation of corrosion''.

(G) The heading of section 2438 is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 2438. Developmental test and evaluation; systems
engineering: designation of responsible officials; joint
guidance''.

(2) Clerical amendments.--Title 10, United States Code, is
further amended as follows:
(A) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 4 is
amended--
(i) by inserting after the item relating to section 132 the
following new item:

``132a. Deputy Chief Management Officer.'';
(ii) by striking the items relating to sections 133a, 134a,
and 136a;
(iii) by amending the item relating to section 137a to read
as follows:

``137a. Principal Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense.'';
(iv) by inserting after the item relating to section 138a
the following new items:

``138b. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.
``138c. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and
Programs.
``138d. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation.
``138e. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and
Biological Defense Programs.''; and
(v) by striking the items relating to sections 139a, 139b,
139c, 139d, 142, and 144.
(B) The item relating to section 2228 in the table of
sections at the beginning of chapter 131 is amended to read
as follows:

``2228. Military equipment and infrastructure: prevention and
mitigation of corrosion.''.
(C) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 144
is amended by inserting after the item relating to section
2437 the following new items:

``2438. Developmental test and evaluation; systems engineering:
designation of responsible officials; joint guidance.
``2438a. Performance assessments and root cause analyses.''.
(D) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter II
of chapter 148 is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 2507 the following new item:

``2508. Director of Small Business Programs.''.
(m) Executive Schedule Amendments.--Chapter 53 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended as follows:
(1) Number of assistant secretary of defense positions.--
Section 5315 is amended by striking ``Assistant Secretaries
of Defense (12)'' and inserting ``Assistant Secretaries of
Defense (17)''.
(2) Positions redesignated as assistant secretary
positions.--
(A) Section 5315 is further amended--
(i) by striking ``Director of Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation, Department of Defense.''; and
(ii) by striking ``Director of Defense Research and
Engineering.''.
(B) Section 5316 is amended by striking ``Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Chemical and Biological
Defense Programs.''.
(3) Amendments to delete references to positions in senior
executive service.--Section 5316 is further amended--
(A) by striking ``Director, Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency, Department of Defense.'';
(B) by striking ``Deputy General Counsel, Department of
Defense.'';
(C) by striking ``Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense for
Research and Engineering, Department of Defense (4).''; and
(D) by striking ``Special Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense.''.
(n) References in Other Laws, etc.--Any reference in any
provision or law other than title 10, United States Code, or
in any rule, regulation, or other paper of the United States,
to any of the offices of the Department of Defense
redesignated by subsection (a) shall be treated as referring
to that office as so redesignated.
(o) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section and the
amendments made by this section shall take effect on January
1, 2011, or on such earlier date for any of such provisions
as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Defense. If the
Secretary prescribes an earlier date for any of those
provisions or amendments, the Secretary shall notify Congress
in writing in advance of such date.

SEC. 903. UNIFIED MEDICAL COMMAND.

(a) Assistant Secretary of Defense.--Section 138(b) of
title 10, United States Code, as amended by section 902, is
further amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(12) One of the Assistant Secretaries is the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs. In addition to any
duties and powers prescribed under paragraph (1), the
principal duty of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Health Affairs is the overall supervision (including
oversight of policy and resources) of all health affairs and
medical activities of the Department of Defense. The
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs is the
principal civilian adviser to the Secretary of Defense on
health affairs and medical matters and, after the Secretary
and Deputy Secretary, is the principal health affairs and
medical official within the senior management of the
Department of Defense.''.
(b) Unified Combatant Command.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 6 of such title is amended by
inserting after section 167a the following new section:

``Sec. 167b. Unified combatant command for medical operations

``(a) Establishment.--With the advice and assistance of the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the President, through
the Secretary of Defense, may establish under section 161 of
this title a unified command for medical operations
(hereinafter in this section referred to as the `unified
medical command'). The principal function of the command is
to provide medical services to the armed forces and other
health care beneficiaries of the Department of Defense as
defined in chapter 55 of this title.
``(b) Assignment of Forces.--In establishing the unified
medical command under subsection (a), all active military
medical treatment facilities, training organizations, and
research entities of the armed forces shall be assigned to
such unified command, unless otherwise directed by the
Secretary of Defense.
``(c) Grade of Commander.--The commander of the unified
medical command shall hold the grade of general or, in the
case of an officer of the Navy, admiral while serving in that
position, without vacating his permanent grade. The commander
of such command shall be appointed to that grade by the
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,
for service in that position. The commander of such command
shall be a member of a health profession described in
paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) of section 335(j)
of title 37. During the five-year period beginning on the
date on which the Secretary establishes the command under
subsection (a), the commander of such command shall be exempt
from the requirements of section 164(a)(1) of this title.

[[Page 9572]]

``(d) Subordinate Commands.--(1) The unified medical
command shall have the following subordinate commands:
``(A) A command that includes all fixed military medical
treatment facilities, including elements of the Department of
Defense that are combined, operated jointly, or otherwise
operated in such a manner that a medical facility of the
Department of Defense is operating in or with a medical
facility of another department or agency of the United
States.
``(B) A command that includes all medical training,
education, and research and development activities that have
previously been unified or combined, including organizations
that have been designated as a Department of Defense
executive agent.
``(C) The Defense Health Agency established under
subsection (f).
``(2) The commander of a subordinate command of the unified
medical command shall hold the grade of lieutenant general
or, in the case of an officer of the Navy, vice admiral while
serving in that position, without vacating his permanent
grade. The commander of such a subordinate command shall be
appointed to that grade by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate, for service in that
position. The commander of such a subordinate command shall
also be required to be a surgeon general of one of the
military departments.
``(e) Authority of Combatant Commander.--(1) In addition to
the authority prescribed in section 164(c) of this title, the
commander of the unified medical command shall be responsible
for, and shall have the authority to conduct, all affairs of
such command relating to medical operations activities.
``(2) The commander of such command shall be responsible
for, and shall have the authority to conduct, the following
functions relating to medical operations activities (whether
or not relating to the unified medical command):
``(A) Developing programs and doctrine.
``(B) Preparing and submitting to the Secretary of Defense
program recommendations and budget proposals for the forces
described in subsection (b) and for other forces assigned to
the unified medical command.
``(C) Exercising authority, direction, and control over the
expenditure of funds--
``(i) for forces assigned to the unified medical command;
``(ii) for the forces described in subsection (b) assigned
to unified combatant commands other than the unified medical
command to the extent directed by the Secretary of Defense;
and
``(iii) for military construction funds of the Defense
Health Program.
``(D) Training assigned forces.
``(E) Conducting specialized courses of instruction for
commissioned and noncommissioned officers.
``(F) Validating requirements.
``(G) Establishing priorities for requirements.
``(H) Ensuring the interoperability of equipment and
forces.
``(I) Monitoring the promotions, assignments, retention,
training, and professional military education of medical
officers described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), or
(6) of section 335(j) of title 37.
``(3) The commander of such command shall be responsible
for the Defense Health Program, including the Defense Health
Program Account established under section 1100 of this title.
``(f) Defense Health Agency.--(1) In establishing the
unified medical command under subsection (a), the Secretary
shall also establish under section 191 of this title a
defense agency for health care (in this section referred to
as the `Defense Health Agency'), and shall transfer to such
agency the organization of the Department of Defense referred
to as the TRICARE Management Activity and all functions of
the TRICARE Program (as defined in section 1072(7)).
``(2) The director of the Defense Health Agency shall hold
the rank of lieutenant general or, in the case of an officer
of the Navy, vice admiral while serving in that position,
without vacating his permanent grade. The director of such
agency shall be appointed to that grade by the President, by
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, for service in
that position. The director of such agency shall be a member
of a health profession described in paragraph (1), (2), (3),
(4), (5), or (6) of section 335(j) of title 37.
``(g) Regulations.--In establishing the unified medical
command under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe regulations for the activities of the unified
medical command.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 167a the following new item:

``167b. Unified combatant command for medical operations.''.
(c) Plan, Notification, and Report.--
(1) Plan.--Not later than March 31, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees
a comprehensive plan to establish the unified medical command
authorized under section 167b of title 10, United States
Code, as added by subsection (b), including any legislative
actions the Secretary considers necessary to implement the
plan.
(2) Notification.--The Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees written notification of the
decision of the Secretary to establish the unified medical
command under such section 167b by not later than the date
that is 30 days before establishing such command.
(3) Report.--Not later than 180 days after submitting the
notification under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report on--
(A) the establishment of the unified medical command; and
(B) the establishment of the Defense Health Agency under
subsection (f) of such section 167b.

Subtitle B--Space Activities

SEC. 911. INTEGRATED SPACE ARCHITECTURES.

The Secretary of Defense and the Director of National
Intelligence shall jointly establish the capability to
conduct integrated national security space architecture
planning, development, coordination, and analysis that--
(1) encompasses defense and intelligence space plans,
programs, budgets, and organizations;
(2) provides mid-term to long-term recommendations to guide
space-related defense and intelligence acquisitions,
requirements, and investment decisions;
(3) is independent of the space architecture planning,
development, coordination, and analysis activities of each
military department and each element of the intelligence
community (as defined in section 3(4) of the National
Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4))); and
(4) makes use of, to the maximum extent practicable, joint
duty assignment positions (as defined in section 668).

Subtitle C--Intelligence-Related Matters

SEC. 921. 5-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE TO ENGAGE IN COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES AS
SECURITY FOR INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION
ACTIVITIES.

The second sentence of section 431(a) of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2015''.

SEC. 922. SPACE AND COUNTERSPACE INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS.

(a) Designation of Lead Integrator.--
(1) Designation.--
(A) In general.--The Director of the Defense Intelligence
Agency shall designate a lead integrator for foreign space
and counterspace defense intelligence analysis.
(B) Initial designation.--Not later than 30 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency shall designate an initial lead
integrator under subparagraph (A).
(2) Notice.--Not later than 30 days after the date on which
the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency designates a
lead integrator under paragraph (1)(A), or removes the
designation of lead integrator from an individual or
organization previously designated under paragraph (1)(A),
the Director shall notify the congressional defense
committees, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of
the House of Representatives, and the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate of the designation of such lead
integrator or the removal of such designation.
(b) Authority to Conduct Original Analysis.--The Director
of the Defense Intelligence Agency shall authorize a lead
integrator designated under subsection (a)(1)(A) to conduct
original intelligence analysis and production within the
areas of responsibility of such lead integrator.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Lead integrator.--The term ``lead integrator'' means,
with respect to a particular subject matter, an individual or
organization with primary responsibility for the review,
coordination, and integration of defense intelligence
analysis and production related to such subject matter to--
(A) ensure the development of coherent assessments and
intelligence products; and
(B) manage and consolidate defense intelligence tasking.
(2) Original intelligence analysis.--The term ``original
intelligence analysis'' means the development of knowledge
and creation of intelligence materials based on raw data and
intelligence reporting.

Subtitle D--Other Matters

SEC. 931. REVISIONS TO THE BOARD OF REGENTS FOR THE UNIFORMED
SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES.

Subsection (b) of section 2113a of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) as
paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph:
``(2) four persons, of which the chairmen and ranking
members of the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
House of Representatives may each appoint one person,
respectively;''.

SEC. 932. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY FOR COMBATANT COMMANDER
INITIATIVE FUND.

(a) In General.--Section 166a(e)(1) of title 10, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) not more than $10,000,000 may be used for research,
development, test and evaluation activities.''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section
shall not apply with respect to funds appropriated for a
fiscal year before fiscal year 2011.

[[Page 9573]]

SEC. 933. TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO
TEMPORARY WAIVER OF REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS OF
ACTIVITIES FOR NONGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL AT
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REGIONAL CENTERS FOR
SECURITY STUDIES.

(a) Extension of Waiver.--Paragraph (1) of section 941(b)
of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4577; 10
U.S.C. 184 note) is amended by striking ``fiscal years 2009
and 2010'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2012''.
(b) Annual Report.--Paragraph (3) of such section is
amended by striking ``in 2010 and 2011'' and inserting ``in
each year through 2013''.

SEC. 934. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR QUADRENNIAL ROLES AND
MISSIONS REVIEW IN 2011.

(a) Additional Activities Considered.--As part of the
quadrennial roles and missions review conducted in 2011
pursuant to section 118b of title 10, United States Code, the
Secretary of Defense shall give consideration to the
following activities, giving particular attention to their
role in counter-terrorism operations:
(1) Information operations.
(2) Strategic communications.
(3) Detention and interrogation.
(b) Additional Report Requirement.--In the report required
by section 118b(d) of such title for such review in 2011, the
Secretary of Defense shall--
(1) provide clear guidance on the nature and extent of
which core competencies are associated with the activities
listed in subsection (a); and
(2) identify the elements of the Department of Defense that
are responsible or should be responsible for providing such
core competencies.

SEC. 935. CODIFICATION OF CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION
REQUIREMENT BEFORE PERMANENT RELOCATION OF ANY
UNITED STATES MILITARY UNIT STATIONED OUTSIDE
THE UNITED STATES.

(a) Codification and Related Report.--Chapter 6 of title
10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
162 the following new section:

``Sec. 162a. Congressional notification before permanent
relocation of military units stationed outside the United
States

``(a) Notification Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense
shall notify Congress at least 30 days before the permanent
relocation of a unit stationed outside the United States.
``(b) Elements of Notification.--The notification required
by subsection (a) shall include a description of the
following:
``(1) How relocation of the unit supports the United States
national security strategy.
``(2) Whether the relocation of the unit will have an
impact on any security commitments undertaken by the United
States pursuant to any international security treaty,
including the North Atlantic Treaty, the Treaty of Mutual
Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan,
and the Security Treaty Between Australia, New Zealand, and
the United States of America.
``(3) How relocation of the unit addresses the current
security environment in the affected geographic combatant
command's area of responsibility, including United States
participation in theater security cooperation activities and
bilateral partnership, exchanges, and training exercises.
``(4) How relocation of the unit impacts the status of
overseas base closure and realignment actions undertaken as
part of a global defense posture realignment strategy and the
status of development and execution of comprehensive master
plans for overseas military main operating bases, forward
operating sites, and cooperative security locations of the
global defense posture of the United States.
``(c) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) does not apply in the
case of--
``(1) the relocation of a unit deployed to a combat zone;
or
``(2) the relocation of a unit as the result of closure of
an overseas installation at the request of the government of
the host nation in the manner provided in the agreement
between the United States and the host nation regarding the
installation.
``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Combat zone.--The term `combat zone' has the meaning
given that term in section 112(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986.
``(2) Geographic combatant command.--The term `geographic
combatant command' means a combatant command with a
geographic area of responsibility that does not include North
America.
``(3) Unit.--The term `unit' has the meaning determined by
the Secretary of Defense for purposes of this section.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 162 the following new item:

``162a. Congressional notification before permanent relocation of
military units stationed outside the United States.''.
(c) Repeal of Superceded Notification Requirement.--Section
1063 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2469; 10 U.S.C. 113
note) is repealed.

TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Financial Matters

SEC. 1001. GENERAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

(a) Authority to Transfer Authorizations.--
(1) Authority.--Upon determination by the Secretary of
Defense that such action is necessary in the national
interest, the Secretary may transfer amounts of
authorizations made available to the Department of Defense in
this division for fiscal year 2011 between any such
authorizations for that fiscal year (or any subdivisions
thereof). Amounts of authorizations so transferred shall be
merged with and be available for the same purposes as the
authorization to which transferred.
(2) Limitation.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), the
total amount of authorizations that the Secretary may
transfer under the authority of this section may not exceed
$3,500,000,000.
(3) Exception for transfers between military personnel
authorizations.--A transfer of funds between military
personnel authorizations under title IV shall not be counted
toward the dollar limitation in paragraph (2).
(b) Limitations.--The authority provided by this section to
transfer authorizations--
(1) may only be used to provide authority for items that
have a higher priority than the items from which authority is
transferred; and
(2) may not be used to provide authority for an item that
has been denied authorization by Congress.
(c) Effect on Authorization Amounts.--A transfer made from
one account to another under the authority of this section
shall be deemed to increase the amount authorized for the
account to which the amount is transferred by an amount equal
to the amount transferred.
(d) Notice to Congress.--The Secretary shall promptly
notify Congress of each transfer made under subsection (a).

SEC. 1002. AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR
OPERATIONS IN AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ, AND HAITI FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2010.

In addition to the amounts otherwise authorized to be
appropriated by this division, the amounts authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2010 in title XV of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law
111-84) are hereby increased, with respect to any such
authorized amount, as follows:
(1) The amounts provided in sections 1502 through 1507 of
such Act for the following procurement accounts are increased
as follows:
(A) For aircraft procurement, Army, by $182,170,000.
(B) For weapons and tracked combat vehicles procurement,
Army, by $3,000,000.
(C) For ammunition procurement, Army, by $17,055,000.
(D) For other procurement, Army, by $1,997,918,000.
(E) For the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund,
by $400,000,000.
(F) For aircraft procurement, Navy, by $104,693,000.
(G) For other procurement, Navy, by $15,000,000.
(H) For procurement, Marine Corps, by $18,927,000.
(I) For aircraft procurement, Air Force, by $209,766,000.
(J) For ammunition procurement, Air Force, by $5,000,000.
(K) For other procurement, Air Force, by $576,895,000.
(L) For the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund,
by $1,123,000,000.
(M) For defense-wide activities, by $189,276,000.
(2) The amounts provided in section 1508 of such Act for
research, development, test, and evaluation are increased as
follows:
(A) For the Army, by $61,962,000.
(B) For the Navy, by $5,360,000.
(C) For the Air Force, by $187,651,000.
(D) For defense-wide activities, by $22,138,000.
(3) The amounts provided in sections 1509, 1511, 1513,
1514, and 1515 of such Act for operation and maintenance are
increased as follows:
(A) For the Army, by $11,700,965,000.
(B) For the Navy, by $2,428,702,000.
(C) For the Marine Corps, by $1,090,873,000.
(D) For the Air Force, by $3,845,047,000.
(E) For defense-wide activities, by $1,188,421,000.
(F) For the Army Reserve, by $67,399,000.
(G) For the Navy Reserve, by $61,842,000.
(H) For the Marine Corps Reserve, by $674,000.
(I) For the Air Force Reserve, by $95,819,000.
(J) For the Army National Guard, by $171,834,000.
(K) For the Air National Guard, by $161,281,000.
(L) For the Defense Health Program, by $33,367,000.
(M) For Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug Activities,
Defense-wide, by $94,000,000.
(N) For the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, by
$2,604,000,000.
(O) For the Iraq Security Forces Fund, by $1,000,000,000.
(P) For Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Aid, by
$255,000,000.
(Q) For Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund, by
$350,000,000.
(R) For Working Capital Funds, by $974,967,000.
(4) The amount provided in section 1512 of such Act for
military personnel accounts is increased by $1,895,761,000.

SEC. 1003. BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF THIS ACT.

The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of
complying with the Statutory Pay-As-

[[Page 9574]]

You-Go-Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the
latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the
Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Committee on the
Budget of the House of Representatives, as long as such
statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage of
this Act.

Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities

SEC. 1011. UNIFIED COUNTER-DRUG AND COUNTERTERRORISM CAMPAIGN
IN COLOMBIA.

Section 1021 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375;
118 Stat. 2042), as most recently amended by section 1011 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2441), is further amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``2010'' and inserting
``2011''; and
(2) in subsection (c), by striking ``2010'' and inserting
``2011''.

SEC. 1012. JOINT TASK FORCES SUPPORT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES CONDUCTING COUNTERTERRORISM
ACTIVITIES.

Section 1022(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136; 10 U.S.C. 371
note), as most recently amended by section 1012 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2441), is further amended by
striking ``2010'' and inserting ``2011''.

SEC. 1013. REPORTING REQUIREMENT ON EXPENDITURES TO SUPPORT
FOREIGN COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES.

Section 1022(a) of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law
by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-255), as most recently
amended by section 1013 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2442),
is further amended by striking ``February 15, 2010'' and
inserting ``February 15, 2011''.

SEC. 1014. SUPPORT FOR COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES OF CERTAIN
FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.

(a) In General.--Subsection (a)(2) section 1033 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998
(Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1881), as most recently amended
by section 1014(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2442), is
further amended by striking ``2010'' and inserting ``2011''.
(b) Maximum Amount of Support.--Subsection (e)(2) of such
section is amended by striking ``fiscal years 2009 and 2010''
and inserting ``fiscal years 2010 and 2011''.

Subtitle C--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

SEC. 1021. REQUIREMENTS FOR LONG-RANGE PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF NAVAL VESSELS.

(a) In General.--Section 231 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 231. Long-range plan for construction of naval vessels

``(a) Quadrennial Naval Vessel Construction Plan.--At the
same time that the budget of the President is submitted under
section 1105(a) of title 31 during each year in which the
Secretary of Defense submits a quadrennial defense review,
the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a long-range plan for the construction of
combatant and support vessels for the Navy that supports the
force structure recommendations of the quadrennial defense
review.
``(b) Matters Included.--The plan under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
``(1) A detailed construction schedule of naval vessels for
the ten-year period beginning on the date on which the plan
is submitted, including a certification by the Secretary that
the budget for the fiscal year in which the plan is submitted
and the budget for the future-years defense program submitted
under section 221 of this title are sufficient for funding
such schedule.
``(2) A probable construction schedule for the ten-year
period beginning on the date that is 10 years after the date
on which the plan is submitted.
``(3) A notional construction schedule for the ten-year
period beginning on the date that is 20 years after the date
on which the plan is submitted.
``(4) The estimated levels of annual funding necessary to
carry out the construction schedules under paragraphs (1),
(2), and (3).
``(5) For the construction schedules under paragraphs (1)
and (2)--
``(A) a determination by the Director of Cost Assessment
and Program Evaluation of the level of funding necessary to
execute such schedules; and
``(B) an evaluation by the Director of the potential risk
associated with such schedules, including detailed effects on
operational plans, missions, deployment schedules, and
fulfillment of the requirements of the combatant commanders.
``(c) Naval Composition.--In submitting the plan under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall ensure that such plan--
``(1) is in accordance with section 5062(b) of this title;
and
``(2) phases the construction of new aircraft carriers
during the periods covered by such plan in a manner that
minimizes the total cost for procurement for such vessels.
``(d) Assessment When Budget Is Insufficient.--If the
budget for a fiscal year provides for funding of the
construction of naval vessels at a level that is less than
the level determined necessary by the Director of Cost
Assessment and Program Evaluation under subsection (b)(5),
the Secretary of the Navy shall include with the defense
budget materials for that fiscal year an assessment that
describes and discusses the risks associated with the budget,
including the risk associated with a reduced force structure
that may result from funding naval vessel construction at
such a level.
``(e) CBO Evaluation.--Not later than 60 days after the
date on which the congressional defense committees receive
the plan under subsection (a), the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office shall submit to such committees a
report assessing the sufficiency of the construction
schedules and the estimated levels of annual funding included
in such plan with respect to the budget submitted during the
year in which the plan is submitted and the future-years
defense program submitted under section 221 of this title.
``(f) Changes to the Construction Plan.--In any year in
which a quadrennial defense review is not submitted, the
Secretary of the Navy may not modify the construction
schedules submitted in the plan under subsection (a) unless--
``(1) the modification is an increase in planned ship
construction;
``(2) the modification is a realignment of less than one
year of construction start dates in the future-years defense
plan submitted under section 221 of this title and the
Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a
report on such modification, including--
``(A) the reasons for realignment;
``(B) any increased cost that will be incurred by the Navy
because of the realignment; and
``(C) an assessment of the effects that the realignment
will have on the shipbuilding industrial base, including the
secondary supply base; or
``(3) the modification is a decrease in the number or type
of combatant and support vessels of the Navy and the
Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a
report on such modification, including--
``(A) an addendum to the most recent quadrennial defense
review that fully explains and justifies the decrease with
respect to the national security strategy of the United
States as set forth in the most recent national security
strategy report of the President under section 108 of the
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404a); and
``(B) a description of the additional reviews and analyses
considered by the Secretary after the previous quadrennial
defense review was submitted that justify the decrease.
``(g) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `budget', with respect to a fiscal year,
means the budget for that fiscal year that is submitted to
Congress by the President under section 1105(a) of title 31.
``(2) The term `defense budget materials', with respect to
a fiscal year, means the materials submitted to Congress by
the Secretary of Defense in support of the budget for that
fiscal year.
``(3) The term `quadrennial defense review' means the
review of the defense programs and policies of the United
States that is carried out every four years under section 118
of this title.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 9 of such title is amended by striking
the item relating to section 231 and inserting the following
new item:

``231. Long-range plan for construction of naval vessels.''.

SEC. 1022. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DECOMMISSIONING OF NAVAL
VESSELS.

(a) Notice of Decommissioning.--The Secretary of the Navy
may not decommission any battle force vessel of the active
fleet of the Navy unless the Secretary provides to the
congressional defense committees written notification of such
decommissioning in accordance with established procedures.
(b) Content of Notification.--Any notification provided
under subsection (a) shall include each of the following:
(1) The reasons for the proposed decommissioning of the
vessel.
(2) An analysis of the effect the decommissioning would be
likely to have on the deployment schedules of other vessels
in the same class as the vessel proposed to be
decommissioned.
(3) A certification from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff that the decommissioning of the vessel will not
adversely affect the requirements of the combatant commanders
to fulfill missions critical to national security.
(4) Any budgetary implications associated with retaining
the vessel in commission, expressed for each applicable
appropriation account.

SEC. 1023. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SIZE OF THE NAVY BATTLE FORCE
FLEET.

(a) Limitation on Decommissioning.--Until the number of
vessels in the battle force fleet of the Navy reaches 313
vessels, the Secretary of the Navy shall not decommission, in
fiscal year 2011 or any subsequent fiscal year, more than
two-thirds of the number of vessels slated for commissioning
into the battle force fleet for that fiscal year.
(b) Treatment of Submarines.--For purposes of subsection
(a), submarines of the battle force fleet slated for
decommissioning for any fiscal year shall not count against
the number of vessels the Secretary of the Navy is required
to maintain for that fiscal year.

SEC. 1024. RETENTION AND STATUS OF CERTAIN NAVAL VESSELS.

The Secretary of the Navy shall retain the vessels the
U.S.S. Nassau (LHA 4) and the

[[Page 9575]]

U.S.S. Peleliu (LHA 5), in a commissioned and operational
status, until the delivery to the Navy of the vessels the
U.S.S. America (LHA 6) and the vessel designated as LHA 7,
respectively.

Subtitle D--Counterterrorism

SEC. 1031. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN AUTHORITY FOR MAKING REWARDS
FOR COMBATING TERRORISM.

Section 127b(c)(3)(C) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``2010'' and inserting ``2011''.

SEC. 1032. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FUNDS FOR THE TRANSFER
OR RELEASE OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT UNITED
STATES NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA.

(a) Releases.--During the period beginning on October 1,
2010, and ending on December 31, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense may not use any of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated in this Act or otherwise available to the
Department of Defense to release into the United States, its
territories, or possessions, any individual described in
subsection (d).
(b) Transfers.--During the period beginning on October 1,
2010, and ending on December 31, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense may not use any of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated in this Act or otherwise available to the
Department of Defense to transfer any individual described in
subsection (d) to the United States, its territories, or
possessions, until 120 days after the President has submitted
to the congressional defense committees the plan described in
section 1041(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2454).
(c) Consultation Required.--The President shall consult
with the chief executive of the State, the District of
Columbia, or the territory or possession of the United States
to which the disposition in section 1041(c)(2) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-81; 123 Stat. 2454) includes transfer to that
State, District of Columbia, or territory or possession.
(d) Individuals Described.--An individual described in this
subsection is any individual who is 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 effective control of the
Department of Defense; or
(B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

SEC. 1033. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE
TRANSFER OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT NAVAL
STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA, TO FOREIGN
COUNTRIES AND OTHER FOREIGN ENTITIES.

(a) Limitation.--The Secretary of Defense may not use any
of the amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act or
otherwise available to the Department of Defense to transfer
any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody or
effective control of the individual's country of origin, to
any other foreign country, or to any other foreign entity
unless the Secretary submits to Congress the certification
described in subsection (b) by not later than 30 days before
the transfer of the individual.
(b) Certification.--The certification described in this
subsection is a written certification made by the Secretary
of Defense, with concurrence of the Secretary of State, that
the government of the foreign country or the recognized
leadership of the foreign entity to which the individual
detained at Guantanamo is to be transferred--
(1) is not a designated state sponsor of terrorism or a
designated foreign terrorist organization;
(2) maintains effective control over each detention
facility in which an individual is to be detained if the
individual is to be housed in a detention facility;
(3) is not, as of the date of the certification, facing a
threat that is likely to substantially affect its ability to
exercise control over the individual;
(4) has agreed to take effective steps to ensure that the
individual cannot take action to threaten the United States,
its citizens, or its allies in the future;
(5) has taken such steps as the Secretary determines are
necessary to ensure that the individual cannot engage or re-
engage in any terrorist activity; and
(6) has agreed to share any information with the United
States that--
(A) is related to the individual or any associates of the
individual; and
(B) could affect the security of the United States, its
citizens, or its allies.
(c) Prohibition and Waiver in Cases of Prior Confirmed
Recidivism.--
(1) Prohibition.--The Secretary of Defense may not use any
amount authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made
available to the Department of Defense to transfer any
individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody of the
individual's country of origin, to any other foreign country,
or to any other foreign entity if there is a confirmed case
of any individual who was detained at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, at any time after September
11, 2001, who was transferred to the foreign country or
entity and subsequently engaged in any terrorist activity.
(2) Waiver.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the
prohibition in paragraph (1) if the Secretary determines that
such a transfer is in the national security interests of the
United States and includes, as part of the certification
described in subsection (b) relating to such transfer, the
determination of the Secretary under this paragraph.
(d) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``individual detained at Guantanamo'' means
any individual who is located at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of October 1, 2009, who--
(A) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of
the Armed Forces of the United States; and
(B) is--
(i) in the custody or under the effective control of the
Department of Defense; or
(ii) otherwise under detention at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
(2) The term ``foreign terrorist organization'' means any
organization so designated by the Secretary of State under
section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1189).

SEC. 1034. PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FUNDS TO MODIFY OR
CONSTRUCT FACILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES TO
HOUSE DETAINEES TRANSFERRED FROM UNITED STATES
NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA.

(a) In General.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act may be used to construct or modify
any facility in the United States, its territories, or
possessions to house any individual described in subsection
(c) for the purposes of detention or imprisonment in the
custody or under the effective control of the Department of
Defense.
(b) Exception.--The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not
apply to any modification of facilities at United States
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(c) Individuals Described.--An individual described in this
subsection is any individual who, as of October 1, 2009, is
located at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,
and 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 effective control of the
Department of Defense; or
(B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(d) Report on Use of Facilities in the United States to
House Detainees Transferred From Guantanamo.--
(1) Report required.--Not later than April 1, 2011, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report, in classified or unclassified
form, on the merits, costs, and risks of using any proposed
facility in the United States, its territories, or
possessions to house any individual described in subsection
(c) for the purposes of detention or imprisonment in the
custody or under the effective control of the Department of
Defense.
(2) Elements of the report.--The report required in
paragraph (1) shall include each of the following:
(A) A discussion of the merits associated with any such
proposed facility that would justify--
(i) using the facility instead of the facility at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; and
(ii) the proposed facility's contribution to effecting a
comprehensive policy for continuing military detention
operations.
(B) The rationale for selecting the specific site for any
such proposed facility, including details for the processes
and criteria used for identifying the merits described in
subparagraph (A) and for selecting the proposed site over
reasonable alternative sites.
(C) A discussion of any potential risks to any community in
the vicinity of any such proposed facility, the measures that
could be taken to mitigate such risks, and the likely cost to
the Department of Defense of implementing such measures.
(D) A discussion of any necessary modifications to any such
proposed facility to ensure that any detainee transferred
from Guantanamo Bay to such facility could not come into
contact with any other individual, including any other person
detained at such facility, that is not approved for such
contact by the Department of Defense, and an assessment of
the likely costs of such modifications.
(E) A discussion of any support at the site of any such
proposed facility that would likely be provided by the
Department of Defense, including the types of support, the
number of personnel required for each such type, and an
estimate of the cost of such support.
(F) A discussion of any support, other than support
provided at a proposed facility, that would likely be
provided by the Department of Defense for the operation of
any such proposed facility, including the types of possible
support, the number of personnel required for each such type,
and an estimate of the cost of such support.
(G) A discussion of the legal issues, in the judgment of
the Secretary of Defense, that could be raised as a result of
detaining or imprisoning any individual described in
subsection (c) at any such proposed facility that could not
be raised while such individual is detained or imprisoned at
United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

SEC. 1035. COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF FORCE PROTECTION POLICIES.

(a) Comprehensive Review Required.--The Secretary of
Defense shall conduct a comprehensive review of Department of
Defense policies, regulations, instructions, and directives

[[Page 9576]]

pertaining to force protection within the Department.
(b) Matters Covered.--The review required under subsection
(a) shall include an assessment of each of the following:
(1) Information sharing practices across the Department of
Defense, and among the State, local, and Federal partners of
the Department of Defense.
(2) Antiterrorism and force protection standards relating
to standoff distances for buildings.
(3) Protective standards relating to chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear, and high explosives threats.
(4) Standards relating to access to Department bases.
(5) Standards for identity management within the
Department, including such standards for identity cards and
biometric identifications systems.
(6) Procedures for validating and approving individuals
with regular or episodic access to military installations,
including military personnel, civilian employees,
contractors, family members of personnel, and other types of
visitors.
(7) Procedures for sharing with appropriate Department of
Defense officials--
(A) information from the intelligence or law enforcement
community regarding possible contacts with terrorists or
terrorist groups, criminal organizations, or other state and
non-state foreign entities actively working to undermine the
security interests of the United States; and
(B) personnel records or other derogatory information
regarding potentially suspicious activities.
(8) Any legislative changes recommended for implementing
the recommendations contained in the review.
(c) Interim Report.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit an interim report on the
comprehensive report required under subsection (a).
(d) Final Report.--Not later than June 1, 2011, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a final
report on the comprehensive review required under subsection
(a). The final report shall include such findings and
recommendations as the Secretary considers appropriate based
on the review, including recommended actions to be taken to
implement the specific recommendations in the final report.
The final report shall be submitted in an unclassified
format, but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 1036. FORT HOOD FOLLOW-ON REVIEW IMPLEMENTATION FUND.

(a) Establishment of Fund.--Of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated under section 301(5), the Secretary of Defense
shall deposit $100,000,000 into a fund to be known as the
``Fort Hood Follow-on Review Implementation Fund''. Amounts
deposited in the Fund shall be available to the Secretary to
address the recommendations contained in the review known as
the ``Fort Hood Follow-on Review''.
(b) Transfer Authority.--
(1) Transfers authorized.--Amounts in the Fort Hood Follow-
on Review Implementation Fund may be transferred to any of
the following accounts and funds of the Department of Defense
for the purpose of addressing any of the recommendations
contained the Fort Hood Follow-on Review:
(A) Military personnel accounts.
(B) Operation and maintenance accounts.
(C) Procurement accounts.
(D) Research, development, test, and evaluation accounts.
(E) Defense working capital funds.
(F) Defense Health Program accounts.
(2) Additional transfer authority.--The transfer authority
provided by paragraph (1) is in addition to any other
transfer authority available to the Department of Defense.
(3) Transfers back to the fund.--Upon the Secretary's
determination that all or part of the funds transferred from
the Fort Hood Follow-on Review Implementation Fund under
paragraph (1) are not necessary for the purpose for which
such funds were transferred, such funds may be transferred
back to the Fund.
(4) Prior notice to congressional committees.--
(A) Obligations.--No amount may be obligated from the Fort
Hood Follow-on Review Implementation Fund until 30 days after
the date on which the Secretary of Defense notifies the
congressional defense committees, in writing, of the details
of the proposed obligation.
(B) Transfers.--No amount may be transferred under
paragraph (1) until 45 days after the date on which the
Secretary of Defense notifies the congressional defense
committees, in writing, of the details of the proposed
transfer.
(5) Effect on authorization amounts.--A transfer to any
account under paragraph (1) shall be deemed to increase the
amount authorized to be appropriated for such account for
fiscal year 2011 by an amount equal to the amount so
transferred.
(c) Quarterly Obligation and Expenditure Reports.--Not
later than 15 days after the end of each fiscal quarter of
fiscal year 2011, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to
the congressional defense committees a report on the Fort
Hood Follow-on Review Implementation Fund. Such reports shall
include explanations of the monthly commitments, obligations,
and expenditures of such Fund, expressed by line of action,
for the fiscal quarter covered by the report.

SEC. 1037. INSPECTOR GENERAL INVESTIGATION OF THE CONDUCT AND
PRACTICES OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING INDIVIDUALS
DETAINED AT NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY,
CUBA.

(a) In General.--The Inspector General of the Department of
Defense shall conduct an investigation of the conduct and
practices of lawyers described in subsection (c). In
conducting such investigation, the Inspector General shall--
(1) identify any conduct or practice of such a lawyer that
has--
(A) interfered with the operations of the Department of
Defense at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, relating to
individuals described in subsection (d);
(B) violated any applicable policy of the Department;
(C) violated any law within the exclusive investigative
jurisdiction of the Inspector General of the Department of
Defense; or
(D) generated any material risk to a member of the Armed
Forces of the United States;
(2) identify any actions taken by the Department to address
any conduct or practice identified in paragraph (1); and
(3) determine whether any such conduct or practice
undermines the operations of the Department relating to such
individuals.
(b) Limitation.--The Inspector General of the Department of
Defense shall initiate the investigation described in
subsection (a) 30 days or later after the date of the
enactment of this Act, unless--
(1) the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General
determine that the investigation described in subsection (a)
cannot be performed without interfering with, or otherwise
compromising, any related criminal investigation,
prosecution, or other legal proceeding; and
(2) the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General
submit such determination to Congress.
(c) Lawyers Described.--The lawyers described in this
subsection are military and non-military lawyers--
(1) who represent individuals described in subsection (d)
in proceedings relating to petitions for habeas corpus or in
military commissions; and
(2) for whom there is reasonable suspicion that they have
engaged in conduct or practices described in subsection
(a)(1).
(d) Individuals Described.--An individual described in this
subsection is any individual who is located, or who has been
located at any time on or after September 11, 2001, at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and who--
(1) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of
the Armed Forces of the United States; and
(2) is or was--
(A) in the custody or under the effective control of the
Department of Defense; or
(B) otherwise under detention at the United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(e) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
completion of an investigation under subsection (a), the
Inspector General shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report
describing the results of such investigation.
(f) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed as authorizing--
(1) the public disclosure of information that is--
(A) specifically prohibited from disclosure by any other
provision of law;
(B) specifically required by Executive Order to be
protected from disclosure in the interest of national defense
or national security; or
(C) a part of an ongoing criminal investigation; or
(2) the Inspector General of the Department of Defense to
investigate any matter that is solely within the
investigative jurisdiction of another Federal official or
entity.

Subtitle E--Studies and Reports

SEC. 1041. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AEROSPACE-RELATED MISHAP
SAFETY INVESTIGATION REPORTS.

(a) Provision of Briefings.--Not later than 30 days after
the submittal of a written request by the chairman and
ranking member of any of the congressional defense
committees, the Secretary of a military department shall
provide to that committee a briefing on the privileged
findings, causal factors, and recommendations contained in a
specific Department of Defense aerospace-related mishap
safety investigation report.
(b) Briefing Attendance.--A briefing provided under
subsection (a) may be attended only by the following
individuals:
(1) The chairman of the congressional defense committee for
which the briefing is provided.
(2) The ranking member of that committee.
(3) The chairmen and ranking members of any subcommittees
of that committee that the committee chairman and ranking
member jointly designate as having jurisdiction over
information contained in the briefing.
(4) Not more than four professional staff members
designated jointly by the chairman and ranking member of the
committee.
(c) Availability of Reports.--During a briefing provided
under subsection (a), two copies of the privileged version of
the mishap safety investigation report that is the subject of
the briefing shall be made available for review by each of
the individuals who attend the briefing pursuant to
subsection (b). Each copy of the report shall be returned to
the Department of Defense at the conclusion of the briefing.
(d) Department of Defense Aerospace-related Mishap
Reporting Requirement.--The chairperson who is appointed by
the Secretary of a military department for the purpose of
conducting an aerospace-related mishap safety board
investigation, shall include as an addendum in the privileged
safety report a discussion--

[[Page 9577]]

(1) comparing and contrasting all of the findings, causal
factors, and recommendations contained in the non-privileged,
publicly-released version of the aerospace-related mishap
investigation report;
(2) describing how such findings, causal factors, and
recommendations differ from the findings, causal factors, and
recommendations contained in the privileged version of the
safety report; and
(3) the rationale that justifies any such differences.

SEC. 1042. INTERAGENCY NATIONAL SECURITY KNOWLEDGE AND
SKILLS.

(a) Study Required.--
(1) Selection of independent study organization.--Not later
than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall select and enter into an agreement
with an appropriate independent, nonprofit organization to
conduct a study of the matters described in subsection (b).
(2) Qualifications of organization selected.--The
organization selected shall be qualified on the basis of
having performed related prior work in the fields of national
security and human capital development, and on the basis of
such other criteria as the Secretary of Defense may
determine.
(b) Matters to Be Covered.--The study required by
subsection (a) shall assess the current state of interagency
national security knowledge and skills in Department of
Defense civilian and military personnel, and make
recommendations for strengthening such knowledge and skills.
At minimum, the study shall include assessments and
recommendations on--
(1) interagency national security training, education, and
rotational assignment opportunities available to civilians
and military personnel;
(2) integration of interagency national security education
into the professional military education system;
(3) level of interagency national security knowledge and
skills possessed by personnel currently serving in civilian
executive and general or flag officer positions, as
represented by the interagency education, training, and
professional experiences they have undertaken;
(4) incentives that enable and encourage military and
civilian personnel to undertake interagency assignment,
education, and training opportunities, as well as
disincentives and obstacles that discourage undertaking such
opportunities; and
(5) any plans or current efforts to improve the interagency
national security knowledge and skills of civilian and
military personnel.
(c) Report.--Not later than December 1, 2011, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report containing the findings and
recommendations from the study required by subsection (a).
(d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``interagency
national security knowledge and skills'' means an
understanding of, and the ability to efficiently and
expeditiously work within, the structures, mechanisms, and
processes by which the departments, agencies, and elements of
the Federal Government that have national security missions
coordinate and integrate their policies, capabilities,
budgets, expertise, and activities to accomplish such
missions.

SEC. 1043. REPORT ON ESTABLISHING A NORTHEAST REGIONAL JOINT
TRAINING CENTER.

(a) Report Required.--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 on
the need for the establishment of a Northeast Regional Joint
Training Center.
(b) Contents of Report.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall include each of the following:
(1) A list of facilities in the Northeastern United States
at which, as of the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Department of Defense has deployed or has committed to
deploying a joint training experimentation network.
(2) The extent to which such facilities have sufficient
unused capacity and expertise to accommodate and fully
utilize a permanent joint training experimentation node.
(3) A list of potential locations for the regional center
discussed in the report.
(c) Considerations With Respect to Location.--In
determining potential locations for the regional center of
excellence to be discussed in the report required under
subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall take into
consideration Department of Defense facilities that have--
(1) a workforce of skilled personnel;
(2) live, virtual, and constructive training capabilities,
and the ability to digitally connect them and the associated
battle command structure at the tactical and operational
levels;
(3) an extensive deployment history in Operation Enduring
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom;
(4) a location in the Northeastern United States;
(5) an existing and permanent joint training and
experimentation network node;
(6) the capacity or potential capacity to accommodate a
target training audience of up to 4000 additional personnel;
and
(7) the capability to accommodate the training of current
and future Army and Air Force unmanned aircraft systems.

SEC. 1044. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED
REPORTS.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report
evaluating the sufficiency, adequacy, and conclusions of
following reports:
(1) The report on Air Force fighter force shortfalls, as
required by the report of the House of Representatives
numbered 111-166, which accompanied the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84).
(2) The report on procurement of 4.5 generation fighters,
as required by section 131 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat. 2218).
(3) The report on combat air forces restructuring, as
required by the report of the House of Representatives
numbered 111-288, which accompanied the conference report for
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84).
(b) Matters Covered by Report.--The report required by
subsection (a) shall examine the potential costs and benefits
of each of the following:
(1) The service life extension program costs to sustain the
legacy fighter fleet to meet inventory requirements with an
emphasis on the service life extension program compared to
other options such as procurement of 4.5 generation fighters.
(2) The Falcon Structural Augmentation Roadmap of F-16s,
with emphasis on the cost-benefit of such effort and the
effect of such efforts on the service life of the airframes.
(3) Any additional programs designed to extend the service
life of legacy fighter aircraft.
(c) Prohibition.--No fighter aircraft may be retired from
the Air Force or the Air National Guard inventory in fiscal
year 2011 until 180 days after the receipt by the Committee
on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives of the report
required under subsection (a).

SEC. 1045. REPORT ON NUCLEAR TRIAD.

(a) Report.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Administrator for Nuclear
Security, shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on the nuclear triad.
(b) Matters Included.--The report under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) A detailed discussion of the modernization and
sustainment plans for each component of the nuclear triad
over the 20-year period beginning on the date of the report.
(2) The funding required for each platform of the nuclear
triad with respect to operations and maintenance,
modernization, and replacement.
(3) Any industrial capacities that the Secretary considers
vital to ensure the viability of the nuclear triad.
(c) Nuclear Triad Defined.--In this section, the term
``nuclear triad'' means the nuclear deterrent capabilities of
the United States composed of ballistic missile submarines,
land-based missiles, and strategic bombers.

SEC. 1046. CYBERSECURITY STUDY AND REPORT.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) cybersecurity is one of the most serious national
security challenges facing the United States; and
(2) it is critical that the Department of Defense develop
technological solutions that ensure the security and freedom
of action of the Department while operating in the cyber
domain.
(b) Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study
assessing--
(1) the current use of, and potential applications of,
modeling and simulation tools to identify likely
cybersecurity methodologies and vulnerabilities within the
Department of Defense.
(2) the application of modeling and simulation technology
to develop strategies and programs to deter hostile or
malicious activity intended to compromise Department of
Defense information systems.
(c) Report.--Not later than January 1, 2012, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services
of the House of Representatives and the Senate a report
containing the results of the study conducted under
subsection (b), including recommendations on possible options
for increasing the use of simulation tools to further
strengthen the cybersecurity environment of the Department of
Defense.
(d) Form.--The report required under subsection (c) shall
be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a
classified annex.

Subtitle F--Other Matters

SEC. 1051. NATIONAL DEFENSE PANEL.

Subsection (f) of section 118 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(f) National Defense Panel.--
``(1) Establishment.--Not later than February 1 of a year
in which a quadrennial defense review is conducted under this
section, there shall be established a bipartisan, independent
panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (in this
section referred to as the `Panel'). The Panel shall have the
duties set forth in this subsection.
``(2) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of ten
members who are recognized experts in matters relating to the
national security of the United States. Eight of the members
shall be appointed as follows:
``(A) Two by the chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives.
``(B) Two by the chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services of the Senate.
``(C) Two by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives.
``(D) Two by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed
Services of the Senate.
``(3) Co-chairs of the panel.--In addition to the members
appointed under paragraph (2), the

[[Page 9578]]

Secretary of Defense shall appoint two members, one from each
of the major political parties, to serve as co-chairs of the
panel.
``(4) Period of appointment; vacancies.--Members shall be
appointed for the life of the Panel. Any vacancy in the Panel
shall be filled in the same manner as the original
appointment.
``(5) Duties.--The Panel shall have the following duties
with respect to a quadrennial defense review:
``(A) Not later than March 1 of a year in which the review
is conducted, the Panel shall submit to the Secretary of
Defense a report that sets the parameters and provide
guidance to the Secretary on the conduct of the review. The
report of the Panel under this subparagraph shall, at a
minimum, include such guidance as is necessary to ensure that
the review is conducted in a manner that provides for
adequately addressing all elements listed in subsection (d).
``(B) While the review is being conducted, the Panel shall
review the updates from the Secretary of Defense required
under paragraph (8) on the conduct of the review.
``(C) The Panel shall--
``(i) review the Secretary of Defense's terms of reference
and any other materials providing the basis for, or
substantial inputs to, the work of the Department of Defense
on the quadrennial defense review;
``(ii) conduct an assessment of the assumptions, strategy,
findings, and risks of the report on the quadrennial defense
review required in subsection (d), with particular attention
paid to the risks described in that report;
``(iii) conduct an independent assessment of a variety of
possible force structures of the armed forces, including the
force structure identified in the report on the quadrennial
defense review required in subsection (d);
``(iv) review the resource requirements identified pursuant
to subsection (b)(3) and, to the extent practicable, make a
general comparison to the resource requirements to support
the forces contemplated under the force structures assessed
under subparagraph (C); and
``(v) provide to Congress and the Secretary of Defense,
through the report under paragraph (7), any recommendations
it considers appropriate for their consideration.
``(6) First meeting.--If the Secretary of Defense has not
made the Secretary's appointments to the Panel under
paragraph (3) by February 1 of a year in which a quadrennial
defense review is conducted under this section, the Panel
shall convene for its first meeting with the remaining
members.
``(7) Report.--Not later than three months after the date
on which the report on a quadrennial defense review is
submitted under subsection (d) to the congressional
committees named in that subsection, the Panel established
under paragraph (1) shall submit to those committees an
assessment of the quadrennial defense review, including a
description of the items addressed under paragraph (5) with
respect to that quadrennial defense review.
``(8) Updates from secretary of defense.--The Secretary of
Defense shall periodically, but not less often than every 30
days, brief the Panel on the progress of the conduct of a
quadrennial defense review under subsection (a).
``(9) Administrative provisions.--
``(A) The Panel may secure directly from the Department of
Defense and any of its components such information as the
Panel considers necessary to carry out its duties under this
subsection. The head of the department or agency concerned
shall ensure that information requested by the Panel under
this paragraph is promptly provided.
``(B) Upon the request of the co-chairs of the Panel, the
Secretary of Defense shall make available to the Panel the
services of any federally funded research and development
center that is covered by a sponsoring agreement of the
Department of Defense.
``(C) The Panel shall have the authorities provided in
section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, and shall be
subject to the conditions set forth in such section.
``(D) Funds for activities of the Panel shall be provided
from amounts available to the Department of Defense.
``(10) Termination.--The Panel for a quadrennial defense
review shall terminate 45 days after the date on which the
Panel submits its final report on the quadrennial defense
review under paragraph (7).''.

SEC. 1052. QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the quadrennial defense review is a critical strategic
document and should be based upon a process unconstrained by
budgetary influences so that such influences do not determine
or limit its outcome.
(b) Relationship of Quadrennial Defense Review to Defense
Budget.--Paragraph (4) of section 118(b) of title 10, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(4) to make recommendations that will not be influenced,
constrained, or informed by the budget submitted to Congress
by the President pursuant to section 1105 of title 31.''.

SEC. 1053. SALE OF SURPLUS MILITARY EQUIPMENT TO STATE AND
LOCAL HOMELAND SECURITY AND EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCIES.

(a) State and Local Agencies to Which Sales May Be Made.--
Section 2576 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``local law enforcement and firefighting''
and inserting ``local law enforcement, firefighting, homeland
security, and emergency management''; and
(B) by striking ``carrying out law enforcement and
firefighting activities'' and inserting ``carrying out law
enforcement, firefighting, homeland security, and emergency
management activities''; and
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``law enforcement or
firefighting'' both places it appears and inserting ``law
enforcement, firefighting, homeland security, or emergency
management''.
(b) Types of Equipment That May Be Sold.--Subsection (a) of
such section, as amended by subsection (a) of this section,
is further amended by striking ``and protective body armor''
and inserting ``personal protective equipment, and other
appropriate equipment''.
(c) Clerical Amendments.--
(1) Section heading.--The heading of such section is
amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 2576. Surplus military equipment: sale to State and
local law enforcement, firefighting, homeland security, and
emergency management agencies''.

(2) Table of sections.--The item relating to such section
in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 153 of
such title is amended to read as follows:

``2576. Surplus military equipment: sale to State and local law
enforcement, firefighting, homeland security, and
emergency management agencies.''.

SEC. 1054. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RAPID INNOVATION PROGRAM.

(a) Program Established.--The Secretary of Defense shall
establish a program to accelerate the fielding of innovative
technologies developed using Department of Defense research
funding and the commercialization of such technologies. Not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Secretary shall issue guidelines for the operation
of the program, including--
(1) criteria for an application for funding by a military
department, defense agency, or the unified combatant command
for special operations forces;
(2) the purposes for which such a department, agency, or
command may apply for funds and appropriate requirements for
technology development or commercialization to be supported
using program funds;
(3) the priorities, if any, to be provided to field or
commercialize technologies developed by certain types of
Department of Defense research funding; and
(4) criteria for evaluation of an application for funding
by a department, agency, or command.
(b) Applications for Funding.--
(1) In general.--Under the program, the Secretary shall,
not less often than annually, solicit from the heads of the
military departments, the defense agencies, and the unified
combatant command for special operations forces applications
for funding to be used to enter into contracts, cooperative
agreements, or other transaction agreements entered into
pursuant to section 845 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160; 107 Stat. 1721;
10 U.S.C. 2371 note) with appropriate entities for the
fielding or commercialization of technologies.
(2) Treatment pursuant to certain congressional rules.--
Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to require any
official of the Department of Defense to provide funding
under this section to any earmark as defined pursuant to
House Rule XXI, clause 9, or any congressionally directed
spending item as defined pursuant to Senate Rule XLIV,
paragraph 5.
(c) Funding.--Subject to the availability of appropriations
for such purpose, of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated for research, development, test, and evaluation,
defense-wide for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015, not
more than $500,000,000 may be used for any such fiscal year
for the program established under subsection (a).
(d) Transfer Authority.--The Secretary may transfer funds
available for the program to the research, development, test,
and evaluation accounts of a military department, defense
agency, or the unified combatant command for special
operations forces pursuant to an application, or any part of
an application, that the Secretary determines would support
the purposes of the program. The transfer authority provided
in this subsection is in addition to any other transfer
authority available to the Department of Defense.
(e) Delegation of Management of Program.--The Secretary may
delegate the management and operation of the program
established under subsection (a) to the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Research and Engineering.
(f) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the last day of a
fiscal year during which the Secretary carries out a program
under this section, the Secretary shall submit a report to
the congressional defense committees providing a detailed
description of the operation of the program during such
fiscal year.
(g) Termination.--The authority to carry out a program
under this section shall terminate on September 30, 2015. Any
amounts made available for the program that remain available
for obligation on the date the program terminates may be
transferred under subsection (d) during the 180-day period
beginning on the date of the termination of the program.

SEC. 1055. TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.

(a) Title 5, United States Code.--Subsection (l)(2)(B) of
section 8344 of title 5, United States Code, as added by
section 1122(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal

[[Page 9579]]

Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2505), is amended by
striking ``5201 et seq.'' and inserting ``5211 et seq.''.
(b) Title 10, United States Code.--Title 10, United States
Code, is amended as follows:
(1) Section 127d(d)(1) is amended by striking ``Committee
on International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''.
(2) Section 132 is amended--
(A) by redesignating subsection (d), as added by section
2831(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2669), as subsection
(e); and
(B) in such subsection, by striking ``Guam Executive
Council'' and inserting ``Guam Oversight Council''.
(3)(A) Section 382 is amended by striking ``section 175 or
2332c'' in subsections (a), (b)(2)(C), and (d)(2)(A)(ii) and
inserting ``section 175, 229, or 2332a''.
(B) The heading of such section is amended by striking
``chemical or biological''.
(C) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 18 is
amended by striking the item relating to section 382 and
inserting the following new item:

``382. Emergency situations involving weapons of mass destruction.''.
(4) Section 1175a(j)(3) is amended by striking ``title 10''
and inserting ``this title''.
(5) Section 1781b(d) is amended by striking ``March 1,
2008, and each year thereafter'' and inserting ``March 1 each
year''.
(6) Section 1781c(h)(1) is amended by striking ``180 days
after the date of the enactment of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, and annually
thereafter'' and inserting ``April 30 each year''.
(7) Section 2130a(b)(1) is amended by striking ``Training
Program'' both places it appears and inserting ``Training
Corps program''.
(8) Section 2222(a) is amended by striking ``Effective
October 1, 2005, funds'' and inserting ``Funds''.
(9) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter I
of chapter 134, as amended by section 1031(a)(2) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2448), is amended by
transferring the item relating to section 2241a from the end
of the table of sections to appear after the item relating to
section 2241.
(10) Section 2362(e)(1) is amended by striking ``IV'' and
inserting ``V''.
(11) Section 2533a(d) is amended in paragraphs (1) and (4)
by striking ``(b)(1)(A), (b)(2), or (b)(3)'' and inserting
``(b)(1)(A) or (b)(2)''.
(12) Section 2642(a)(3) is amended by striking ``During the
five-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010''
and inserting ``During the period beginning on October 28,
2009, and ending on October 28, 2014''.
(13) Section 2667(e)(1)(A)(ii) is amended by striking
``sections 2668 and 2669'' and inserting ``section 2668''.
(14) Section 2684a(g)(1) is amended by striking ``March 1,
2007, and annually thereafter'' and inserting ``March 1 each
year''.
(15) Section 2687a(a) is amended by striking ``31for'' and
inserting ``31 for''.
(16) Section 2922d is amended by striking ``1 or more''
each place it appears and inserting ``one or more''.
(17) Section 10216 is amended by striking ``section
115(c)'' in subsections (b)(1), (c)(1), and (c)(2)(A) and
inserting ``section 115(d)''.
(18) Section 10217(c)(1) is amended--
(A) by striking ``Effective October 1, 2007, the'' and
inserting ``The''; and
(B) by striking ``after the preceding sentence takes
effect''.
(19) Section 12203(a) is amended by striking ``above'' in
the first sentence and inserting ``of''.
(c) National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2010.--Effective as of October 28, 2009, and as if included
therein as enacted, the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84) is amended as
follows:
(1) Section 325(d)(4) (123 Stat. 2254) is amended by
striking ``section 236'' and inserting ``section 235''.
(2) Section 581(a)(1)(C) (123 Stat. 2326) is amended by
striking ``subsection (f)'' and inserting ``subsection (g),
as redesignated by section 582(b)(1)''.
(3) Section 584(a) (123 Stat. 2330) is amended by striking
``such Act'' and inserting ``the Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting Act''.
(4) Section 585(b)(1) (123 Stat. 2331) is amended by
striking subparagraphs (A) and (B), and inserting the
following new subparagraphs:
``(A) in paragraph (2), by striking `section 102(4)' and
inserting `section 102(a)(4)'; and
``(B) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
```(4) prescribe a suggested design for absentee ballot
mailing envelopes;'; and
(5) Section 589 (123 Stat. 2334; 42 U.S.C. 1973ff-7) is
amended--
(A) in subsection (a)(1)--
(i) by striking ``section 107(a)'' and inserting ``section
107(1)''; and
(ii) by striking ``1973ff et seq.'' and inserting ``1973ff-
6(1)''; and
(B) in subsection (e)(1), by striking ``1977ff note'' and
inserting ``1973ff note''.
(6) The undesignated section immediately following section
603 (123 Stat. 2350) is designated as section 604.
(7) Section 714(c) (123 Stat. 2382; 10 U.S.C. 1071 note) is
amended--
(A) by striking ``feasability'' both places it appears and
inserting ``feasibility''; and
(B) by striking ``specialities'' both places it appears and
inserting ``specialties''.
(8) Section 813(a)(3) is amended by inserting ``order''
after ``task'' in the matter proposed to be struck.
(9) Section 921(b)(2) (123 Stat. 2432) is amended by
inserting ``subchapter I of'' before ``chapter 21''.
(10) Section 1014(c) (123 Stat. 2442) is amended by
striking ``in which the support'' and inserting ``in which
support''.
(11) Section 1043(d) (123 Stat. 2457; 10 U.S.C. 2353 note)
is amended by striking ``et 13 seq.'' and inserting ``et
seq.''.
(12) Section 1055(f) (123 Stat. 2462) is amended by
striking ``Combating'' and inserting ``Combatting''.
(13) Section 1063(d)(2) (123 Stat. 2470) is amended by
striking ``For purposes of this section, the'' and inserting
``The''.
(14) Section 1080(b) (123 Stat. 2479; 10 U.S.C. 801 note)
is amended--
(A) by striking ``title 14'' and inserting ``title XIV'';
(B) by striking ``title 10'' and inserting ``title X''; and
(C) by striking ``the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (10
U.S.C. 948 et seq.; Public Law 109-366)'' and inserting
``chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code''.
(15) Section 1111(b) (123 Stat. 2495; 10 U.S.C. 1580 note
prec.) is amended by striking ``the Secretary'' in the first
sentence and inserting ``the Secretary of Defense''.
(16) Section 1113(g)(1) (123 Stat. 2502; 5 U.S.C. 9902
note) is amended by inserting ``United States Code,'' after
``title 5,'' the first place it appears.
(17) Section 1121 (123 Stat. 2505) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) by striking ``Section 9902(h)'' and inserting ``Section
9902(g)''; and
(ii) by inserting ``as redesignated by section
1113(b)(1)(B),'' after ``Code,''; and
(B) in subsection (b), by striking ``section 9902(h)'' and
inserting ``section 9902(g)''.
(18) Section 1261 (123 Stat. 2553; 22 U.S.C. 6201 note) is
amended by inserting a space between the first short title
and ``or''.
(19) Section 1306(b) (123 Stat. 2560) is amended by
striking ``fiscal year'' and inserting ``Fiscal Year''.
(20) Subsection (b) of section 1803 (123 Stat. 2612) is
amended to read as follows:
``(b) Appellate Review Under Detainee Treatment Act of
2005.--
``(1) Department of defense, emergency supplemental
appropriations to address hurricanes in the gulf of mexico,
and pandemic influenza act, 2006.--Section 1005(e) of the
Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (title X of Public Law 109-
148; 10 U.S.C. 801 note) is amended by striking paragraph
(3).
``(2) National defense authorization act for fiscal year
2006.--Section 1405(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005
(Public Law 109-163; 10 U.S.C. 801 note) is amended by
striking paragraph (3).''.
(21) Section 1916(b)(1)(B) (123 Stat. 2624) is amended by
striking the comma after ``5941''.
(22) Section 2804(d)(2) (123 Stat. 2662) is amended by
inserting ``subchapter III of'' before ``chapter 169''.
(23) Section 2835(f)(1) (123 Stat. 2677) is amended by
striking ``publically-available'' and inserting ``publicly
available''.
(24) Section 3503(b)(1) (123 Stat. 2719) is amended by
striking the extra quotation marks.
(25) Section 3508(1) (123 Stat. 2721) is amended by
striking ``headline'' and inserting ``heading''.
(d) Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2009.--
(1) Section 596(b)(1)(D) of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 10 U.S.C. 1071 note), as amended by section 594 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2337), is amended by striking
``or flag'' the second place it appears.
(2) Section 1111(b) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
10 U.S.C. 143 note), as amended by section 1109 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2492), is amended--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``secretary of a military department'' and inserting
``Secretary of a military department'';
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``the the requirements'' and inserting
``the requirements''; and
(ii) by striking ``this title'' and inserting ``such
title''; and
(C) in paragraph (2), by striking ``any any of the
following'' and inserting ``any of the following''.
(e) Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009.--
Effective as of May 22, 2009, and as if included therein as
enacted, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009
(Public Law 111-23) is amended as follows:
(1) Section 205(a)(1)(B) (123 Stat. 1724) is amended in the
matter proposed to be inserted by striking ``paragraphs (1)
and (2)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)''.
(2) Section 205(c) (124 Stat. 1725) is amended by striking
``2433a(c)(3)'' and inserting ``2433a(c)(1)(C)''.
(f) Technical Correction Regarding SBIR Extension.--Section
9(m)(2) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(m)(2)), as
added by section 847(a) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;

[[Page 9580]]

123 Stat. 2420), is amended by striking ``is authorized'' and
inserting ``are authorized''.
(g) Technical Correction Regarding Performance Management
and Workforce Incentives.--Section 9902(a)(2) of title 5,
United States Code, as added by section 1113(d) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2499), is amended by striking
``chapters'' both places it appears and inserting
``chapter''.
(h) Technical Correction Regarding Small Shipyards and
Maritime Communities Assistance Program.--Section 3506 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, as
reinstated by the amendment made by section 1073(c)(14) of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2475), is repealed.
(i) Technical Correction Regarding DOT Maritime Heritage
Property.--Section 6(a)(1)(C) of the National Maritime
Heritage Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 5405(a)(1)(C)), as amended by
section 3509 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2721), is
amended by striking ``the date of enactment of the Maritime
Administration Authorization Act of 2010'' and inserting
``October 28, 2009''.
(j) Technical Correction Regarding DOE National Security
Programs.--The table of contents at the beginning of the
National Nuclear Security Administration Act (title XXXII of
Public Law 106-65; 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.) is amended by
striking the item relating to section 3255 and inserting the
following new item:

``Sec. 3255. Biennial plan and budget assessment on the modernization
and refurbishment of the nuclear security complex.''.

SEC. 1056. LIMITATION ON AIR FORCE FISCAL YEAR 2011 FORCE
STRUCTURE ANNOUNCEMENT IMPLEMENTATION.

None of the amounts authorized to be appropriated by this
Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2011 may be
obligated or expended for the purpose of implementing the Air
Force fiscal year 2011 Force Structure Announcement until 45
days after--
(1) the Secretary of the Air Force provides a detailed
report to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and
the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives on the follow-on missions for bases affected
by the 2010 Combat Air Forces restructure; and
(2) the Secretary of the Air Force certifies to the
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives that the
Air Sovereignty Alert Mission will be fully resourced with
required funding, personnel, and aircraft.

SEC. 1057. BUDGETING FOR THE SUSTAINMENT AND MODERNIZATION OF
NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS.

Consistent with the plan contained in the report submitted
to Congress under section 1251 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat. 2549), in the budget materials submitted to the
President by the Secretary of Defense in connection with the
submission to Congress, pursuant to section 1105 of title 31,
United States Code, of the budget for fiscal year 2012, and
each subsequent fiscal year, the Secretary shall ensure that
a separate budget (including separate, dedicated line items
and program elements) is included with respect to programs
and platforms regarding the sustainment and modernization of
nuclear delivery systems.

SEC. 1058. LIMITATION ON NUCLEAR FORCE REDUCTIONS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) As of September 30, 2009, the stockpile of nuclear
weapons of the United States has been reduced by 84 percent
from its maximum level in 1967 and by more than 75 percent
from its level when the Berlin Wall fell in November, 1989.
(2) The number of non-strategic nuclear weapons of the
United States has declined by approximately 90 percent from
September 30, 1991, to September 30, 2009.
(3) In 2002, the United States announced plans to reduce
its number of operationally deployed strategic nuclear
warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 by December 31, 2012.
(4) The United States plans to further reduce its stockpile
of deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550 during the
next seven years.
(5) The United States plans to further reduce its deployed
ballistic missiles and heavy bombers to 700 and its deployed
and non-deployed launchers and heavy bombers to 800 during
the next seven years.
(6) Beyond these plans for reductions, the Nuclear Posture
Review of April 2010 stated that, ``the President has
directed a review of potential future reductions in U.S.
nuclear weapons below New START levels. Several factors will
influence the magnitude and pace of such reductions.''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) any reductions in the nuclear forces of the United
States should be supported by a thorough assessment of the
strategic environment, threat, and policy and the technical
and operational implications of such reductions; and
(2) specific criteria are necessary to guide future
decisions regarding further reductions in the nuclear forces
of the United States.
(c) Limitation.--No action may be taken to implement the
reduction of nuclear forces of the United States below the
levels described in paragraphs (4) and (5) of subsection (a),
unless--
(1) the Secretary of Defense and the Administrator for
Nuclear Security jointly submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on such reduction, including--
(A) the justification for such reduction;
(B) an assessment of the strategic environment, threat, and
policy and the technical and operational implications of such
reduction;
(C) written certification by the Secretary of Defense
that--
(i) either--

(I) the strategic environment or the assessment of the
threat has changed to allow for such reduction; or
(II) technical measures to provide a commensurate or better
level of safety, security, and reliability as before such
reduction have been implemented for the remaining nuclear
forces of the United States;

(ii) such reduction preserves the nuclear deterrent
capabilities of the ``nuclear triad'' (intercontinental
ballistic missiles, ballistic missile submarines, and heavy
bombers and dual-capable aircraft);
(iii) such reduction does not require a change in targeting
strategy from counterforce targeting to countervalue
targeting;
(iv) the remaining nuclear forces of the United States
provide a sufficient means of protection against unforeseen
technical challenges and geopolitical events; and
(v) such reduction is compensated by other measures (such
as nuclear modernization, conventional forces, and missile
defense) that together provide a commensurate or better
deterrence capability and level of credibility as before such
reduction; and
(D) written certification by the Administrator for Nuclear
Security that--
(i) technical measures to provide a commensurate or better
level of safety, security, and reliability as before such
reduction have been implemented for the remaining nuclear
forces of the United States;
(ii) the remaining nuclear forces of the United States
provide a sufficient means of protection against unforeseen
technical challenges and geopolitical events; and
(iii) measures to modernize the nuclear weapons complex
have been implemented to provide a sufficiently responsive
infrastructure to support the remaining nuclear forces of the
United States; and
(2) a period of 180 days has elapsed after the date on
which the report under paragraph (1) is submitted.
(d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``nuclear forces
of the United States'' includes--
(1) both active and inactive nuclear warheads in the
nuclear weapons stockpile; and
(2) deployed and non-deployed delivery vehicles.

SEC. 1059. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW.

It is the sense of Congress that the Nuclear Posture
Review, released in April 2010 by the Secretary of Defense,
weakens the national security of the United States by
eliminating options to defend against a catastrophic nuclear,
biological, chemical, or conventional attack against the
United States.

SEC. 1060. STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF STRATEGIC CHALLENGES POSED
BY POTENTIAL COMPETITORS.

The Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the
Joint Chiefs of Staff and the commanders of the regional
combatant commands, submit to the congressional defense
committees, not later than March 15, 2011, a comprehensive
strategic assessment of the current and future strategic
challenges posed to the United States by potential
competitors out through 2021, with particular attention paid
to those challenges posed by the military modernization of
the People's Republic of China, Iran, North Korea, and
Russia.

SEC. 1061. ELECTRONIC ACCESS TO CERTAIN CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION.

The Secretary of Defense shall provide to each committee of
Congress an electronic communications link to classified
information in the possession of the Department of Defense
pertaining to a subject matter that is in the jurisdiction of
such committee under the Rules of the House of
Representatives or the Standing Rules of the Senate. Such
electronic communications link shall be capable of supporting
appropriate classified communications between the Department
of Defense and each committee of Congress authorized to carry
out such communications.

SEC. 1062. JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE AND TERRORISM.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (Public Law 110-181) expressed the sense of Congress (in
section 1083(d)(4)) that the Secretary of State ``should work
with the Government of Iraq on a state-to-state basis to
ensure compensation for any meritorious claims based on
terrorist acts committed by the Saddam Hussein regime against
individuals who were United States nationals or members of
the United States Armed Forces at the time of those terrorist
acts and whose claims cannot be addressed in courts in the
United States due to the exercise of the waiver authority''
provided to the President under section 1083(d) of that Act.
(2) The House of Representatives in the 110th Congress
unanimously adopted H.R. 5167, the Justice for Victims of
Torture and Terrorism Act, which set forth an appropriate
compromise of the claims described in paragraph (1).
(3) The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2010 (in section 1079) further expressed the sense of
Congress that these claims of American victims of torture and
hostage taking by Iraq ``should be resolved by a prompt and
fair settlement negotiated between the Government of Iraq and
the Government of the United

[[Page 9581]]

States, taking note of the provisions of H.R. 5167 of the
110th Congress, which was adopted by the United States House
of Representatives''.
(4) Pursuant to these congressional actions, the Secretary
of State has diligently pursued these negotiations with the
Government of Iraq. To date, however, more than three years
after the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008, and nearly a year after the enactment
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2010, there has been no resolution of these claims of injured
Americans, despite the resolution by Iraq of claims of
foreign corporations against the Saddam Hussein regime.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the claims of American victims of torture and hostage taking
by the Government of Iraq during the regime of Saddam Hussein
that are subject to Presidential Determination Number 2008-9
of January 28, 2008, which waived application of section 1083
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008, should be resolved by a prompt and fair settlement
negotiated between the Government of Iraq and the Government
of the United States.

SEC. 1063. POLICY REGARDING APPROPRIATE USE OF DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE RESOURCES.

(a) Policy.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 2 of Title 10, United States Code,
is amended by inserting after section 113a the following new
section:

``Sec. 113b. Use of Department of Defense resources

``(a) Policy.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that
all resources of the Department of Defense are used only for
activities that--
``(1) fulfill a legitimate Government purpose;
``(2) comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and
policies of the Department of Defense; and
``(3) contribute to the mission of the Department of
Defense.
``(b) Guidance.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
guidance as is necessary to ensure compliance with the policy
required under subsection (a) and to address any violations
of the policy, including, as appropriate, any applicable
legal remedies.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 113a the following new item:

``113b. Use of Department of Defense resources.''.
(b) Prohibition on Use of Funds.--None of the funds
authorized to be appropriated in this Act or otherwise
available to the Department of Defense may be used--
(1) for any activity that does not comply with the policy
established under section 113b of title 10, United States
Code, as added by subsection (a), including any improper
activity involving--
(A) transportation or travel (including use of Government
vehicles); or
(B) Department of Defense information technology resources;
or
(2) to pay the salary of any employee who engages in an
intentional violation of the policy established under such
section.

SEC. 1064. EXECUTIVE AGENT FOR PREVENTING THE INTRODUCTION OF
COUNTERFEIT MICROELECTRONICS INTO THE DEFENSE
SUPPLY CHAIN.

(a) Executive Agent.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
designate a senior official of the Department of Defense to
serve as the executive agent for preventing the introduction
of counterfeit microelectronics into the defense supply
chain.
(b) Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities.--
(1) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the
executive agent designated under subsection (a).
(2) Specification.--The roles and responsibilities of the
executive agent designated under subsection (a) shall include
the following:
(A) Development and maintenance of a strategy and
implementation plan that ensures that the Department of
Defense has the ability to identify, mitigate, prevent, and
eliminate counterfeit microelectronics from the defense
supply chain.
(B) Development of recommendations for funding strategies
necessary to meet the requirements of the strategy and
implementation plan developed under subparagraph (A).
(C) Assessments of trends in counterfeit microelectronics,
including--
(i) an analysis of recent incidents of discovery of
counterfeit microelectronics in the defense supply chain,
including incidents involving material and service providers;
(ii) a projection of future trends in counterfeit
microelectronics;
(iii) the sufficiency of reporting mechanisms and metrics
within the Department of Defense and each component of the
Department of Defense;
(iv) the economic impact of identifying and remediating
counterfeit microelectronics in the defense supply chain; and
(v) the impact of counterfeit microelectronics in the
defense supply chain on defense readiness.
(D) Coordination of planning and activities with
interagency and international partners.
(E) Development and participation in public-private
partnerships to prevent the introduction of counterfeit
microelectronics into the supply chain.
(F) Such other roles and responsibilities as the Secretary
of Defense considers appropriate.
(c) Support Within Department of Defense.--The Secretary of
Defense shall ensure that each component of the Department of
Defense provides the executive agent designated under
subsection (a) with the appropriate support and resources
needed to perform the roles, responsibilities, and
authorities of the executive agent.
(d) Required Actions.--The Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the congressional defense committees--
(1) not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, a description of the roles, responsibilities,
and authorities of the executive agent prescribed in
accordance with subsection (b)(1);
(2) not later than one year after the date of the enactment
of this Act, a strategy for how the Department of Defense
will identify, mitigate, prevent, and eliminate counterfeit
microelectronics within the defense supply chain; and
(3) not later than 18 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, an implementation plan for how the
Department of Defense will execute the strategy submitted in
accordance with paragraph (2).
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Counterfeit microelectronic.--The term ``counterfeit
microelectronic'' means any type of integrated circuit or
other microelectronic component that consists of--
(A) a substitute or unauthorized copy of a valid product
from an original manufacturer;
(B) a product in which the materials used or the
performance of the product has been changed without notice by
a person other than the original manufacturer of the product;
or
(C) a substandard component misrepresented by the supplier
of such component.
(2) Executive agent.--The term ``executive agent'' has the
meaning given the term ``DoD Executive Agent'' in Department
of Defense Directive 5101.1, or any successor directive
relating to the responsibilities of an executive agent of the
Department of Defense.

TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

SEC. 1101. AUTHORITY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TO APPROVE
AN ALTERNATE METHOD OF PROCESSING EQUAL
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLAINTS WITHIN ONE OR
MORE COMPONENT ORGANIZATIONS UNDER SPECIFIED
CIRCUMSTANCES.

(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may implement
within one or more of the component organizations of the
Department of Defense an alternate program for processing
equal employment opportunity complaints.
(1) Complaints processed under the alternate program shall
be subject to the procedural requirements established for the
alternate program and shall not be subject to the procedural
requirements of part 1614 of title 29 of the Code of Federal
Regulations or other regulations, directives, or regulatory
restrictions prescribed by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission.
(2) The alternate program shall include procedures to
reduce processing time and eliminate redundancy with respect
to processes for the resolution of equal employment
opportunity complaints, reinforce local management and chain-
of-command accountability, and provide the parties involved
with early opportunity for resolution.
(3) The Secretary may carry out the alternate program
during a 5-year period beginning on the date of the enactment
of this Act. Not later than 180 days before the expiration of
such period, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the
Senate, a recommendation regarding whether the program should
be extended for an additional period.
(4)(A) Participation in the alternate program shall be
voluntary on the part of the complainant. Complainants who
participate in the alternate program shall retain the right
to appeal a final agency decision to the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission and to file suit in district court.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall not reverse
a final agency decision on the grounds that the agency did
not comply with the regulatory requirements promulgated by
the Commission.
(B) Subparagraph (A) shall apply to all cases filed with
the Commission after the date of the enactment of this Act
and under the alternate program established under this
subsection.
(C) The Secretary shall consult with the Equal Employment
Commission in the development of the alternate program.
(b) Evaluation Plan.--The Secretary of Defense shall
develop an evaluation plan to accurately and reliably assess
the results of each alternate program implemented under
subsection (a), identifying the key features of the program,
including--
(1) well-defined, clear, and measurable objectives;
(2) measures that are directly linked to the program
objectives;
(3) criteria for determining the program performance;
(4) a way to isolate the effects of the alternate program;
(5) a data analysis plan for the evaluation design; and
(6) a detailed plan to ensure that data collection, entry,
and storage are reliable and error-free.
(c) Reports.--The Comptroller General shall submit to the
Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro
tempore of the Senate, two reports on the alternate program.
(1) Contents of reports.--Each report shall contain the
following:

[[Page 9582]]

(A) A description of the processes tested by the alternate
program.
(B) The results of the testing of such processes.
(C) Recommendations for changes to the processes for the
resolution of equal employment opportunity complaints as a
result of the alternate program.
(D) A comparison of the processes used, and results
obtained, under the alternate program to traditional and
alternative dispute resolution processes used in the
Government or private industry.
(2) Dates of submission.--The first of such reports shall
be submitted at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the
date of the enactment of this Act. The second of such reports
shall be submitted at the end of the 4-year period beginning
on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 1102. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITIES AT PERSONNEL
DEMONSTRATION LABORATORIES.

(a) Clarification of Applicability of Direct Hire
Authority.--Section 1108 of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 122 Stat. 4618; 10 U.S.C. 1580 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``identified'' and all
that follows and inserting ``designated by section 1105(a) of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2486) as a Department of
Defense science and technology reinvention laboratory.''; and
(2) in subsection (c), by striking ``2 percent'' and
inserting ``4 percent''.
(b) Clarification of Applicability of Full Implementation
Requirement.--Section 1107 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181;
122 Stat 357; 10 U.S.C. 2358 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``that are exempted by''
and all that follows and inserting ``designated by section
1105(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2486) as Department
of Defense science and technology reinvention
laboratories.''; and
(2) in subsection (c), by striking ``as enumerated in'' and
all that follows and inserting ``designated by section
1105(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat 2486) as a Department
of Defense science and technology reinvention laboratory.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (a)
and (b) shall take effect as of October 28, 2009.

SEC. 1103. SPECIAL RULE RELATING TO CERTAIN OVERTIME PAY.

(a) In General.--Section 5542(a) of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(6)(A) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), for an
employee who is described in subparagraph (B), and whose rate
of basic pay exceeds the minimum rate for GS-10, the overtime
hourly rate of pay is an amount equal to one and one-half
times the hourly rate of basic pay of the employee, and all
that amount is premium pay.
``(B) This paragraph applies in the case of an employee of
the Department of the Navy--
``(i) who is performing work aboard or in support of the
U.S.S. GEORGE WASHINGTON while that vessel is forward
deployed in Japan; and
``(ii) as to whom the application of this paragraph is
necessary (as determined under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of the Navy)--
``(I) in order to ensure equal treatment with employees
performing similar work in the United States;
``(II) in order to secure the services of qualified
employees; or
``(III) for such other reasons as may be set forth in such
regulations.''.
(b) Reporting Requirement.--Within 1 year after date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit
to the Secretary of Defense and the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management a report that addresses the use of
paragraph (6) of section 5542(a) of title 5, United States
Code, as added by subsection (a), including associated costs.

SEC. 1104. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO WAIVE ANNUAL
LIMITATION ON PREMIUM PAY AND AGGREGATE
LIMITATION ON PAY FOR FEDERAL CIVILIAN
EMPLOYEES WORKING OVERSEAS.

Effective January 1, 2011, section 1101(a) of the Duncan
Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2009 (Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4615), as amended by
section 1106(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2487), is
amended by striking ``calendar years 2009 and 2010'' and
inserting ``calendar years 2011 and 2012''.

SEC. 1105. WAIVER OF CERTAIN PAY LIMITATIONS.

Section 9903(d) of title 5, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) An employee appointed under this section is not
eligible for any bonus, monetary award, or other monetary
incentive for service, except for--
``(A) payments authorized under this section; and
``(B) in the case of an employee who is assigned in support
of a contingency operation (as defined in section 101(a)(13)
of title 10), allowances and any other payments authorized
under chapter 59.''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by adding at the end the following:
``In computing an employee's total annual compensation for
purposes of the preceding sentence, any payment referred to
in paragraph (2)(B) shall be excluded.''.

SEC. 1106. SERVICES OF POST-COMBAT CASE COORDINATORS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 79 of title 5, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 7906. Services of post-combat case coordinators

``(a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) the terms `employee', `agency', `injury', `war-risk
hazard', and `hostile force or individual' have the meanings
given those terms in section 8101; and
``(2) the term `qualified employee' means an employee as
described in subsection (b).
``(b) Requirement.--The head of each agency shall, in a
manner consistent with the guidelines prescribed under
subsection (c), provide for the assignment of a post-combat
case coordinator in the case of any employee of such agency
who suffers an injury or disability incurred, or an illness
contracted, while in the performance of such employee's
duties, as a result of a war-risk hazard or during or as a
result of capture, detention, or other restraint by a hostile
force or individual.
``(c) Guidelines.--The Office of Personnel Management
shall, after such consultation as the Office considers
appropriate, prescribe guidelines for the operation of this
section. Under the guidelines, the responsibilities of a
post-combat case coordinator shall include--
``(1) acting as the main point of contact for qualified
employees seeking administrative guidance or assistance
relating to benefits under chapter 81 or 89;
``(2) assisting qualified employees in the collection of
documentation or other supporting evidence for the
expeditious processing of claims under chapter 81 or 89;
``(3) assisting qualified employees in connection with the
receipt of prescribed medical care and the coordination of
benefits under chapter 81 or 89;
``(4) resolving problems relating to the receipt of
benefits under chapter 81 or 89; and
``(5) ensuring that qualified employees are properly
screened and receive appropriate treatment--
``(A) for post-traumatic stress disorder or other similar
disorder stemming from combat trauma; or
``(B) for suicidal or homicidal thoughts or behaviors.
``(d) Duration.--The services of a post-combat case
coordinator shall remain available to a qualified employee
until--
``(1) such employee accepts or declines a reasonable offer
of employment in a position in the employee's agency for
which the employee is qualified, which is not lower than 2
grades (or pay levels) below the employee's grade (or pay
level) before the occurrence or onset of the injury,
disability, or illness (as referred to in subsection (a)),
and which is within the employee's commuting area; or
``(2) such employee gives written notice, in such manner as
the employing agency prescribes, that those services are no
longer desired or necessary.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
79 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding after
the item relating to section 7905 the following:

``7906. Services of post-combat case coordinators.''.

SEC. 1107. AUTHORITY TO WAIVE MAXIMUM AGE LIMIT FOR CERTAIN
APPOINTMENTS.

Section 3307(e) of title 5, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``(e) The'' and inserting ``(e)(1) Except
as provided in paragraph (2), the''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2)(A) In the case of the conversion of an agency
function from performance by a contractor to performance by
an employee of the agency, the head of the agency may waive
any maximum limit of age, determined or fixed for positions
within such agency under paragraph (1), if necessary in order
to promote the recruitment or appointment of experienced
personnel.
``(B) For purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) the term `agency' means the Department of Defense or
a military department; and
``(ii) the term `head of the agency' means the Secretary of
Defense or the Secretary of a military department.''.

SEC. 1108. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING WAIVER OF RECOVERY OF
CERTAIN PAYMENTS MADE UNDER CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES
VOLUNTARY SEPARATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

(a) Congressional Finding.--Congress finds that employees
and former employees of the Department of Defense described
in subsection (c) provided a valuable service to such
Department in response to the national emergency declared in
the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) employees and former employees of the Department of
Defense described in subsection (c) deserve to retain or to
be repaid their voluntary separation incentive payment
pursuant to section 9902 of title 5, United States Code;
(2) recovery of the amount of the payment referred to in
section 9902 of title 5, United States Code, would be against
equity and good conscience and contrary to the best interests
of the United States;

[[Page 9583]]

(3) the Secretary of Defense should waive the requirement
under subsection (f)(6)(B) of section 9902 of title 5, United
States Code, for repayment to the Department of Defense of a
voluntary separation incentive payment made under subsection
(f)(1) of such section 9902 in the case of an employee or
former employee of the Department of Defense described in
subsection (c); and
(4) a person who has repaid to the United States all or
part of the voluntary separation incentive payment for which
repayment is waived under this section may receive a refund
of the amount previously repaid to the United States.
(c) Persons Covered.--Subsection (a) applies to any
employee or former employee of the Department of Defense
who--
(1) during the period beginning on April 1, 2004, and
ending on May 1, 2008, received a voluntary separation
incentive payment under section 9902(f)(1) of title 5, United
States Code;
(2) was reappointed to a position in the Department of
Defense during the period beginning on June 1, 2004, and
ending on May 1, 2008; and
(3) received a written representation from an officer or
employee of the Department of Defense, before accepting the
reappointment referred to in paragraph (2), that recovery of
the amount of the payment referred to in paragraph (1) would
not be required or would be waived, and reasonably relied on
that representation in accepting reappointment.

SEC. 1109. SUSPENSION OF DCIPS PAY AUTHORITY EXTENDED FOR A
YEAR.

Section 1114(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (10 U.S.C. 1601 note) is amended by
striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting ``December 31,
2011''.

TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO FOREIGN NATIONS

Subtitle A--Assistance and Training

SEC. 1201. EXPANSION OF AUTHORITY FOR SUPPORT OF SPECIAL
OPERATIONS TO COMBAT TERRORISM.

(a) In General.--Section 1208(a) of the Ronald W. Reagan
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
(Public Law 108-375; 118 Stat. 2086), as most recently
amended by section 1202(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat. 2511), is further amended by striking
``$40,000,000'' and inserting ``$50,000,000''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on October 1, 2010.

SEC. 1202. ADDITION OF ALLIED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO ENHANCED
LOGISTICS INTEROPERABILITY AUTHORITY.

(a) Enhanced Interoperability Authority.--Subsection (a) of
section 127d of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``Subject to'';
(2) by inserting ``of the United States'' after ``armed
forces'';
(3) by striking the second sentence; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(2) In addition to any logistic support, supplies, and
services provided under paragraph (1), the Secretary may
provide logistic support, supplies, and services to allied
forces solely for the purpose of enhancing the
interoperability of the logistical support systems of
military forces participating in combined operations with the
United States in order to facilitate such operations. Such
logistic support, supplies, and services may also be provided
under this paragraph to a nonmilitary logistics, security, or
similar agency of an allied government if such provision
would directly benefit the armed forces of the United States.
``(3) Provision of support, supplies, and services pursuant
to paragraph (1) or (2) may be made only with the concurrence
of the Secretary of State.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further
amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``subsection (a)'' in
paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting ``subsection (a)(1)'';
and
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``Except as provided in paragraph (2),
the'' and inserting ``The''; and
(ii) by striking ``this section'' and inserting
``subsection (a)(1)''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``In addition'' and all
that follows through ``fiscal year,'' and inserting ``The
value of the logistic support, supplies, and services
provided under subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year may
not''.

SEC. 1203. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING
TO PROGRAM TO BUILD THE CAPACITY OF FOREIGN
MILITARY FORCES.

(a) Annual Funding Limitation.--Subsection (c)(1) of
section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163; 119 Stat. 3456), as
amended by section 1206(b) of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 122 Stat. 4625), is further amended by striking
``$350,000,000'' and inserting ``$500,000,000''.
(b) Temporary Limitation on Amount for Building Capacity to
Participate in or Support Military and Stability
Operations.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (c)(5) of such section is
amended--
(A) by striking ``and not more than'' and inserting ``not
more than''; and
(B) by inserting after ``fiscal year 2011'' the following:
``, and not more than $100,000,000 may be used during fiscal
year 2012''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on October 1, 2010, and shall apply with
respect to programs under subsection (a) of such section that
begin on or after that date.
(c) Temporary Authority to Build the Capacity of Yemen's
Counter-terrorism Forces.--Such section is further amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
``(g) Temporary Authority to Build the Capacity of Yemen's
Counter-terrorism Forces.--
``(1) Authority of secretary of state.--
``(A) In general.--Of the funds made available under
subsection (c) for the authority of subsection (a) for fiscal
year 2011, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the
Secretary of State $75,000,000 of such funds for purposes of
providing assistance under section 23 of the Arms Export
Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2763) to build the capacity of the
counter-terrorism forces of the Yemeni Ministry of Interior.
``(B) Certification.--The Secretary of Defense may transfer
funds pursuant to subparagraph (A) only if, not later than
July 31, 2011, the Secretary of State certifies to the
Secretary of Defense and the congressional committees
specified in subsection (e)(3) that the Secretary of State is
able to effectively carry out the purpose of subparagraph
(A).
``(C) Availability of funds.--Amounts available under this
paragraph for the authority of subparagraph (A) for fiscal
year 2011 may be used to conduct or support a program or
programs under that authority that begin in fiscal year 2011
but end in fiscal year 2012.
``(2) Authority of secretary of defense.--If a
certification described in paragraph (1)(B) is not made by
July 31, 2011, the Secretary of Defense may, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of State, use up to $75,000,000
of the funds made available under subsection (c) for the
authority of subsection (a) for fiscal year 2011 to conduct
or support a program or programs under the authority of
subsection (a) to build the capacity of the counter-terrorism
forces of the Yemeni Ministry of Interior.
``(3) Congressional notification.--
``(A) By secretary of state.--The Secretary of State shall
notify the congressional committees specified in subsection
(e)(3) whenever the Secretary of State makes a certification
under paragraph (1)(B) for purposes of exercising the
authority of paragraph (1).
``(B) By secretary of defense.--The Secretary of Defense
shall notify the congressional committees specified in
subsection (e)(3) whenever the Secretary of Defense exercises
the authority of paragraph (2) to support or conduct a
program or programs described in paragraph (2).
``(C) Contents.--A notification under subparagraph (A) or
(B) shall include a description of the program or programs to
be conducted or supported under the authority of this
subsection.''.
(d) One-year Extension of Authority.--Subsection (h) of
such section, as most recently amended by section 1206(c) of
the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4625) and
redesignated by subsection (c) of this section, is further
amended by--
(1) by striking ``September 30, 2011'' and inserting
``September 30, 2012''; and
(2) by striking ``fiscal years 2006 through 2011'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2006 through 2012''.

SEC. 1204. AIR FORCE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE
NATIONS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE EURO-NATO JOINT
JET PILOT TRAINING PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment of Scholarship Program.--The Secretary of
the Air Force shall establish and maintain a demonstration
scholarship program to allow personnel of the air forces of
countries that are signatories of the Partnership for Peace
Framework Document to receive undergraduate pilot training
and necessary related training through the Euro-NATO Joint
Jet Pilot Training (ENJJPT) program. The Secretary of the Air
Force shall establish the program pursuant to regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with
the Secretary of State.
(b) Transportation, Supplies, and Allowance.--Under such
conditions as the Secretary of the Air Force may prescribe,
the Secretary may provide to a person receiving a scholarship
under the scholarship program--
(1) transportation incident to the training received under
the ENJJPT program;
(2) supplies and equipment to be used during the training;
(3) flight clothing and other special clothing required for
the training;
(4) billeting, food, and health services; and
(5) a living allowance at a rate to be prescribed by the
Secretary, taking into account the amount of living
allowances authorized for a member of the armed forces under
similar circumstances.
(c) Relation to Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training
Program.--
(1) ENJJPT steering committee authority.--Nothing in this
section shall be construed or interpreted to supersede the
authority of the ENJJPT Steering Committee under the ENJJPT
Memorandum of Understanding. Pursuant to the ENJJPT
Memorandum of Understanding, the ENJJPT Steering Committee
may resolve to forbid any airman or airmen from a Partnership
for Peace nation to participate in the Euro-NATO Joint Jet
Pilot Training program under the authority of a scholarship
under this section.

[[Page 9584]]

(2) No representation.--Countries whose air force personnel
receive scholarships under the scholarship program shall not
have privilege of ENJJPT Steering Committee representation.
(d) Limitation on Eligible Countries.--The Secretary of the
Air Force may not use the authority in subsection (a) to
provide assistance described in subsection (b) to any foreign
country that is otherwise prohibited from receiving such type
of assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151 et seq.) or any other provision of law.
(e) Cost-sharing.--For purposes of ENJJPT cost-sharing,
personnel of an air force of a foreign country who receive a
scholarship under the scholarship program may be counted as
United States pilots.
(f) Progress Report.--Not later than February 1, 2015, the
Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional
defense committees, the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the
House of Representatives, and the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate a report on the status of the
demonstration program, including the opinion of the Secretary
and NATO allies on the benefits of the program and whether or
not to permanently authorize the program or extend the
program beyond fiscal year 2015. The report shall specify the
following:
(1) The countries participating in the scholarship program.
(2) The total number of foreign pilots who received
scholarships under the scholarship program.
(3) The amount expended on scholarships under the
scholarship program.
(4) The source of funding for scholarships under the
scholarship program.
(g) Duration.--No scholarship may be awarded under the
scholarship program after September 30, 2015.
(h) Funding Source.--Amounts to award scholarships under
the scholarship program shall be derived from amounts
authorized to be appropriated for operation and maintenance
for the Air Force.

Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan

SEC. 1211. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR CERTAIN
PURPOSES RELATING TO IRAQ.

No funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization of
appropriations in this Act may be obligated or expended for a
purpose as follows:
(1) To establish any military installation or base for the
purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United
States Armed Forces in Iraq.
(2) To exercise United States control of the oil resources
of Iraq.

SEC. 1212. COMMANDERS' EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM.

(a) Authority for Fiscal Year 2011.--During fiscal year
2011, from funds made available to the Department of Defense
for operation and maintenance for such fiscal year--
(1) not to exceed $100,000,000 may be used by the Secretary
of Defense in such fiscal year to provide funds for the
Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Iraq; and
(2) not to exceed $800,000,000 may be used by the Secretary
of Defense in such fiscal year to provide funds for the
Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Afghanistan.
(b) Quarterly Reports.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the end of
each fiscal-year quarter of fiscal year 2011, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report regarding the Commanders' Emergency
Response Program.
(2) Matters to be included.--The report required under
paragraph (1) shall include the following:
(A) The allocation and use of funds under the Commanders'
Emergency Response Program or any other provision of law
making funding available for the Commanders' Emergency
Response Program during the fiscal-year quarter.
(B) The dates of obligation and expenditure of such funds
during the fiscal-year quarter.
(C) A description of each project for which amounts in
excess of $500,000 were obligated or expended during the
fiscal-year quarter.
(D) The dates of obligation and expenditure of funds under
the Commanders' Emergency Response Program or any other
provision of law making funding available for the Commanders'
Emergency Response Program for each of fiscal years 2004
through 2010.
(3) Matters to be included with respect to commanders'
emergency response program in iraq.--The report required
under paragraph (1) shall include the following with respect
to the Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Iraq:
(A) A written statement by the Secretary of Defense, or the
Deputy Secretary of Defense if the authority under subsection
(f) is delegated to the Deputy Secretary of Defense,
affirming that the certification required under subsection
(f) was issued for each project for which amounts in excess
of $1,000,000 were obligated or expended during the fiscal-
year quarter.
(B) For each project listed in subparagraph (A), the
following information:
(i) A description and justification for carrying out the
project.
(ii) A description of the extent of involvement by the
Government of Iraq in the project, including--

(I) the amount of funds provided by the Government of Iraq
for the project; and
(II) a description of the plan for the transition of such
project upon completion to the people of Iraq and for the
sustainment of any completed facilities, including any
commitments by the Government of Iraq to sustain projects
requiring the support of the Government of Iraq for
sustainment.

(iii) A description of the current status of the project,
including, where appropriate, the projected completion date
(C) A description of the status of transitioning activities
to the Government of Iraq, including--
(i) the level of funding provided and expended by the
Government of Iraq in programs designed to meet urgent
humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements that
immediately assist the Iraqi people; and
(ii) a description of the progress made in transitioning
the responsibility for the Sons of Iraq Program to the
Government of Iraq.
(c) Submission of Guidance.--
(1) Initial submission.--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 copy
of the guidance issued by the Secretary to the Armed Forces
concerning the allocation of funds through the Commanders'
Emergency Response Program.
(2) Modifications.--If the guidance in effect for the
purpose stated in paragraph (1) is modified, the Secretary
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a copy
of the modification not later than 15 days after the date on
which the Secretary makes the modification.
(d) Waiver Authority.--For purposes of exercising the
authority provided by this section or any other provision of
law making funding available for the Commanders' Emergency
Response Program, the Secretary of Defense may waive any
provision of law not contained in this section that would
(but for the waiver) prohibit, restrict, limit, or otherwise
constrain the exercise of that authority.
(e) Prohibition on Certain Projects Under Commanders'
Emergency Response Program in Iraq.--
(1) Prohibition.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
funds made available under this section for the Commanders'
Emergency Response Program in Iraq may not be obligated or
expended to carry out any project if the total amount of such
funds made available for the purpose of carrying out the
project exceeds $2,000,000.
(2) Exception.--The prohibition contained in paragraph (1)
shall not apply with respect to funds managed or controlled
by the Department of Defense that were otherwise provided by
another department or agency of the United States Government,
the Government of Iraq, the government of a foreign country,
a foundation or other charitable organization (including a
foundation or charitable organization that is organized or
operates under the laws of a foreign country), or any source
in the private sector of the United States or a foreign
country.
(3) Waiver.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the
prohibition contained in paragraph (1) if the Secretary--
(A) determines that such a waiver is required to meet
urgent humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements
that will immediately assist the Iraqi people; and
(B) submits in writing, within 15 days of issuing such
waiver, to the congressional defense committees a
notification of the waiver, together with a discussion of--
(i) the unmet and urgent needs to be addressed by the
project; and
(ii) any arrangements between the Government of the United
States and the Government of Iraq regarding the provision of
Iraqi funds for carrying out and sustaining the project.
(f) Certification of Certain Projects Under the Commanders'
Emergency Response Program in Iraq.--
(1) Certification.--Funds made available under this section
for the Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Iraq may
not be obligated or expended to carry out any project if the
total amount of such funds made available for the purpose of
carrying out the project exceeds $1,000,000 unless the
Secretary of Defense certifies that the project addresses
urgent humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements
that will immediately assist the Iraqi people.
(2) Delegation.--The Secretary may delegate the authority
under paragraph (1) to the Deputy Secretary of Defense.
(g) Definitions.--In this section--
(1) the term ``Commanders' Emergency Response Program''
means--
(A) with respect to Iraq, the program established by the
Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority for the
purpose of enabling United States military commanders in Iraq
to respond to urgent humanitarian relief and reconstruction
requirements within their areas of responsibility by carrying
out programs that will immediately assist the Iraqi people;
and
(B) with respect to Afghanistan, the program established
for Afghanistan for purposes similar to the program
established for Iraq, as described in subparagraph (A);
(2) the term ``Commanders' Emergency Response Program in
Iraq'' means the program described in paragraph (1)(A); and
(3) the term ``Commanders' Emergency Response Program in
Afghanistan'' means the program described in paragraph
(1)(B).

SEC. 1213. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY FOR REIMBURSEMENT TO
CERTAIN COALITION NATIONS FOR SUPPORT PROVIDED
TO UNITED STATES MILITARY OPERATIONS.

(a) Extension of Authority.--Subsection (a) of section 1233
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 393), as amended by
section 1223 of the National Defense Authorization Act

[[Page 9585]]

for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2519), is
further amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``2010'' and inserting ``2011''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Logistical and military support provided by that
nation to confront the threat posed by al'Qaida, the Taliban,
and other militant extremists in Pakistan.''.
(b) Limitation on Amount.--Subsection (d)(1) of such
section is amended by striking ``2010'' and inserting
``2011''.

SEC. 1214. MODIFICATION OF REPORT ON RESPONSIBLE REDEPLOYMENT
OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM IRAQ.

(a) Report Required.--Subsection (a) of section 1227 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2525; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``December 31, 2009'' and inserting
``December 31, 2010''; and
(2) by striking ``90 days thereafter'' and inserting ``180
days thereafter''.
(b) Elements.--Subsection (b) of such section is amended--
(1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``Multi-National Force-
Iraq'' each place it occurs and inserting ``United States
Forces-Iraq''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) An assessment of progress to transfer responsibility
of programs, projects, and activities carried out in Iraq by
the Department of Defense to other United States Government
departments and agencies, international or nongovernmental
entities, or the Government of Iraq. The assessment should
include a description of the numbers and categories of
programs, projects, and activities for which such other
entities have taken responsibility or which have been
discontinued by the Department of Defense. The assessment
should also include a discussion of any difficulties or
barriers in transitioning such programs, projects, and
activities and what, if any, solutions have been developed to
address such difficulties or barriers.
``(7) An assessment of progress toward the goal of
establishing those minimum essential capabilities determined
by the Secretary of Defense as necessary to allow the
Government of Iraq to provide for its own internal and
external defense, including a description of--
``(A) such capabilities both extant and remaining to be
developed;
``(B) major military equipment necessary to achieve such
capabilities;
``(C) the level and type of support provided by the United
States to address shortfalls in such capabilities; and
``(D) the level of commitment, both financial and
political, made by the Government of Iraq to develop such
capabilities, including a discussion of resources used by the
Government of Iraq to develop capabilities that the Secretary
determines are not minimum essential capabilities for
purposes of this paragraph.
``(8) An assessment of the anticipated level and type of
support to be provided by United States special operations
forces to the Government of Iraq and Iraqi special operations
forces during the redeployment of United States conventional
forces from Iraq. The assessment should include a listing of
anticipated organic support, organic combat service support,
and additional critical enabling asset requirements for
United States special operations forces and Iraqi special
operations forces, to include engineers, rotary aircraft,
logisticians, communications assets, information support
specialists, forensic analysts, and intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance assets needed through
December 31, 2011.''.
(c) Secretary of State Comments.--Such section is further
amended by striking subsection (c) and inserting the
following:
``(c) Secretary of State Comments.--Prior to submitting the
report required under subsection (a), the Secretary of
Defense shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary
of State for review. At the request of the Secretary of
State, the Secretary of Defense shall include an appendix to
the report which contains any comments or additional
information that the Secretary of State requests.''.
(d) Form.--Subsection (d) of such section is amended by
striking ``, whether or not included in another report on
Iraq submitted to Congress by the Secretary of Defense,''.
(e) Termination.--Such section is further amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(f) Termination.--The requirement to submit the report
required under subsection (a) shall terminate on September
30, 2012.''.
(f) Repeal of Other Reporting Requirements.--The following
provisions of law are hereby repealed:
(1) Section 1227 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163; 119 Stat. 3465; 50
U.S.C. 1541 note) (as amended by section 1223 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law
110-181; 122 Stat. 373)).
(2) Section 1225 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 375).

SEC. 1215. MODIFICATION OF REPORTS RELATING TO AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Report on Progress Toward Security and Stability in
Afghanistan.--
(1) Report required.--Subsection (a) of section 1230 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 385), as amended by section
1236 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2535), is further
amended by striking ``2011'' and inserting ``2012''.
(2) Matters to be included: strategic direction of united
states activities relating to security and stability in
afghanistan.--Subsection (c) of such section is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(8) Conditions necessary for achievement of progress.--A
discussion of the conditions and criteria that would need to
exist in key districts and across Afghanistan to--
``(A) meet United States and coalition goals in Afghanistan
and the region;
``(B) permit the transition of lead security responsibility
in key districts to the Government of Afghanistan; and
``(C) permit the redeployment of United States Armed Forces
and coalition forces from Afghanistan.''.
(3) Matters to be included: performance indicators and
measures of progress toward sustainable long-term security
and stability in afghanistan.--Subsection (d) of such section
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Conditions necessary for achievement of progress.--
With respect to each performance indicator and measure of
progress specified in paragraph (2) (A) through (L), the
report shall include a description of the conditions that
would need to exist in Afghanistan for the Secretary of
Defense to conclude that such indicator or measure of
progress has been achieved.''.
(b) United States Plan for Sustaining the Afghanistan
National Security Forces.--Section 1231(a) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law
110-181; 122 Stat. 390) is amended by striking ``2010'' and
inserting ``2012''.

SEC. 1216. NO PERMANENT MILITARY 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.

SEC. 1217. AUTHORITY TO USE FUNDS FOR REINTEGRATION
ACTIVITIES IN AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Authority.--If a certification described in subsection
(b) is made in accordance with such subsection, the Secretary
of Defense may utilize not more than $50,000,000 from funds
made available to the Department of Defense for operations
and maintenance for fiscal year 2011 to support in those
areas of Afghanistan specified in the certification the
reintegration into Afghan society of those individuals who--
(1) have ceased all support to the insurgency in
Afghanistan;
(2) have agreed to live in accordance with the Constitution
of Afghanistan;
(3) have renounced violence against the Government of
Afghanistan and its international partners; and
(4) do not have material ties to al Qaeda or affiliated
transnational terrorist organizations.
(b) Certification.--A certification described in this
subsection is a certification made by the Secretary of State,
in coordination with the Administrator of United States
Agency for International Development, to the appropriate
congressional committees stating that it is necessary for the
Department of Defense to carry out a program of reintegration
in areas of Afghanistan that are specified by the Secretary
of State in the certification. Such certification shall
include--
(1) a statement that such program is necessary to support
the goals of the United States in Afghanistan; and
(2) a certification that the Department of State and the
United States Agency for International Development are unable
to carry out a similar program of reintegration in the areas
specified by the Secretary of State because of the security
environment of such areas or for other reasons.
(c) Submission of Guidance.--
(1) Initial submission.--Not later than 30 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense,
with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, shall submit
to the appropriate congressional committees a copy of the
guidance issued by the Secretary or the Secretary's designee
concerning the allocation of funds utilizing the authority of
subsection (a). Such guidance shall include--
(A) mechanisms for coordination with the Government of
Afghanistan and other United States Government departments
and agencies as appropriate;
(B) mechanisms to track the status of those individuals
described in subsection (a); and
(C) metrics to monitor and evaluate the impact of funds
used pursuant to subsection (a).
(2) Modifications.--If the guidance in effect for the
purpose stated in paragraph (1) is modified, the Secretary of
Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State,
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a
copy of the modification not later than 15 days after the
date on which such modification is made.
(d) Quarterly Reports.--The Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report
on activities carried out utilizing the authority of
subsection (a).
(e) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(1) the congressional defense committees; and
(2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representative and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate.
(f) Expiration.--The authority to utilize funds under
subsection (a) shall expire at the close of December 31,
2011.

[[Page 9586]]

SEC. 1218. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF PAKISTAN COUNTERINSURGENCY
FUND.

Section 1224(h) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2521) is
amended by striking ``September 30, 2010'' both places it
appears and inserting ``September 30, 2011''.

SEC. 1219. AUTHORITY TO USE FUNDS TO PROVIDE SUPPORT TO
COALITION FORCES SUPPORTING MILITARY AND
STABILITY OPERATIONS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Authority.--Notwithstanding section 127d(c) of title
10, United States Code, up to $400,000,000 of the funds
available to the Department of Defense by section 1509 of
this Act may be used to provide supplies, services,
transportation, including airlift and sealift, and other
logistical support to coalition forces supporting military
and stability operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
(b) Quarterly Reports.--The Secretary of Defense shall
submit quarterly reports to the congressional defense
committees regarding support provided under this section.

SEC. 1220. REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE UNITED STATES BRIGADE AND
EQUIVALENT UNITS DEPLOYED TO AFGHANISTAN WITH
THE COMMENSURATE LEVEL OF UNIT AND THEATER-WIDE
COMBAT ENABLERS.

(a) Statement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United
States to provide each United States brigade and equivalent
units deployed to Afghanistan with the commensurate level of
unit and theater-wide combat enablers to--
(1) implement the United States strategy to disrupt,
dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their
affiliated networks and eliminate their safe haven;
(2) achieve the military campaign plan;
(3) minimize the level risk to United States, coalition,
and Afghan forces; and
(4) reduce the number of military and civilian casualties.
(b) Requirement.--In order to achieve the policy expressed
in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall provide
each United States brigade and equivalent units deployed to
Afghanistan with the commensurate level of unit and theater-
wide combat enablers.
(c) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House
of Representatives a report containing--
(1) a description of United States Forces-Afghanistan
requests for forces for fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010;
(2) a description of the current troop-to-task analysis and
resource requirements;
(3) the number of United States brigade and equivalent
units deployed to Afghanistan;
(4) the number of United States unit and theater-wide
combat enablers deployed to Afghanistan, including at a
minimum, a breakdown of--
(A) Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR);
(B) force protection, including force protection at each
United States Forward Operating Base (FOB); and
(C) medical evacuation (MEDEVAC); and
(5) an assessment of the risk to United States, coalition,
and Afghan forces based on a lack of combat enablers.
(d) Combat Enablers Defined.--In this section, the term
``combat enablers'' includes--
(1) Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR);
(2) force protection, including force protection at each
United States Forward Operating Base (FOB);
(3) medical evacuation (MEDEVAC); and
(4) any other combat enablers as determined by the
Secretary of Defense.

Subtitle C--Other Matters

SEC. 1231. NATO SPECIAL OPERATIONS COORDINATION CENTER.

Section 1244(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2541) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``fiscal year 2010'' and inserting ``fiscal
year 2011''; and
(2) by striking ``$30,000,000'' and inserting
``$50,000,000''.

SEC. 1232. NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGIC PLAN TO COUNTER IRAN.

(a) National Military Strategic Plan Required.--The
Secretary of Defense shall develop a strategic plan, to be
known as the ``National Military Strategic Plan to Counter
Iran''. The strategic plan shall--
(1) outline the Department of Defense's strategic planning
and provide strategic guidance for military activities and
operations that support the United States policy objective of
countering threats posed by Iran;
(2) identify the direct and indirect military contribution
to this policy objective, and constitute the comprehensive
military plan to counter threats posed by Iran;
(3) undertake a review of the intelligence in the
possession of the Department of Defense to develop a list of
gaps in intelligence that limit the ability of the Department
of Defense to counter threats emanating from Iran that the
Secretary considers to be critical;
(4) develop a plan to address those gaps identified in the
review under paragraph (3); and
(5) undertake a review of the plans of the Department of
Defense to counter threats to the United States, its forces,
allies, and interests from Iran, including--
(A) plans for both conflict and peace;
(B) contributions of the Department of Defense to the
efforts of other agencies of the United States Government to
counter or address the threat emanating from Iran; and
(C) any gaps in the plans, capabilities and authorities of
the Department.
(b) Plan.--In addition to the plan required under
subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall develop a plan
to address those gaps identified in the review required in
subsection (a)(5). The plan shall guide the planning and
actions of the relevant combatant commands, the military
departments, and combat support agencies that the Secretary
of Defense determines have a role in countering threats posed
by Iran.
(c) Report to Congress.--
(1) In general.--Not later than the date on which the
President submits to Congress the budget for a fiscal year
under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report identifying and justifying any
resources, capabilities, legislative authorities, or changes
to current law the Secretary believes are necessary to carry
out the plan required under subsection (b) to address the
gaps identified in the strategic plan required in subsection
(a).
(2) Form.--The report required in paragraph (1) shall be in
unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 1233. REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE'S PLANS TO REFORM
THE EXPORT CONTROL SYSTEM.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 60 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report
on the Department of Defense's plans to reform the
Department's export control system.
(b) Matters to Be Included.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall include--
(1) a description of the plans of the Department of Defense
to implement Presidential Study Directive 8; and
(2) an assessment of the extent to which the plans to
reform the export control system will--
(A) impact the Defense Technology Security Administration
of the Department of Defense;
(B) affect the role of the Department of Defense with
respect to export control policy; and
(C) ensure greater protection and monitoring of key defense
items and technologies.
(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.

SEC. 1234. REPORT ON UNITED STATES EFFORTS TO DEFEND AGAINST
THREATS POSED BY THE ADVANCED ANTI-ACCESS
CAPABILITIES OF POTENTIALLY HOSTILE FOREIGN
COUNTRIES.

(a) Congressional Finding.--Congress finds that the report
of the 2010 Department of Defense Quadrennial Defense Review
finds that ``Anti-access strategies seek to deny outside
countries the ability to project power into a region, thereby
allowing aggression or other destabilizing actions to be
conducted by the anti-access power. Without dominant
capabilities to project power, the integrity of U.S.
alliances and security partnerships could be called into
question, reducing U.S. security and influence and increasing
the possibility of conflict.''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that,
in light of the finding in subsection (a), the Secretary of
Defense should ensure that the United States has the
appropriate authorities, capabilities, and force structure to
defend against any threats posed by the advanced anti-access
capabilities of potentially hostile foreign countries.
(c) Report.--Not later than April 1, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on
United States efforts to defend against any threats posed by
the advanced anti-access capabilities of potentially hostile
foreign countries.
(d) Matters to Be Included.--The report required under
subsection (c) shall include the following:
(1) An assessment of any threats posed by the advanced
anti-access capabilities of potentially hostile foreign
countries, including an identification of the foreign
countries with such capabilities, the nature of such
capabilities, and the possible advances in such capabilities
over the next 10 years.
(2) A description of any efforts by the Department of
Defense since the release of the 2010 Quadrennial Defense
Review to address the finding in subsection (a).
(3) A description of the authorities, capabilities, and
force structure that the United States may require over the
next 10 years to address the finding in subsection (a).
(e) Form.--The report required under subsection (c) shall
be submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a
classified annex if necessary.
(f) Modification of Other Reports.--
(1) Concerning the people's republic of china.--Section
1202(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 781; 10 U.S.C. 113
note), as most recently amended by section 1246 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2544), is further amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (10) through (12) as
paragraphs (11) through (13), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:

[[Page 9587]]

``(10) Developments in China's anti-access and area denial
capabilities.''.
(2) Concerning iran.--Section 1245(b) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law
111-84; 123 Stat. 2542) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(5) A description and assessment of Iran's anti-access
and area denial strategy and capabilities.''.

SEC. 1235. REPORT ON FORCE STRUCTURE CHANGES IN COMPOSITION
AND CAPABILITIES AT MILITARY INSTALLATIONS IN
EUROPE.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall submit to
the appropriate congressional committees a report evaluating
potential changes in the composition and capabilities of
units of the United States Armed Forces at military
installations in European member nations of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization--
(1) to satisfy the commitments undertaken by United States
pursuant to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, signed at
Washington, District of Columbia, on April 4, 1949, and
entered into force on August 24, 1949 (63 Stat. 2241; TIAS
1964);
(2) to address the current security environment in Europe,
including United States participation in theater cooperation
activities; and
(3) to contribute to peace and stability in Europe.
(b) Matters to Be Considered.--As part of the report, the
Secretary of Defense shall consider--
(1) the stationing of advisory and assist brigades at
military installations in Europe;
(2) the expanded use of Joint Task Forces to train and
build mutual capabilities with partner countries; and
(3) the stationing of units of the United States Armed
Forces to support missile defense and cyber-security
missions.
(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.

SEC. 1236. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MISSILE DEFENSE AND NEW START
TREATY WITH RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The United States and the Russian Federation signed the
Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian
Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and
Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (commonly known as the
``New START Treaty'') on April 8, 2010.
(2) The preamble of the New START Treaty states,
``Recognizing the existence of the interrelationship between
strategic offensive arms and strategic defensive arms, that
this interrelationship will become more important as
strategic nuclear arms are reduced, and that current
strategic defensive arms do not undermine the viability and
effectiveness of the strategic offensive arms of the
Parties.''.
(3) Officials of the United States have stated that the New
START Treaty does not constrain the missile defenses of the
United States and according to the New START Treaty U.S.
Congressional Briefing Book of April, 2010, released by the
Department of State and the Department of Defense, ``The
United States will continue to invest in improvements to both
strategic and theater missile defenses, both qualitatively
and quantitatively, as needed for our security and the
security of our allies.''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) as stated by officials of the United States, there
would be no limitations on any phase of the phased, adaptive
approach to missile defense in Europe resulting from
ratification of the New START treaty between the United
States and Russia, signed on 8 April 2010;
(2) the United States should deploy the phased, adaptive
approach for missile defense in Europe to protect the United
States, its deployed forces, and NATO allies, after
appropriate testing and consistent with NATO policy; and
(3) the ground-based midcourse defense system in Alaska and
California should be maintained, evolved, and appropriately
tested because it is the only missile defense capability as
of the date of the enactment of this Act that would protect
the United States from the growing threat of a long-range
ballistic missile attack.

TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION

SEC. 1301. SPECIFICATION OF COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION
PROGRAMS AND FUNDS.

(a) Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
Programs.--For purposes of section 301 and other provisions
of this Act, Cooperative Threat Reduction programs are the
programs specified in section 1501 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (50 U.S.C. 2362 note).
(b) Fiscal Year 2011 Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds
Defined.--As used in this title, the term ``fiscal year 2011
Cooperative Threat Reduction funds'' means the funds
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations
in section 301 for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.
(c) Availability of Funds.--Funds appropriated pursuant to
the authorization of appropriations in section 301 for
Cooperative Threat Reduction programs shall be available for
obligation for fiscal years 2011, 2012, and 2013.

SEC. 1302. FUNDING ALLOCATIONS.

(a) Funding for Specific Purposes.--Of the $522,512,000
authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense
for fiscal year 2011 in section 301(20) for Cooperative
Threat Reduction programs, the following amounts may be
obligated for the purposes specified:
(1) For strategic offensive arms elimination in Russia,
$66,732,000.
(2) For strategic nuclear arms elimination in Ukraine,
$6,800,000.
(3) For nuclear weapons storage security in Russia,
$9,614,000.
(4) For nuclear weapons transportation security in Russia,
$45,000,000.
(5) For weapons of mass destruction proliferation
prevention in the states of the former Soviet Union,
$79,821,000.
(6) For biological threat reduction in the former Soviet
Union, $209,034,000.
(7) For chemical weapons destruction, $3,000,000.
(8) For defense and military contacts, $5,000,000.
(9) For Global Nuclear Lockdown, $74,471,000.
(10) For activities designated as Other Assessments/
Administrative Costs, $23,040,000.
(b) Report on Obligation or Expenditure of Funds for Other
Purposes.--No fiscal year 2011 Cooperative Threat Reduction
funds may be obligated or expended for a purpose other than a
purpose listed in paragraphs (1) through (10) of subsection
(a) until 15 days after the date that the Secretary of
Defense submits to Congress a report on the purpose for which
the funds will be obligated or expended and the amount of
funds to be obligated or expended. Nothing in the preceding
sentence shall be construed as authorizing the obligation or
expenditure of fiscal year 2011 Cooperative Threat Reduction
funds for a purpose for which the obligation or expenditure
of such funds is specifically prohibited under this title or
any other provision of law.
(c) Limited Authority to Vary Individual Amounts.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), in any case in
which the Secretary of Defense determines that it is
necessary to do so in the national interest, the Secretary
may obligate amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2011 for a
purpose listed in paragraphs (1) through (10) of subsection
(a) in excess of the specific amount authorized for that
purpose.
(2) Notice-and-wait required.--An obligation of funds for a
purpose stated in paragraphs (1) through (10) of subsection
(a) in excess of the specific amount authorized for such
purpose may be made using the authority provided in paragraph
(1) only after--
(A) the Secretary submits to Congress notification of the
intent to do so together with a complete discussion of the
justification for doing so; and
(B) 15 days have elapsed following the date of the
notification.

TITLE XIV--OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

Subtitle A--Military Programs

SEC. 1401. WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the use of the Armed Forces and other
activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for
providing capital for working capital and revolving funds in
amounts as follows:
(1) For the Defense Working Capital Funds, $160,965,000.
(2) For the Defense Working Capital Fund, Defense
Commissary, $1,273,571,000.

SEC. 1402. STUDY ON WORKING CAPITAL FUND CASH BALANCES.

(a) Study Required.--Not later than 30 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
seek to enter into a contract with a federally funded
research and development center with appropriate expertise in
revolving fund financial management to carry out a study to
determine a sufficient operational level of cash that each
revolving fund of the Department of Defense should maintain
in order to sustain a single rate or price throughout the
fiscal year.
(b) Contents of Study.--In carrying out a study pursuant to
a contract entered into under subsection (a), the federally
funded research and development center shall--
(1) qualitatively analyze the operational requirements and
inherent risks associated with maintaining a specific level
of cash within each revolving fund of the Department;
(2) for each such revolving fund, take into consideration
any effects on appropriation accounts that have occurred due
to changes made in the rates charged by the fund during a
fiscal year;
(3) take into consideration direct input from the Secretary
of Defense and officials of each of the military departments
with leadership responsibility for financial management;
(4) examine the guidance provided and regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
each of the military departments, as in effect on the date of
the enactment of this Act, including such guidance with
respect to programming and budgeting and the annual budget
displays provided to Congress;
(5) examine the effects on appropriations accounts that
have occurred due to congressional adjustments relating to
excess cash balances in revolving funds;
(6) identify best business practices from the private
sector relating to sufficient cash balance reserves;
(7) examine any relevant applicable laws, including the
relevant body of work performed by the Government
Accountability Office; and

[[Page 9588]]

(8) address--
(A) instances where the fiscal policy of the Department of
Defense directly follows the law, as in effect on the date of
the enactment of this Act, and instances where such policy is
more restrictive with respect to the fiscal management of
revolving funds than such law requires;
(B) instances where current Department fiscal policy
restricts the capability of a revolving fund to achieve the
most economical and efficient organization and operation of
activities;
(C) fiscal policy adjustments required to comply with
recommendations provided in the study, including proposed
adjustments to--
(i) the Department of Defense Financial Management
Regulation;
(ii) published service regulations and instructions; and
(iii) major command fiscal guidance; and
(D) such other matters as determined relevant by the center
carrying out the study.
(c) Availability of Information.--The Secretary of Defense
and the Secretary of each of the military departments shall
make available to a federally funded research and development
center carrying out a study pursuant to a contract entered
into under subsection (a) all necessary and relevant
information to allow the center to conduct the study in a
quantitative and analytical manner.
(d) Report.--Any contract entered into under subsection (a)
shall provide that not later than nine months after the date
on which the Secretary of Defense enters into the contract,
the chief executive officer of the entity that carries out
the study pursuant to the contract shall submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives and the Secretary of Defense a final report
on the study. The report shall include each of the following:
(1) A description of the revolving fund environment, as of
the date of the conclusion of the study, and the anticipated
future environment, together with the quantitative data used
in conducting the assessment of such environments under the
study.
(2) Recommended fiscal policy adjustments to support the
initiatives identified in the study, including adjustments
to--
(A) the Department of Defense Financial Management
Regulation;
(B) published service regulations and instructions; and
(C) major command fiscal guidance.
(3) Recommendations with respect to any changes to any
applicable law that would be appropriate to support the
initiatives identified in the study.
(e) Submittal of Comments.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of the submittal of the report under subsection (d),
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of each of the
military departments shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives comments
on the findings and recommendations contained in the report.

SEC. 1403. MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN WORKING CAPITAL FUND
REQUIREMENTS.

Section 2208 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ``or used'' and
inserting ``used, or developed through continuous technology
refreshment''; and
(2) in subsection (k)(2), by striking ``$100,000'' and
inserting ``$250,000''.

SEC. 1404. REDUCTION OF UNOBLIGATED BALANCES WITHIN THE
PENTAGON RESERVATION MAINTENANCE REVOLVING
FUND.

Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer $77,000,000
from the unobligated balances of the Pentagon Reservation
Maintenance Revolving Fund established under section 2674(e)
of title 10, United States Code, to the Miscellaneous
Receipts Fund of the United States Treasury.

SEC. 1405. NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
fiscal year 2011 for the National Defense Sealift Fund in the
amount of $934,866,000.

SEC. 1406. CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION,
DEFENSE.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense
for fiscal year 2011 for expenses, not otherwise provided
for, for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense,
in the amount of $1,467,307,000, of which--
(1) $1,067,364,000 is for Operation and Maintenance;
(2) $392,811,000 is for Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation; and
(3) $7,132,000 is for Procurement.
(b) Use.--Amounts authorized to be appropriated under
subsection (a) are authorized for--
(1) the destruction of lethal chemical agents and munitions
in accordance with section 1412 of the Department of Defense
Authorization Act, 1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521); and
(2) the destruction of chemical warfare materiel of the
United States that is not covered by section 1412 of such
Act.

SEC. 1407. DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES,
DEFENSE-WIDE.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 for expenses, not
otherwise provided for, for Drug Interdiction and Counter-
Drug Activities, Defense-wide, in the amount of
$1,131,351,000.

SEC. 1408. DEFENSE INSPECTOR GENERAL.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 for expenses, not
otherwise provided for, for the Office of the Inspector
General of the Department of Defense, in the amount of
$283,354,000, of which--
(1) $282,354,000 is for Operation and Maintenance; and
(2) $1,000,000 is for Procurement.

SEC. 1409. DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 for expenses, not
otherwise provided for, for the Defense Health Program, in
the amount of $30,991,952,000, of which--
(1) $29,947,792,000 is for Operation and Maintenance;
(2) $524,239,000 is for Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation; and
(3) $519,921,000 is for Procurement.

Subtitle B--National Defense Stockpile

SEC. 1411. AUTHORIZED USES OF NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE
FUNDS.

(a) Obligation of Stockpile Funds.--During fiscal year
2011, the National Defense Stockpile Manager may obligate up
to $41,181,000 of the funds in the National Defense Stockpile
Transaction Fund established under subsection (a) of section
9 of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act
(50 U.S.C. 98h) for the authorized uses of such funds under
subsection (b)(2) of such section, including the disposal of
hazardous materials that are environmentally sensitive.
(b) Additional Obligations.--The National Defense Stockpile
Manager may obligate amounts in excess of the amount
specified in subsection (a) if the National Defense Stockpile
Manager notifies Congress that extraordinary or emergency
conditions necessitate the additional obligations. The
National Defense Stockpile Manager may make the additional
obligations described in the notification after the end of
the 45-day period beginning on the date on which Congress
receives the notification.
(c) Limitations.--The authorities provided by this section
shall be subject to such limitations as may be provided in
appropriations Acts.

SEC. 1412. REVISION TO REQUIRED RECEIPT OBJECTIVES FOR
PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED DISPOSALS FROM THE
NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE.

Section 3402(b)(5) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (50 U.S.C. 98d note), as most
recently amended by section 1412(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181;
122 Stat. 418), is amended by striking ``$710,000,000'' and
inserting ``$730,000,000''.

Subtitle C--Other Matters

SEC. 1421. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR ARMED FORCES
RETIREMENT HOME.

There is authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011
from the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund the sum of
$71,200,000 for the operation of the Armed Forces Retirement
Home.

SEC. 1422. PLAN FOR FUNDING FUEL INFRASTRUCTURE SUSTAINMENT,
RESTORATION, AND MODERNIZATION REQUIREMENTS.

Not later than the date on which the President submits to
Congress the budget for fiscal year 2012 pursuant to section
1105 of title 31, United States Code, the Director of the
Defense Logistics Agency shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the fuel infrastructure of the
Department of Defense. Such report shall include projections
for fuel infrastructure sustainment, restoration, and
modernization requirements, and a plan for funding such
requirements.

TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR OVERSEAS
CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS

SEC. 1501. PURPOSE.

The purpose of this title is to authorize appropriations
for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 to provide
additional funds for overseas contingency operations being
carried out by the Armed Forces.

SEC. 1502. ARMY PROCUREMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for procurement accounts of the Army in amounts as
follows:
(1) For aircraft procurement, $1,373,803,000.
(2) For missile procurement, $343,828,000.
(3) For weapons and tracked combat vehicles procurement,
$687,500,000.
(4) For ammunition procurement, $652,491,000.
(5) For other procurement, $5,865,446,000.

SEC. 1503. JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011 for the
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund in the amount
of $3,464,368,000.
(b) Use and Transfer of Funds.--Subsections (b) and (c) of
section 1514 of the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364;
120 Stat. 2439), as amended by section 1503 of the Duncan
Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2009 (Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4649), shall apply to the
funds appropriated pursuant to the authorization of
appropriations in subsection (a) and made available to the
Department of Defense for the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Fund.
(c) Monthly Obligations and Expenditure Reports.--Not later
than 15 days after the end of each month of fiscal year 2011,
the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional
defense committees a report on the Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Fund explaining

[[Page 9589]]

monthly commitments, obligations, and expenditures by line of
action.

SEC. 1504. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS PROCUREMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for procurement accounts of the Navy and Marine
Corps in amounts as follows:
(1) For aircraft procurement, Navy, $843,358,000.
(2) For weapons procurement, Navy, $93,425,000.
(3) For ammunition procurement, Navy and Marine Corps,
$565,084,000.
(4) For other procurement, Navy, $480,735,000.
(5) For procurement, Marine Corps, $1,854,243,000.

SEC. 1505. AIR FORCE PROCUREMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for procurement accounts of the Air Force in
amounts as follows:
(1) For aircraft procurement, $1,096,520,000.
(2) For ammunition procurement, $292,959,000.
(3) For missile procurement, $56,621,000.
(4) For other procurement, $3,087,481,000.

SEC. 1506. DEFENSE-WIDE ACTIVITIES PROCUREMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the procurement account for Defense-wide
activities in the amount of $1,376,046,000.

SEC. 1507. IRON DOME SHORT-RANGE ROCKET DEFENSE PROGRAM.

Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by section 1506
for the procurement account for Defense-wide activities, the
Secretary of Defense may provide up to $205,000,000 to the
government of Israel for the procurement of the Iron Dome
defense system to counter short-range rocket threats.

SEC. 1508. NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the procurement of aircraft, missiles, wheeled
and tracked combat vehicles, tactical wheeled vehicles,
ammunition, other weapons, and other procurement for the
reserve components of the Armed Forces in the amount of
$700,000,000.

SEC. 1509. MINE RESISTANT AMBUSH PROTECTED VEHICLE FUND.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle
Fund in the amount of $3,415,000,000.

SEC. 1510. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the use of the Department of Defense for
research, development, test, and evaluation as follows:
(1) For the Army, $112,734,000.
(2) For the Navy, $60,401,000.
(3) For the Air Force, $266,241,000.
(4) For Defense-wide activities, $657,240,000.

SEC. 1511. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 for the use of the Armed Forces for expenses, not
otherwise provided for, for operation and maintenance, in
amounts as follows:
(1) For the Army, $62,202,618,000.
(2) For the Navy, $8,946,634,000.
(3) For the Marine Corps, $4,136,522,000.
(4) For the Air Force, $13,487,283,000
(5) For Defense-wide activities, $9,426,358,000.
(6) For the Army Reserve, $286,950,000.
(7) For the Navy Reserve, $93,559,000.
(8) For the Marine Corps Reserve, $29,685,000.
(9) For the Air Force Reserve, $129,607,000.
(10) For the Army National Guard, $544,349,000.
(11) For the Air National Guard, $350,823,000.
(12) For the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund,
$10,964,983,000.
(13) For the Iraq Security Forces Fund, $2,000,000,000.
(14) For the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund,
$506,781,000.

SEC. 1512. LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS IN
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND.

Funds appropriated pursuant to the authorization of
appropriations for the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund in
section 1511(12) shall be subject to the conditions contained
in subsections (b) through (g) of section 1513 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 428).

SEC. 1513. LIMITATIONS ON IRAQ SECURITY FORCES FUND.

(a) Application of Existing Limitations.--Subject to
subsection (b), funds made available to the Department of
Defense for the Iraq Security Forces Fund for fiscal year
2011 shall be subject to the conditions contained in
subsections (b) through (g) of section 1512 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law
110-181; 122 Stat. 426).
(b) Cost-share Requirement.--
(1) Requirement.--If funds made available to the Department
of Defense for the Iraq Security Forces Fund for fiscal year
2011 are used for the purchase of any item or service for
Iraq Security Forces, the funds may not cover more than 80
percent of the cost of the item or service.
(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) does not apply to any item
that the Secretary of Defense determines--
(A) is an item of significant military equipment (as such
term is defined in section 47(9) of the Arms Export Control
Act (22 U.S.C. 2794(9))); or
(B) is included on the United States Munitions List, as
designated pursuant to section 38(a)(1) of the Arms Export
Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778(a)(1)).

SEC. 1514. MILITARY PERSONNEL.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011 to the Department of Defense for military personnel
accounts in the total amount of $15,275,502,000.

SEC. 1515. WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS.

SEC. 1516. DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2011 for expenses, not
otherwise provided for, for the Defense Health Program in the
amount of $1,398,092,000 for operation and maintenance.

SEC. 1517. DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES,
DEFENSE-WIDE.

SEC. 1518. DEFENSE INSPECTOR GENERAL.

SEC. 1519. CONTINUATION OF PROHIBITION ON USE OF UNITED
STATES FUNDS FOR CERTAIN FACILITIES PROJECTS IN
IRAQ.

Section 1508(a) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
122 Stat. 4651) shall apply to funds authorized to be
appropriated by this title.

SEC. 1520. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR RAPID FORCE PROTECTION
IN AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Availability of Funds.--Of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by section 1511(5) for operation and maintenance
for Defense-wide activities, the Secretary of Defense may
obligate up to $200,000,000 during fiscal year 2011 to
address urgent force protection requirements facing United
States military forces in Afghanistan, as identified by the
Commander of United States Forces-Afghanistan.
(b) Use of Rapid Acquisition Authority.--To carry out this
section, the Secretary of Defense shall utilize the rapid
acquisition authority available to the Secretary.
(c) Use of Transfer Authority.--To carry out this section,
the Secretary of Defense may utilize the transfer authority
provided by section 1522, subject to the limitation in
subsection (a)(2) of such section on the total amount of
authorizations that may be transferred.

SEC. 1521. TREATMENT AS ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS.

The amounts authorized to be appropriated by this title are
in addition to amounts otherwise authorized to be
appropriated by this Act.

SEC. 1522. SPECIAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

(a) Authority To Transfer Authorizations.--
(1) Authority.--Upon determination by the Secretary of
Defense that such action is necessary in the national
interest, the Secretary may transfer amounts of
authorizations made available to the Department of Defense in
this title for fiscal year 2011 between any such
authorizations for that fiscal year (or any subdivisions
thereof). Amounts of authorizations so transferred shall be
merged with and be available for the same purposes as the
authorization to which transferred.
(2) Limitation.--The total amount of authorizations that
the Secretary may transfer under the authority of this
section may not exceed $3,500,000,000.
(b) Terms and Conditions.--Transfers under this section
shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as
transfers under section 1001.
(c) Additional Authority.--The transfer authority provided
by this section is in addition to the transfer authority
provided under section 1001.

TITLE XVI--IMPROVED SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE IN THE ARMED
FORCES

SEC. 1601. DEFINITION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SEXUAL ASSAULT
PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM AND OTHER
DEFINITIONS.

(a) Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program
Defined.--In this title, the term ``sexual assault prevention
and response program'' refers to Department of Defense
policies and programs, including policies and programs of a
specific military department or Armed Force, that are
intended to reduce the number of sexual assaults involving
members of the Armed Forces and improve the response of the
department to reports of sexual assaults involving members of
the Armed Forces, whether members of the Armed Forces are the
victim, alleged assailant, or both.
(b) Other Definitions.--In this title:
(1) The term ``Armed Forces'' means the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marine Corps.
(2) The term ``department'' has the meaning given that term
in section 101(a)(6) of title 10, United States Code.
(3) The term ``military installation'' has the meaning
given that term by the Secretary concerned.

[[Page 9590]]

(4) The term ``Secretary concerned'' means--
(A) the Secretary of the Army, with respect to matters
concerning the Army;
(B) the Secretary of the Navy, with respect to matters
concerning the Navy and the Marine Corps; and
(C) the Secretary of the Air Force, with respect to matters
concerning the Air Force.

Subtitle A--Immediate Actions to Improve Department of Defense Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response Program

SEC. 1611. SPECIFIC BUDGETING FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM.

Effective with the Program Objective Memorandum to be
issued for fiscal year 2012 and thereafter and containing
recommended programming and resource allocations for the
Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense shall
specifically address the Department of Defense sexual assault
prevention and response program to ensure that a separate
line of funding is allocated to the program.

SEC. 1612. CONSISTENCY IN TERMINOLOGY, POSITION DESCRIPTIONS,
PROGRAM STANDARDS, AND ORGANIZATIONAL
STRUCTURES.

(a) In General.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
require the use of consistent terminology, position
descriptions, minimum program standards, and organizational
structures throughout the Armed Forces in implementing the
Department of Defense sexual assault prevention and response
program.
(b) Recognizing Operational Differences.--In complying with
subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall take into
account the responsibilities of the Secretary concerned and
operational needs of the Armed Force involved.

SEC. 1613. GUIDANCE FOR COMMANDERS.

Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of each military department shall
issue guidance to all military unit commanders that
implementation of the Department of Defense sexual assault
prevention and response program requires their leadership and
is their responsibility.

SEC. 1614. COMMANDER CONSULTATION WITH VICTIMS OF SEXUAL
ASSAULT.

Before making a decision regarding how to proceed under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice in the case of an alleged
sexual assault or other offense covered by section 920 of
title 10, United States Code (article 120), the commanding
officer shall offer to meet with the victim of the offense to
determine the opinion of the victim regarding case
disposition and provide that information to the convening
authority.

SEC. 1615. OVERSIGHT AND EVALUATION.

Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall--
(1) issue standards to be used to assess and evaluate the
effectiveness of the sexual assault prevention and response
program of each Armed Force in reducing the number of sexual
assaults involving members of the Armed Forces and in
improving the response of the department to reports of sexual
assaults involving members of the Armed Forces, whether
members of the Armed Forces are the victim, alleged
assailant, or both; and
(2) develop measures to ensure that the Armed Forces comply
with those standards.

SEC. 1616. SEXUAL ASSAULT REPORTING HOTLINE.

(a) Availability of Hotline.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall establish a universal hotline to facilitate the
reporting of a sexual assault--
(1) by a member of the Armed Forces, whether serving in the
United States or overseas, who is a victim of a sexual
assault; or
(2) by any other person who is a victim of a sexual assault
involving a member of the Armed Forces.
(b) Prompt Response.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure
that a Sexual Assault Response Coordinator serving in the
locality of the victim promptly responds to the reporting of
a sexual assault using the hotline. The Secretary of Defense
shall define appropriate localities for purposes of this
subsection.

SEC. 1617. REVIEW OF APPLICATION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION
AND RESPONSE PROGRAM TO RESERVE COMPONENTS.

(a) 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
on the application of the sexual assault prevention and
response program for the reserve components.
(b) Contents.--The report required by subsection (a) shall
include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) The ability of members of the reserve components to
access the services available under the sexual assault
prevention and response program, including policies and
programs of a specific military department or Armed Force.
(2) The quality of training provided to Sexual Assault
Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Victim Advocates in
the reserve components.
(3) The degree to which the services available for regular
and reserve members under the sexual assault prevention and
response program are integrated.
(4) Such recommendations as the Secretary of Defense
considers appropriate on how to improve the services
available for reserve members under the sexual assault
prevention and response program and their access to the
services.

SEC. 1618. REVIEW OF EFFECTIVENESS OF REVISED UNIFORM CODE OF
MILITARY JUSTICE OFFENSES REGARDING RAPE,
SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND OTHER SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.

(a) Review Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
conduct a review of the effectiveness of section 920 of title
10, United States Code (article 120 of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice), as amended by section 552 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law
109-163; 119 Stat. 3256). The Secretary shall use a panel of
military justice experts to conduct the review.
(b) Submission of Results.--Not later than one year after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit the results of the review to the
congressional defense committees.

SEC. 1619. TRAINING AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT
PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM.

(a) Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Training and
Education.--
(1) Development of curricula.--Not later than one year
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
each military department shall develop curricula to provide
sexual assault prevention and response training and education
for members of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary and civilian employees of the military department
to strengthen individual knowledge, skills, and capacity to
prevent and respond to sexual assault.
(2) Scope of training and education.--The sexual assault
prevention and response training and education shall
encompass initial entry and accession programs, annual
refresher training, professional military education, peer
education, and specialized leadership training. Training
shall be tailored for specific leadership levels and local
area requirements.
(3) Consistent training.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that the sexual assault prevention and response
training provided to members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense civilian employees is consistent
throughout the military departments.
(b) Inclusion in Professional Military Education.--The
Secretary of Defense shall provide for the inclusion of a
sexual assault prevention and response training module at
each level of professional military education. The training
shall be tailored to the new responsibilities and leadership
requirements of members of the Armed Forces as they are
promoted.
(c) Inclusion in First Responder Training.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall direct that
managers of specialty skills associated with first responders
described in paragraph (2) integrate sexual assault response
training in initial and recurring training courses.
(2) Covered first responders.--First responders referred to
in paragraph (1) include firefighters, emergency medical
technicians, law enforcement officers, military criminal
investigators, healthcare personnel, judge advocates, and
chaplains.

SEC. 1620. USE OF SEXUAL ASSAULT FORENSIC MEDICAL EXAMINERS.

Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide for the use
of forensic medical examiners within the Department of
Defense who are specially trained regarding the collection
and preservation of evidence in cases involving sexual
assault.

SEC. 1621. SEXUAL ASSAULT ADVISORY BOARD.

(a) Establishment.--Not later than one year after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
establish a Sexual Assault Advisory Board, to be modeled
after other Defense advisory boards, such as the Defense
Business Board, the Defense Policy Board, or the Defense
Science Board.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the Sexual Assault Advisory
Board is--
(1) to advise the Secretary of Defense on the overall
Department of Defense sexual assault prevention and response
program and its comprehensive prevention strategy and on the
effectiveness of the sexual assault prevention and response
program of each Armed Force; and
(2) to make recommendations regarding changes and
improvements to the sexual assault prevention and response
program.
(c) Relation to Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
Office.--The Sexual Assault Advisory Board is not intended to
replace the organic capabilities that must reside in the
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office, but to ensure
that best practices from both the civilian and military
community perspective are incorporated into the design,
development, and performance of the sexual assault prevention
and response program
(d) Organization and Membership.--The Sexual Assault
Advisory Board shall be chaired by the Undersecretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness. The Sexual Assault
Advisory Board shall include experts on criminal law and
sexual assault prevention, response, and training who are not
members of the Armed Forces or civilian employees of the
Department of Defense and include representatives from other
Federal agencies.
(e) Frequency of Meetings.--The Sexual Assault Advisory
Board shall meet not less frequently than biannually.

SEC. 1622. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SEXUAL ASSAULT ADVISORY
COUNCIL.

(a) Reorganization.--Not later than one year after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
reorganize the Sexual

[[Page 9591]]

Assault Advisory Council and limit membership on the Sexual
Assault Advisory Council to Department of Defense personnel.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the Sexual Assault Advisory
Council is--
(1) to oversee the Department's overall sexual assault
prevention and response Program and its comprehensive
prevention strategy;
(2) to ensure accountability of the sexual assault
prevention and response program of each Armed Force;
(3) to make recommendations regarding changes and
improvements to the sexual assault prevention and response
program; and
(4) to identify cross-cutting issues and solutions in the
area of sexual assault.
(c) Organization and Membership.--The Sexual Assault
Advisory Council shall be chaired by the Deputy Secretary of
Defense or the designee of the Deputy Secretary. Members
shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) Principals or deputies from every office within the
Office of the Secretary of Defense with responsibilities
involving the sexual assault prevention and response program.
(2) The Assistant Secretary of each of the military
departments with responsibility for the sexual assault
prevention and response program.
(3) The Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, the Vice Chief of
Naval Operations, the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force,
and the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps.
(4) A general or flag officer from the staff of each
officer specified in paragraph (3) who has responsibility for
the sexual assault prevention and response program.
(5) A general officer from the National Guard Bureau.
(d) Frequency of Meetings.--The Sexual Assault Advisory
Council shall meet not less frequently than once each
calendar-year quarter.
(e) Service-level Sexual Assault Advisory Councils.--The
Secretary of a military department shall establish a sexual
assault advisory council, comparable to the Sexual Assault
Advisory Council required by subsection (a), for each Armed
Force under the jurisdiction of the Secretary.

SEC. 1623. SERVICE-LEVEL SEXUAL ASSAULT REVIEW BOARDS.

(a) Establishment.--Not later than one year after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of a military
department shall establish for each military installation or
operational command under the jurisdiction of the Secretary a
multi-disciplinary group to serve as a sexual assault review
board.
(b) Membership.--The chair of a sexual assault review board
shall be the senior commander, senior deputy commander, or
chief of staff. Other members should include the Sexual
Assault Response Coordinator, command legal representative or
staff judge advocate, command chaplain, and representation of
senior commanders or supervisors from the Military Criminal
Investigative Organizations, military law enforcement,
medical, alcohol and substance abuse office, and the safety
office.
(c) Responsibilities.--A sexual assault review board shall
be responsible for, at a minimum, addressing safety issues,
developing prevention strategies, analyzing response
processes, community impact and overall trends, and
identifying training issues. These functions should be
flexible to accommodate the resources available at different
installations and operational commands.
(d) Frequency of Meetings.--A sexual assault review board
shall meet not less frequently than once each calendar-year
quarter.

SEC. 1624. RENEWED EMPHASIS ON ACQUISITION OF CENTRALIZED
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SEXUAL ASSAULT DATABASE.

(a) New Deadline for Acquisition.--Notwithstanding
subsection (c) of section 563 of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 122 Stat. 4470), the Secretary of Defense shall
complete implementation of the centralized sexual assault
database required by subsection (a) of such section not later
than September 30, 2011.
(b) Acquisition Process.--To meet the deadline imposed by
subsection (a), acquisition best practices associated with
successfully acquiring and deploying information technology
systems related to the database, such as economically
justifying the proposed system solution and effectively
developing and managing requirements, shall be completed as
soon as possible.

Subtitle B--Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy and Annual Reporting
Requirement

SEC. 1631. COMPREHENSIVE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SEXUAL ASSAULT
PREVENTION STRATEGY.

(a) Strategy 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
comprehensive strategy to reduce the number of sexual
assaults involving members of the Armed Forces, whether
members of the Armed Forces are the victim, alleged
assailant, or both. All activities and programs of a specific
military department or Armed Force related to preventing
sexual assault must align with and support the overall
comprehensive strategy.
(b) Coordination With Other Requirements.--In developing
the comprehensive strategy under subsection (a), the
Secretary of Defense shall incorporate and build upon--
(1) the new requirements imposed by this subtitle;
(2) the policies and procedure developed under section 577
of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375; 10 U.S.C. 113
note); and
(3) the prevention and response plan developed under
section 567(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2313).
(c) Implementation of Strategy.--Not later than six months
after the submission of the comprehensive strategy prepared
under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall complete
implementation of the comprehensive strategy throughout the
Department of Defense.
(d) Sexual Assault Prevention Evaluation Plan.--
(1) Plan required.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop
and implement an evaluation plan for assessing the
effectiveness of the comprehensive strategy prepared under
subsection (a) its intended outcomes at the Department of
Defense and individual Armed Force levels.
(2) Commander role.--As a component of the evaluation plan,
the commander of each military installation and the commander
of each unified or specified combatant command shall assess
the adequacy of measures undertaken at facilities under the
authority of the commander to ensure the safest and most
secure living and working environments with regard to
preventing sexual assault.
(3) Submission of results.--The results of assessments
conducted under the evaluation plan shall be included in the
annual report required by section 1632, beginning with the
report required to be submitted in calendar year 2012.

SEC. 1632. ANNUAL REPORT ON SEXUAL ASSAULTS INVOLVING MEMBERS
OF THE ARMED FORCES AND SEXUAL ASSAULT
PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM.

(a) Annual Report on Sexual Assaults.--Not later than
January 15 of each year, the Secretary of each military
department shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a report
on the sexual assaults involving members of the Armed Forces
under the jurisdiction of that Secretary during the preceding
year. In the case of the Secretary of the Navy, separate
reports shall be prepared for the Navy and for the Marine
Corps.
(b) Contents.--The report of a Secretary of a military
department on an Armed Force under subsection (a) shall
contain the following:
(1) The number of sexual assaults committed against members
of the Armed Force that were reported to military officials
during the year covered by the report, and the number of the
cases so reported that were founded.
(2) The number of sexual assaults committed by members of
the Armed Force that were reported to military officials
during the year covered by the report, and the number of the
cases so reported that were founded. The information required
by this paragraph shall not be combined with the information
required by paragraph (1).
(3) A synopsis of each such founded case, organized by
offense, and, for each such case, the disciplinary action
taken in the case, including the type of disciplinary or
administrative sanction imposed, if any.
(4) The policies, procedures, and processes implemented by
the Secretary concerned during the year covered by the report
in response to incidents of sexual assault involving members
of the Armed Force concerned.
(5) The number of founded sexual assault cases in which the
victim is a deployed member of the Armed Forces and the
assailant is a foreign national, and the policies,
procedures, and processes implemented by the Secretary
concerned to monitor the investigative process and
disposition of such cases and to eliminate any gaps in
investigating and adjudicating such cases.
(6) A description of the implementation during the year
covered by the report of the tracking system implemented
pursuant to section 596(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163;
10 U.S.C. 113 note), including information collected on cases
during that year in which care to a victim of rape or sexual
assault was hindered by the lack of availability of a rape
kit or other needed supplies or by the lack of timely access
to appropriate laboratory testing resources.
(7) A description of the implementation during the year
covered by the report of the accessibility plan implemented
pursuant to section 596(b) of such Act, including a
description of the steps taken during that year to provide
that trained personnel, appropriate supplies, and
transportation resources are accessible to deployed units in
order to provide an appropriate and timely response in any
case of reported sexual assault in a deployed unit.
(8) A description of the required supply inventory,
location, accessibility, and availability of supplies,
trained personnel, and transportation resources needed, and
in fact in place, in order to be able to provide an
appropriate and timely response in any case of reported
sexual assault in a deployed unit.
(9) A plan for the actions that are to be taken in the year
following the year covered by such report on reducing the
number of sexual assaults involving members of the Armed
Forces concerned and improving the response to sexual
assaults involving members of the Armed Forces concerned.
(10) The results of the most recent biennial gender-
relations survey of an adequate sample of members to evaluate
and improve the sexual assault prevention and response
program.
(c) Verification.--The Office of the Judge Advocate General
of an Armed Force (or, in the case of the Marine Corps, the
Office of the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the
Marine Corps) shall verify the accuracy of the information
required by paragraphs (1), (2), (3),

[[Page 9592]]

and (5) of subsection (b), including courts-martial data.
(d) Consistent Definition of Founded.--Not later than one
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall establish a consistent definition
of ``founded'' for purposes of paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and
(5) of subsection (b) and require that military criminal
investigative organizations only provide synopses for those
cases for the preparation of reports under this section.
(e) Assessment Component.--Each report under subsection (a)
shall include an assessment by the Secretary concerned of the
implementation during the preceding fiscal year of the sexual
assault prevention and response program in order to determine
the effectiveness of the program during such fiscal year in
providing an appropriate response to sexual assaults
involving members of the Armed Forces.
(f) Submission to Congress.--The Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
House of Representatives each report prepared under
subsection (a), together with the comments of the Secretary
of Defense on the report. The Secretary of Defense shall
submit each such report not later than March 15 of the year
following the year covered by the report.
(g) Repeal of Superseded Reporting Requirement.--Section
577 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375; 10 U.S.C. 113
note) is amended by striking subsection (f).

Subtitle C--Amendments to Title 10

SEC. 1641. SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE OFFICE.

(a) Appointment of Director; Duties.--Chapter 4 of title
10, United States Code, as amended by section 902, is amended
by inserting after section 139 the following new section:

``Sec. 139a. Director of Sexual Assault Prevention and
Response Office

``(a) Appointment.--There is a Director of the Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response Office who shall be a general
or flag officer or an employee of the Department of Defense
in a comparable Senior Executive Service position.
``(b) Duties.--The Director of the Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response Office serves as the single point of
authority, accountability, and oversight for the Department
of Defense sexual assault prevention and response program and
provides oversight to ensure that the military departments
comply with the program.
``(c) Role of Inspectors General.--The Inspector General of
the Department of Defense, the Inspector General of the Army,
the Naval Inspector General, and the Inspector General of the
Air Force shall include sexual assault prevention and
response programs within the scope of their assessments. The
Inspector General teams shall include at least one member
with expertise and knowledge of sexual assault prevention and
response policies related to a specific armed force.
``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `armed forces' means the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marine Corps.
``(2) The term `sexual assault prevention and response
program' refers to Department of Defense policies and
programs, including policies and programs of a specific
military department or the that are intended to reduce the
number of sexual assaults involving members of the armed
forces and improve the response of the department to reports
of sexual assaults involving members of the armed forces,
whether members of the armed forces are the victim, alleged
assailant, or both.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 139 the following new item:

``139a. Director of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office.''.

SEC. 1642. SEXUAL ASSAULT RESPONSE COORDINATORS AND SEXUAL
ASSAULT VICTIM ADVOCATES.

(a) Assignment and Training.--Chapter 80 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:

``Sec. 1568. Sexual assault prevention and response: Sexual
Assault Response Coordinators and Victim Advocates

``(a) Assignment of Coordinators.--(1) At least one full-
time Sexual Assault Response Coordinator shall be assigned to
each brigade or equivalent or higher unit level of the armed
forces. The Secretary of the military department concerned
may assign additional Sexual Assault Response Coordinators as
necessary based on the demographics or needs of the unit. The
additional Sexual Assault Response Coordinator may serve on a
full-time or part-time basis at the discretion of the
Secretary.
``(2) Effective October 1, 2013, only members of the armed
forces and civilian employees of the Department of Defense
may be assigned to duty as a Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator. After that date, contractor employees may serve
as a Sexual Assault Response Coordinator only on a temporary
basis, as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
``(b) Assignment of Victim Advocates.--(1) At least one
full-time Sexual Assault Victim Advocate shall be assigned to
each brigade or equivalent or higher unit level of the armed
forces. The Secretary of the military department concerned
may assign additional Victim Advocates as necessary based on
the demographics or needs of the unit. The additional Victim
Advocates may serve on a full-time or part-time basis at the
discretion of the Secretary.
``(2) Only members of the armed forces and civilian
employees of the Department of Defense may be assigned to
duty as a Victim Advocate. Contractor employees may serve as
a Victim Advocate only on a temporary basis, as determined by
the Secretary of Defense.
``(c) Deployable Coordinators and Victim Advocates.--(1)
The Secretary of a military department shall assign members
of the armed forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary
to serve as a deployable Sexual Assault Response Coordinator
or Sexual Assault Victim Advocate when a Sexual Assault
Response Coordinator assigned to a unit under subsection (a)
or a Sexual Assault Victim Advocate assigned to a unit under
subsection (b) is not deployed with the unit.
``(2) A deployable Sexual Assault Response Coordinator or
deployable Sexual Assault Victim Advocate may serve on a
full-time or part-time basis at the discretion of the
Secretary.
``(d) Training and Certification.--(1) As part of the
sexual assault prevention and response program, the Secretary
of Defense shall establish a professional and uniform
training and certification program for Sexual Assault
Response Coordinators assigned under subsection (a) and
Sexual Assault Victim Advocates assigned under subsection
(b). The program shall be structured and administered in a
manner similar to the professional training available for
Equal Opportunity Advisors through the Defense Equal
Opportunity Management Institute.
``(2) Effective beginning one year after the date of the
enactment of this section, before a member or civilian
employee may be assigned to duty as a Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator under subsection (a), the member or employee must
have completed the training program required by paragraph (1)
and obtained the certification.
``(3) A member or civilian employee assigned to duty as a
Victim Advocate under subsection (b) may obtain certification
under the training program required by paragraph (1). At a
minimum, the Sexual Assault Response Coordinator to whom a
Victim Advocate reports shall train the Victim Advocate using
the same training materials used to train the Sexual Assault
Response Coordinator under the program.
``(4) Deployable Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and
deployable Sexual Assault Victim Advocates shall receive
training from a designated Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator or Sexual Assault Victim Advocate on their
specific roles and responsibilities before assuming such
responsibilities.
``(e) Access to Commanders and Units.--(1) The Secretaries
of the military departments shall ensure that a Sexual
Assault Response Coordinator, including a deployable Sexual
Assault Response Coordinator assigned under subsection (c),
has direct access to senior commanders and any other
commander within the unit or geographical area of
responsibility of the Sexual Assault Response Coordinator.
``(2) A Sexual Assault Response Coordinator may work with
supporting medical staff, mental health staff, and chaplains
to offer unit counseling options for commanders of units in
which a sexual assault involving a member of the armed forces
occurs.
``(f) Sexual Assault Response Teams Responsible for
Overseeing Unrestricted Reported Cases.--
``(1) Response team protocol.--Not later than one year
after the date of the enactment of this section, the
Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a protocol
for the establishment and use of sexual assault response
teams throughout the Department of Defense.
``(2) Emergency response.--A sexual assault response team
shall be led by a Sexual Assault Response Coordinator and
convene as soon as practicable after a reported sexual
assault involving a member of the armed forces.
``(3) Other elements.--At a minimum, the protocol for
sexual assault response teams shall also provide for--
``(A) in addition to meetings required by paragraph (2),
monthly meetings to review individual cases, facilitate
timely victim updates, and ensure system coordination,
accountability (to include tracking case adjudication), and
victim access to quality services; and
``(B) depending on the resources available at different
locations, membership drawn from the relevant military
criminal investigator, medical personnel, chaplain, trial
counsel, and Sexual Assault Victim Advocate.
``(4) Command involvement.--Within the first three months
of assuming a command, the commander shall attend a meeting
of their command's sexual assault response team occurring
after the commander's assumption of command. The Secretary of
Defense shall provide for the inclusion of a sexual assault
prevention and response training module as part of commanders
pre-command courses.
``(g) Prohibition on Use of Inspector General Personnel.--
Personnel of the Inspector General of the Department of
Defense, the Inspector General of the Army, the Naval
Inspector General, and the Inspector General of the Air Force
may not perform Sexual Assault Response Coordinator duties.
``(h) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `armed forces' means the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marine Corps.
``(2) The term `sexual assault prevention and response
program' refers to Department of Defense policies and
programs, including policies and programs of a specific
military department or the that are intended to reduce the
number of sexual assaults involving members of the armed
forces and improve the response of the department to reports
of sexual assaults involving members of the armed forces,
whether members

[[Page 9593]]

of the armed forces are the victim, alleged assailant, or
both.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``1568. Sexual assault prevention and response: Sexual Assault Response
Coordinators and Victim Advocates.''.

SEC. 1643. SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIMS ACCESS TO LEGAL COUNSEL AND
VICTIM ADVOCATE SERVICES.

(a) Access.--Chapter 53 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after section 1044d the following new
section:

``Sec. 1044e. Access to legal assistance and Victim Advocate
services for victims of sexual assault

``(a) Availability of Legal Assistance and Victim Advocate
Services.--
``(1) Members.--A member of the armed forces or a dependent
of a member of the armed forces who is the victim of a sexual
assault is entitled to--
``(A) legal assistance provided by a military legal
assistance counsel certified as competent to provide such
duties pursuant to section 827(b) of this title (article
27(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice); and
``(B) assistance provided by a qualified Sexual Assault
Victim Advocate.
``(2) Dependents.--To the extent practicable, the Secretary
of a military department shall make the assistance described
in paragraph (1) available to dependent of a member of the
armed forces who is the victim of a sexual assault and
resides on or in the vicinity of a military installation. The
Secretary concerned shall define the term `vicinity' for
purposes of this paragraph.
``(3) Notice of availability of assistance; opt out.--The
member or dependent shall be informed of the availability of
assistance under this subsection as soon as the member or
dependent seeks assistance from a Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator or any other responsible member of the armed
forces or Department of Defense civilian employee. The victim
shall also be informed that the legal assistance and services
of a Sexual Assault Response Coordinator and Sexual Assault
Victim Advocate are optional and these services may be
declined, in whole or in part, at any time.
``(4) Nature of reporting immaterial.--In the case of a
member of the armed forces, access to legal assistance and
Victim Advocate services is available regardless of whether
the member elects unrestricted or restricted (confidential)
reporting of the sexual assault.
``(5) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to establish an attorney-client
relationship.
``(b) Restricted Reporting Option.--
``(1) Availability of restricted reporting.--A member of
the armed forces who is the victim of a sexual assault may
confidentially disclose the details of the assault to an
individual specified in paragraph (2) and receive medical
treatment, legal assistance, or counseling, without
triggering an official investigation of the allegations.
``(2) Persons covered by restricted reporting.--Individuals
covered by paragraph (1) are the following:
``(A) Military legal assistance counsel.
``(B) Sexual Assault Response Coordinator.
``(C) Sexual Assault Victim Advocate.
``(D) Healthcare personnel.
``(E) Chaplain.
``(3) Importance of contacting sexual assault response
coordinator.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that all
sexual assault prevention and response training emphasizes
the importance of immediately contacting a Sexual Assault
Response Coordinator after a sexual assault to ensure that
the victim preserves the restricted reporting option and
receives guidance on available services and victim care. A
member's responsibility to report a sexual assault is
satisfied by informing the Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator, in addition to or in lieu of informing the
member's commander or military law enforcement.
``(c) Clarification of Victim Option to Participate in
Investigation.--The Secretary of Defense shall implement a
Sexual Assault Response Coordinator-led process by which a
member or dependent referred to in subsection (a) may decline
to participate in the investigation of the sexual assault.
The member or dependent, after consultation with a Sexual
Assault Victim Advocate or Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator, or both, may complete a form indicating a
preference not to participate further in the investigative
process.
``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `sexual assault' includes any of the
offenses covered by section 920 of this title (article 120).
``(2) The term `military legal assistance counsel' means--
``(A) a judge advocate (as defined in section 801(13) of
this title (article 1(13) of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice)); or
``(B) a civilian attorney serving as a legal assistance
officer under the provisions of section 1044 of this
title.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1044d the following new item:

``1044e. Access to legal assistance and Victim Advocate services for
victims of sexual assault.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment Regarding Provision of Legal
Counsel.--Section 1044(d)(3)(B) of such title is amended by
striking ``sections 1044a, 1044b, 1044c, and 1044d'' and
inserting ``sections 1044a through 1044e''.

SEC. 1644. NOTIFICATION OF COMMAND OF OUTCOME OF COURT-
MARTIAL INVOLVING CHARGES OF SEXUAL ASSAULT.

Section 853 of title 10, United States Code (article 53 of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(a) Announcement to Parties.--'' before
``A court-martial''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(b) Dissemination of Results to Command in Certain
Cases.--In the case of an alleged sexual assault or other
offense covered by section 920 of this title (article 120),
the trial counsel shall notify the servicing staff judge
advocate at the military installation, who shall notify the
convening authority and commanders, as appropriate. In
consultation with the servicing staff judge advocate, the
commanding officer shall notify members of the command of the
outcome of the case.''.

SEC. 1645. COPY OF RECORD OF COURT-MARTIAL TO VICTIM OF
SEXUAL ASSAULT INVOLVING A MEMBER OF THE ARMED
FORCES.

Section 854 of title 10, United States Code (article 54 of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) In the case of a general or special court-martial
involving a sexual assault or other offense covered by
section 920 of this title (article 120), a copy of the
prepared record of the proceedings of the court-martial shall
be given to the victim of the offence if the victim testified
during the proceedings. The record of the proceedings shall
be provided without charge and as soon as the record is
authenticated. The victim shall be notified of the
opportunity to receive the record of the proceedings.''.

SEC. 1646. MEDICAL CARE FOR VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT.

(a) Medical Care and Records.--Chapter 55 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
1074l the following new section:

``Sec. 1074m. Medical care for members who are victims of
sexual assault

``(a) Medical Care.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall
establish protocols for providing medical care to a member of
the armed forces who is a victim of a sexual assault,
including protocols with respect to the appropriate
screening, prevention, and mitigation of diseases.
``(2) In establishing the protocols under paragraph (1),
the Secretary shall take into consideration the sex of the
member of the armed forces.
``(b) Medical Records.--The Secretary shall ensure that--
``(1) an accurate and complete medical record is made for
each member of the armed forces who is a victim of a sexual
assault with respect to the physical and mental condition of
the member resulting from the assault; and
``(2) such record complies with the requirement for
confidentiality in making a restricted report under section
1044e(b) of this title.
``(c) Restricted Reporting.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed as affecting the right of a member of the armed
forces to make a restricted report under section 1044e(b) of
this title.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1074l the following new item:

``1074m. Medical care for members who are victims of sexual assault.''.

SEC. 1647. PRIVILEGE AGAINST DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN
COMMUNICATIONS WITH SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIM
ADVOCATES.

(a) Privilege Established.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 53 of title 10, United States Code
is amended by inserting after section 1034a the following new
section:

``Sec. 1034b. Privilege against disclosure of certain
communications with Sexual Assault Victim Advocates

``A confidential communication between the victim of a
sexual assault or other offense covered by section 920 of
this title (article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice) and a Sexual Assault Victim Advocate assigned under
section 1568 of this title, including a deployable Sexual
Assault Victim Advocate, shall be treated in the same manner
as a confidential communication between a patient and a
psychiatrist for purposes of any privilege which may attach
to such a communication.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1034a the following new item:

``1034b. Privilege against disclosure of certain communications with
Sexual Assault Victim Advocates.''.
(b) Applicability.--Section 1034b of title 10, United
States Code, as added by subsection (a), applies to
communications described in such section whether made before,
on, or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Subtitle D--Other Matters

SEC. 1661. RECRUITER SELECTION AND OVERSIGHT.

(a) Screening, Training, and Oversight of Recruiters.--The
Secretaries of the military departments shall ensure
effective recruiter selection and oversight with regard to
sexual assault prevention and response by ensuring that--
(1) recruiters are screened and trained under the sexual
assault prevention and response program;

[[Page 9594]]

(2) sexual assault prevention and response program
information is disseminated to recruiters and potential
recruits for the Armed Forces; and
(3) oversight is in place to preclude the potential for
sexual misconduct by recruiters.
(b) Improved Awareness of Recruits.--Commanders of
recruiting organizations and Military Entrance Processing
Stations shall ensure that sexual assault prevention and
response awareness campaign materials are available and
posted in locations visible to potential and actual recruits
for the Armed Forces.

SEC. 1662. AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES UNDER SEXUAL ASSAULT
PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM FOR DEPENDENTS
OF MEMBERS, MILITARY RETIREES, DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES, AND DEFENSE
CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES.

(a) Notification of Extent of Current Services.--Not later
than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall revise materials made available
under the sexual assault prevention and response program to
include information on the extent to which dependents of
members of the Armed Forces, retired members, Department of
Defense civilian employees, and employees of defense
contractors are eligible for sexual assault prevention and
response services under the sexual assault prevention and
response program.
(b) 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
on the feasibility of extending all sexual assault prevention
and response services available for a member of the Armed
Forces who is the victim of a sexual assault to persons
referred to in subsection (a).

SEC. 1663. APPLICATION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND
RESPONSE PROGRAM IN TRAINING ENVIRONMENTS.

The Secretaries of the military departments shall ensure
that a member of the Armed Forces who is a victim of a sexual
assault in a training environment is provided, to the maximum
extent possible, with confidential access to victim support
services and afforded time for recovery. The member should
not be required to repeat training unless the time needed for
support services and recovery significantly interferes with
the progress of the member's training.

SEC. 1664. APPLICATION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND
RESPONSE PROGRAM IN REMOTE ENVIRONMENTS AND
JOINT BASING SITUATIONS.

(a) Remote and Deployed Environments.--The Secretary of
Defense and the combatant commanders shall ensure that the
sexual assault prevention and response program continues to
operate even in remote environments in which members of the
Armed Forces are deployed, including coalition operations.
(b) Joint Basing.--The Secretary of Defense shall monitor
the implementation of the sexual assault prevention and
response program and military justice and jurisdiction issues
at joint basing locations. Elements of the Armed Forces
sharing a joint base location shall closely collaborate on
sexual assault prevention and response issues to ensure
consistency in approach and messages at the joint base
location.

DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011''.

SEC. 2002. EXPIRATION OF AUTHORIZATIONS AND AMOUNTS REQUIRED
TO BE SPECIFIED BY LAW.

(a) Expiration of Authorizations After Three Years.--Except
as provided in subsection (b), all authorizations contained
in titles XXI through XXVII and title XXIX for military
construction projects, land acquisition, family housing
projects and facilities, and contributions to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (and
authorizations of appropriations therefor) shall expire on
the later of--
(1) October 1, 2013; or
(2) the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds
for military construction for fiscal year 2014.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to
authorizations for military construction projects, land
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, and
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program (and authorizations of
appropriations therefor), for which appropriated funds have
been obligated before the later of--
(1) October 1, 2013; or
(2) the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds
for fiscal year 2014 for military construction projects, land
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, and
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program.

SEC. 2003. EFFECTIVE DATE.

Titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, XXVI, XXVII, and XXIX
shall take effect on the later of--
(1) October 1, 2010; or
(2) the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 2004. GENERAL REDUCTION ACROSS DIVISION.

(a) Reduction.--Of the amounts provided in the
authorizations of appropriations in this division, the
overall authorization of appropriations in this division is
reduced by $441,096,000.
(b) Report on Application.--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 describing how the reduction required by subsection
(a) is applied.

TITLE XXI--ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

SEC. 2101. AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Army
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the installations or locations inside the United
States, and subject to the purpose, total amount authorized,
and authorization of appropriations specified for each
project, set forth in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army: Military Construction Inside the United States (Amounts Are
Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK Fort Urban Assault 3,350 3,350
Wainwright... Course.........
AK Fort Multipurpose 12,200 12,200
Richardson... Machine Gun
Range..........
AK Fort Greely... Fire Station.... 26,000 26,000
AK Fort Aviation Task 27,000 27,000
Wainwright... Force Complex,
Ph 2B (Company
Ops Facility)..
AK Fort Simulations 34,000 34,000
Richardson... Center.........
AK Fort Brigade Complex, 67,038 67,038
Richardson... Ph 1...........
AK Fort Aviation Task 142,650 142,650
Wainwright... Force Complex,
Ph 2A (Hangar).
AL Fort Rucker... Training Aids 4,650 4,650
Center.........
AL Fort Rucker... Aviation 29,000 29,000
Component
Maintenance
Shop...........
AL Fort Rucker... Aviation 36,000 36,000
Maintenance
Facility.......
CA Presidio Satellite 38,000 38,000
Monterey..... Communications
Facility.......
CA Presidio General 39,000 39,000
Monterey..... Instruction
Building.......
CA Presidio Advanced 63,000 63,000
Monterey..... Individual
Training
Barracks.......
CO Fort Carson... Automated Sniper 3,650 3,650
Field Fire
Range..........
CO Fort Carson... Battalion 6,700 6,700
Headquarters...
CO Fort Carson... Simulations 40,000 40,000
Center.........
CO Fort Carson... Brigade Complex. 56,000 56,000
FL Eglin AB...... Chapel.......... 6,900 6,900
FL US Army Commissary...... 19,000 19,000
Garrison
Miami........
FL Miami-Dade Command & 41,000 41,000
County....... Control
Facility.......
GA Fort Stewart.. Modified Record 3,750 3,750
Fire Range.....
GA Fort Gordon... Training Aids 4,150 4,150
Center.........
GA Fort Stewart.. Automated 6,200 6,200
Infantry
Platoon Battle
Course.........
GA Fort Stewart.. Training Aids 7,000 7,000
Center.........
GA Fort Stewart.. General 8,200 8,200
Instruction
Building.......
GA Fort Stewart.. Automated 9,100 9,100
Multipurpose
Machine Gun
Range..........
GA Fort Benning.. Land Acquisition 12,200 12,200
GA Fort Benning.. Training 14,600 14,600
Battalion
Complex, Ph 2..
GA Fort Benning.. Training 14,600 14,600
Battalion
Complex, Ph 2..

[[Page 9595]]

GA Fort Stewart.. Battalion 18,000 18,000
Complex........
GA Fort Stewart.. Simulations 26,000 26,000
Center.........
GA Fort Benning.. Museum 32,000 32,000
Operations
Support
Building.......
GA Fort Stewart.. Aviation Unit 47,000 47,000
Operations
Complex........
GA Fort Benning.. Trainee 51,000 51,000
Barracks, Ph 2.
GA Fort Benning.. Vehicle 53,000 53,000
Maintenance
Shop...........
HI Fort Shafter.. Flood Mitigation 23,000 23,000
HI Schofield Training Aids 24,000 24,000
Barracks..... Center.........
HI Tripler Army Barracks........ 28,000 28,000
Medical
Center.......
HI Fort Shafter.. Command & 58,000 58,000
Control
Facility, Ph 1.
HI Schofield Barracks........ 90,000 90,000
Barracks.....
HI Schofield Barracks........ 98,000 98,000
Barracks.....
KS Fort Riley.... Automated 4,100 4,100
Infantry Squad
Battle Course..
KS Fort Vehicle 7,100 7,100
Leavenworth.. Maintenance
Shop...........
KS Fort Riley.... Known Distance 7,200 7,200
Range..........
KS Fort Riley.... Automated 14,800 14,800
Qualification/
Training Range.
KS Fort Riley.... Battalion 31,000 31,000
Complex, Ph 1..
KY Fort Campbell. Automated Sniper 1,500 1,500
Field Fire
Range..........
KY Fort Campbell. Urban Assault 3,300 3,300
Course.........
KY Fort Campbell. Rappelling 5,600 5,600
Training Area..
KY Fort Knox..... Access Corridor 6,000 6,000
Improvements...
KY Fort Knox..... Military 12,800 12,800
Operation Urban
Terrain
Collective
Training
Facility.......
KY Fort Campbell. Vehicle 15,500 15,500
Maintenance
Shop...........
KY Fort Campbell. Company 25,000 25,000
Operations
Facilities.....
KY Fort Campbell. Unit Operations 26,000 26,000
Facilities.....
KY Fort Campbell. Brigade Complex. 67,000 67,000
LA Fort Polk..... Heavy Sniper 4,250 4,250
Range..........
LA Fort Polk..... Land Acquisition 6,000 6,000
LA Fort Polk..... Land Acquisition 24,000 24,000
LA Fort Polk..... Barracks........ 29,000 29,000
MD Fort Meade.... Indoor Firing 7,600 7,600
Range..........
MD Aberdeen Auto Tech 14,600 14,600
Proving Evaluate
Ground....... Facility, Ph 2.
MD Fort Meade.... Wideband SATCOM 25,000 25,000
Operations
Center.........
MO Fort Leonard General 7,000 7,000
Wood......... Instruction
Building.......
MO Fort Leonard Brigade 12,200 12,200
Wood......... Headquarters...
MO Fort Leonard Information 15,500 15,500
Wood......... Systems
Facility.......
MO Fort Leonard Training 19,000 19,000
Wood......... Barracks.......
MO Fort Leonard Barracks........ 29,000 29,000
Wood.........
MO Fort Leonard Transient 29,000 29,000
Wood......... Advanced
Trainee
Barracks, Ph 2.
NC Fort Bragg.... Vehicle 7,500 7,500
Maintenance
Shop...........
NC Fort Bragg.... Dining Facility. 11,200 11,200
NC Fort Bragg.... Company 12,600 12,600
Operations
Facilities.....
NC Fort Bragg.... Staging Area 14,600 14,600
Complex........
NC Fort Bragg.... Murchison Road 17,000 17,000
Right of Way
Acquisition....
NC Fort Bragg.... Student Barracks 18,000 18,000
NC Fort Bragg.... Brigade Complex. 25,000 25,000
NC Fort Bragg.... Vehicle 28,000 28,000
Maintenance
Shop...........
NC Fort Bragg.... Battalion 33,000 33,000
Complex........
NC Fort Bragg.... Brigade Complex. 41,000 41,000
NC Fort Bragg.... Brigade Complex. 50,000 50,000
NC Fort Bragg.... Command and 53,000 53,000
Control
Facility.......
NM White Sands... Barracks........ 29,000 29,000
NY U.S. Military Urban Assault 1,700 1,700
Academy...... Course.........
NY Fort Drum..... Alert Holding 6,700 6,700
Area Facility..
NY Fort Drum..... Infantry Squad 8,200 8,200
Battle Course..
NY Fort Drum..... Aircraft Fuel 14,600 14,600
Storage Complex
NY Fort Drum..... Aircraft 16,500 16,500
Maintenance
Hangar.........
NY Fort Drum..... Training Aids 18,500 18,500
Center.........
NY Fort Drum..... Brigade Complex, 55,000 55,000
Ph 1...........
NY Fort Drum..... Transient 55,000 55,0006333
Training
Barracks.......
NY Fort Drum..... Battalion 61,000 61,000
Complex........
NY U.S. Military Science 130,624 130,624
Academy...... Facility, Ph 2.
OK McAlester..... Igloo Storage, 3,000 3,000
Depot Level....
OK Fort Sill..... Museum 12,800 12,800
Operations
Support
Building.......
OK Fort Sill..... General Purpose 13,800 13,800
Storage
Building.......
SC Fort Jackson.. Training Aids 17,000 17,000
Center.........
SC Fort Jackson.. Trainee Barracks 28,000 28,000
SC Fort Jackson.. Trainee Barracks 46,000 46,000
Complex, Ph 1..
TX Fort Bliss.... Light Demolition 2,100 2,100
Range..........
TX Fort Hood..... Live Fire 2,100 2,100
Exercise
Shoothouse.....
TX Fort Hood..... Urban Assault 2,450 2,450
Course.........
TX Fort Bliss.... Urban Assault 2,800 2,800
Course.........
TX Fort Bliss.... Squad Defense 3,000 3,000
Range..........
TX Fort Bliss.... Live Fire 3,150 3,150
Exercise
Shoothouse.....
TX Fort Hood..... Convoy Live Fire 3,200 3,200
TX Fort Bliss.... Heavy Sniper 3,500 3,500
Range..........
TX Fort Hood..... Company 4,300 4,300
Operations
Facilities.....
TX Fort Sam Training Aids 6,200 6,200
Houston...... Center.........

[[Page 9596]]

TX Fort Bliss.... Automated 6,700 6,700
Multipurpose
Machine Gun
Range..........
TX Fort Bliss.... Vehicle Bridge 8,700 8,700
Overpass.......
TX Corpus Christi Rotor Blade 13,400 13,400
NAS.......... Processing
Facility, Ph 2.
TX Fort Bliss.... Indoor Swimming 15,500 15,500
Pool...........
TX Fort Bliss.... Scout/ 15,500 15,500
Reconnaissance
Crew Engagement
Gunnery Complex
TX Fort Sam Simulations 16,000 16,000
Houston...... Center.........
TX Fort Bliss.... Theater High 17,500 17,500
Altitude Area
Defense Battery
Complex........
TX Fort Bliss.... Company 18,500 18,500
Operations
Facilities.....
TX Fort Bliss.... Digital 22,000 22,000
Multipurpose
Training Range.
TX Fort Bliss.... Transient 31,000 31,000
Training
Complex........
TX Fort Hood..... Brigade Complex. 38,000 38,000
TX Fort Hood..... Battalion 40,000 40,000
Complex........
TX Fort Hood..... Unmanned Aerial 55,000 55,000
System Hangar..
VA Fort A.P. Hill Known Distance 3,800 3,800
Range..........
VA Fort A.P. Hill Light Demolition 4,100 4,100
Range..........
VA Fort Lee...... Company 4,900 4,900
Operations
Facility.......
VA Fort Lee...... Training Aids 5,800 5,800
Center.........
VA Fort A.P. Hill Indoor Firing 6,200 6,200
Range..........
VA Fort Lee...... Automated 7,700 7,700
Qualification
Training Range.
VA Fort A.P. Hill 1200 Meter Range 14,500 14,500
VA Fort Eustis... Warrior in 18,000 18,000
Transition
Complex........
VA Fort Lee...... Museum 30,000 30,000
Operations
Support
Building.......
VA Fort A.P. Hill Military 65,000 65,000
Operation Urban
Terrain
Collective
Training
Facility.......
WA Yakima........ Sniper Field 3,750 3,750
Fire Range.....
WA Fort Lewis.... Rappelling 5,300 5,300
Training Area..
WA Fort Lewis.... Regional 16,500 16,500
Logistic
Support Complex
Warehouse......
WA Fort Lewis.... Barracks Complex 40,000 40,000
WA Fort Lewis.... Barracks........ 47,000 47,000
WA Fort Lewis.... Regional 63,000 63,000
Logistic
Support Complex
ZU Various....... Training 190,000 190,000
Barracks.......
.............. ................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of the Army
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the installations or locations outside the
United States, and subject to the purpose, total amount
authorized, and authorization of appropriations specified for
each project, set forth in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army: Military Construction Outside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
Overseas Location Installation or Location Purpose of Project Project of
Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AF Bagram AB.................. Joint Defense Operations 2,800 2,800
Center.....................
AF Bagram AB.................. Entry Control Point......... 7,500 7,500
AF Bagram AB.................. Eastside Electrical 10,400 10,400
Distribution...............
AF Bagram AB.................. Consolidated Community 14,800 14,800
Support Area...............
AF Bagram AB.................. Barracks.................... 18,000 18,000
AF Bagram AB.................. Army Aviation HQ Facilities. 19,000 19,000
AF Bagram AB.................. Eastside Utilities 29,000 29,000
Infrastructure.............
GY Wiesbaden AB............... Command and Battle Center, 0 59,500
Incr 2.....................
GY Wiesbaden AB............... Construct New Access Control 5,100 5,100
Point......................
GY Sembach AB................. Confinement Facility........ 9,100 9,100
GY Ansbach.................... Physical Fitness Center..... 13,800 13,800
GY Grafenwoehr................ Barracks.................... 17,500 17,500
GY Ansbach.................... Vehicle Maintenance Shop.... 18,000 18,000
GY Grafenwoehr................ Barracks.................... 19,000 19,000
GY Grafenwoehr................ Barracks.................... 19,000 19,000
GY Grafenwoehr................ Barracks.................... 20,000 20,000
GY Wiesbaden AB............... Information Processing 30,400 30,400
Center.....................
GY Rhine Ordnance Barracks.... Barracks Complex............ 35,000 35,000
GY Wiesbaden AB............... Sensitive Compartmented 91,000 46,000
Information Facility Inc 1.
HO Soto Cano AB............... Barracks.................... 20,400 20,400
IT Vicenza.................... Brigade Complex - Barracks/ 0 13,000
Community, Incr 4..........
IT Vicenza.................... Brigade Complex - Operations 0 13,000
Support Facility, Incr 4...
KR Camp Walker................ Electrical System Upgrade & 19,500 19,500
Natural Gas System.........
........................... ............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Inside the united states.--For military construction
projects inside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $3,456,462,000.
(2) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(b), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $459,800,000.
(3) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total amount of
$26,450,000.
(4) Host nation support and certain services and design.--
For host nation support and architectural and engineering
services and construction design under section 2807 of title
10, United States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30,
2010, in the total amount of $255,462,000.

[[Page 9597]]

SEC. 2102. FAMILY HOUSING.

(a) Construction and Acquisition.--The Secretary of the
Army may construct or acquire family housing units (including
land acquisition and supporting facilities) at the
installations or locations, and subject to the purpose and
number of units, total amount authorized, and authorization
of appropriations specified for each project, set forth in
the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army: Family Housing (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose of Project and Project Authorization of
Location Installation or Location Number of Units Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK Fort Wainwright........... Family Housing Replacement 21,000 21,000
Constrution (110 units)..
GY Baumholder................ Family Housing Replacement 34,329 34,329
Construction (64 units)..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Planning and Design.--The Secretary of the Army may
carry out architectural and engineering services and
construction design activities with respect to the
construction or improvement of family housing units in an
amount not to exceed $2,040,000.
(c) Improvements to Military Family Housing Units.--Subject
to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, the
Secretary of the Army may improve existing military family
housing units in an amount not to exceed $35,000,000.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning
after September 30, 2010--
(1) for construction and acquisition, planning and design,
and improvement of military family housing and facilities
authorized by subsections (a), (b), and (c) in the total
amount of $92,369,000; and
(2) for support of military family housing (including the
functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United
States Code), in the total amount of $518,140,000.

SEC. 2103. USE OF UNOBLIGATED ARMY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
FUNDS IN CONJUNCTION WITH FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN
FISCAL YEAR 2002 PROJECT.

(a) Fire Station at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.--Section
2836(d) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat.
1314), as most recently amended by section 2849 of the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2007 (Public Law 109-364; 120 Stat. 2486), is further
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``through a project for
construction of an Army standard-design, two-company fire
station at Fort Belvoir, Virginia,'' after ``Building 191'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) The Secretary may use up to $3,900,000 of available,
unobligated Army military construction funds appropriated for
a fiscal year before fiscal year 2011, in conjunction with
the funds provided under paragraph (1), for the project
described in paragraph (2).''.
(b) Congressional Notification.--The Secretary of the Army
shall provide information, in accordance with section 2851(c)
of title 10, United States Code, regarding the project
described in the amendment made by subsection (a). If it
becomes necessary to exceed the estimated project cost of
$8,780,000, including $4,880,000 contributed by the
Commonwealth of Virginia, the Secretary shall utilize the
authority provided by section 2853 of such title regarding
authorized cost and scope of work variations.

SEC. 2104. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN
FISCAL YEAR 2009 PROJECT.

The table in section 2101(b) of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (division B of Public
Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4661) is amended by striking
``Katterbach'' and inserting ``Grafenwoehr''.

SEC. 2105. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN
FISCAL YEAR 2010 PROJECT.

In the case of the authorization contained in the table in
section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (division B of Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat. 2628) for Fort Riley, Kansas, for construction of a
Brigade Complex at the installation, the Secretary of the
Army may construct up to a 40,100 square-feet brigade
headquarters consistent with the Army's construction
guidelines for brigade headquarters.

SEC. 2106. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR
2008 PROJECTS.

(a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2002 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(division B of Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 503),
authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as
provided in section 2101 of that Act (122 Stat. 504), shall
remain in effect until October 1, 2011, or the date of the
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military
construction for fiscal year 2012, whichever is later:
(b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as
follows:

Army: Extension of 2008 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Installation or Location Project Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Georgia............................... Fort Stewart............. Unit Operations Facilities.. $16,000,000
Hawaii................................ Schofield Barracks....... Tactical Vehicle Wash $10,200,000
Facility.
Barracks Complex............ $51,000,000
Louisiana............................. Fort Polk................ Brigade Headquaters......... $9,800,000
Child Care Facility......... $6,100,000
Missouri.............................. Fort Leonard Wood........ Multipurpose Machine Gun $4,150,000
Range.
Oklahoma.............................. Fort Sill................ Multipurpose Machine Gun $3,300,000
Range.
Washington............................ Fort Lewis............... Alternative Fuel Facility... $3,300,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE XXII--NAVY MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

SEC. 2201. AUTHORIZED NAVY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Navy
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the installations or locations inside the United
States, and subject to the purpose, total amount authorized,
and authorization of appropriations specified for each
project, set forth in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy: Military Construction Inside the United States (Amounts Are
Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AL Mobile........ T-6 Outlying 29,082 29,082
Landing Field..
AZ Yuma.......... Aircraft 40,600 40,600
Maintenance
Hangar.........
AZ Yuma.......... Aircraft 63,280 63,280
Maintenance
Hangar.........
AZ Yuma.......... Communications 63,730 63,730
Infrastructure
Upgrade........
AZ Yuma.......... Intermediate 21,480 21,480
Maintenance
Activity
Facility.......
AZ Yuma.......... Simulator 36,060 36,060
Facility.......
AZ Yuma.......... Utilities 44,320 44,320
Infrastructure
Upgrades.......
AZ Yuma.......... Van Pad Complex 15,590 15,590
Relocation.....

[[Page 9598]]

CA Coronado NB... Maritime 6,890 6,890
Expeditionary
Security Group-
One (MESG-1)
Consolidated
Boat
Maintenance
Facility.......
CA Monterey NSA.. International 11,960 11,960
Academic
Instruction
Building.......
CA Camp Pendleton Bachelor 42,864 42,864
Enlisted
Quarters - 13
Area...........
CA Camp Pendleton Bachelor 37,020 37,020
Enlisted
Quarters - Las
Flores.........
CA Camp Pendleton Center for Naval 66,110 66,110
Aviation
Technical
Training/Fleet
Replacement
Squadron -
Aviation
Training and
Bachelor
Enlisted
Quarters.......
CA Camp Pendleton Conveyance/Water 100,700 100,700
Treatment......
CA Camp Pendleton Marine Aviation 48,230 48,230
Logistics
Squadron-39
Maintenance
Hangar
Expansion......
CA Camp Pendleton Marine Corps 9,950 9,950
Energy
Initiative.....
CA Camp Pendleton North Region 0 30,000
Tert Treat
Plant
(Incremented)..
CA Camp Pendleton Small Arms 3,760 3,760
Magazine -
Edson Range....
CA Camp Pendleton Truck Company 53,490 53,490
Operations
Complex........
CA Coronado...... Rotary Hangar... 67,160 67,160
CA Miramar....... Aircraft 90,490 90,490
Maintenance
Hangar.........
CA Miramar....... Hangar 4........ 33,620 33,620
CA Miramar....... Parking Apron/ 66,500 66,500
Taxiway
Expansion......
CA San Diego..... Bachelor 75,342 75,342
Enlisted
Quarters,
Homeport Ashore
CA San Diego..... Berthing Pier 12 108,414 108,414
Replace &
Dredging, Ph 1.
CA San Diego..... Marine Corps 9,950 9,950
Energy
Initiative.....
CA Twentynine Bachelor 53,158 53,158
Palms........ Enlisted
Quarters &
Parking
Structure......
FL Panama City Purchase 9 Acres 5,960 5,960
NSA..........
FL Blount Island. Consolidated 17,260 17,260
Warehouse
Facility.......
FL Blount Island. Container 5,990 5,990
Staging and
Loading Lot....
FL Blount Island. Container 4,910 4,910
Storage Lot....
FL Blount Island. Hardstand 17,930 17,930
Extension......
FL Blount Island. Paint and Blast 18,840 18,840
Facility.......
FL Blount Island. Washrack 9,690 9,690
Expansion......
FL Tampa......... Joint Comms 2,300 2,300
Support Element
Vehicle Paint
Facility.......
GA Albany MCLB... Maintenance 5,180 5,180
Center Test
Firing Range...
GA Kings Bay..... Security Enclave 45,004 45,004
& Vehicle
Barriers.......
GA Kings Bay..... Waterfront 15,660 15,660
Emergency Power
HI Camp Smith.... Physical Fitness 29,960 29,960
Center.........
HI Kaneohe Bay... Bachelor 90,530 90,530
Enlisted
Quarters.......
HI Kaneohe Bay... Waterfront 19,130 19,130
Operations
Facility.......
HI Pearl Harbor.. Center for 9,140 9,140
Disaster Mgt/
Humanitarian
Assistance.....
HI Pearl Harbor.. Joint POW/MIA 99,328 99,328
Accounting
Command........
MD Patuxent River Atlantic Test 10,160 10,160
NAS.......... Range Addition.
MD Indian Head... Agile Chemical 34,238 34,238
Facility, Ph 2.
MD Patuxent River Broad Area 42,211 42,211
Maritime
Surveillance &
E Facility.....
ME Portsmouth NSY Structural Shops 11,910 11,910
Addition, Ph 1.
NC Camp Lejeune.. 2nd Intel 90,270 90,270
Battalion
Maintenance/Ops
Complex........
NC Camp Lejeune.. Armory- II MEF - 12,280 12,280
Wallace Creek..
NC Camp Lejeune.. Bachelor 40,780 40,780
Enlisted
Quarters -
Courthouse Bay.
NC Camp Lejeune.. Bachelor 42,330 42,330
Enlisted
Quarters -
Courthouse Bay.
NC Camp Lejeune.. Bachelor 43,640 43,640
Enlisted
Quarters -
French Creek...
NC Camp Lejeune.. Bachelor 55,350 55,350
Enlisted
Quarters -
Rifle Range....
NC Camp Lejeune.. Bachelor 51,660 51,660
Enlisted
Quarters -
Wallace Creek..
NC Camp Lejeune.. Bachelor 46,290 46,290
Enlisted
Quarters -
Wallace Creek
North..........
NC Camp Lejeune.. Bachelor 46,550 46,550
Enlisted
Quarters- Camp
Johnson........
NC Camp Lejeune.. Explosive 7,420 7,420
Ordnanance
Disposal Unit
Addition - 2nd
Marine
Logistics Group
NC Camp Lejeune.. Hangar.......... 73,010 73,010
NC Camp Lejeune.. Maintenance 74,260 74,260
Hangar.........
NC Camp Lejeune.. Maintenance/Ops 36,100 36,100
Complex - 2ND
Air Naval
Gunfire Liaison
Company........
NC Camp Lejeune.. Marine Corps 9,950 9,950
Energy
Initiative.....
NC Camp Lejeune.. Mess Hall - 25,960 25,960
French Creek...
NC Camp Lejeune.. Mess Hall 2,553 2,553
Addition -
Courthouse Bay.
NC Camp Lejeune.. Motor 18,470 18,470
Transportation/
Communications
Maintenance
Facility.......
NC Camp Lejeune.. Utility 56,470 56,470
Expansion -
Hadnot Point...
NC Camp Lejeune.. Utility 56,050 56,050
Expansion-
French Creek...
NC Cherry Point Bachelor 42,500 42,500
Marine Corps Enlisted
Air Station.. Quarters.......
NC Cherry Point Mariners Bay 3,790 3,790
Marine Corps Land
Air Station.. Acquisition -
Bogue..........
NC Cherry Point Missile Magazine 13,420 13,420
Marine Corps
Air Station..
NC Cherry Point Station 5,800 5,800
Marine Corps Infrastructure
Air Station.. Upgrades.......
RI Newport....... Electromagnetic 27,007 27,007
Facility.......
SC Beaufort...... Air Installation 21,190 21,190
Compatable Use
Zone Land
Acquisition....
SC Beaufort...... Aircraft Hangar. 46,550 46,550
SC Beaufort...... Physical Fitness 15,430 15,430
Center.........
SC Beaufort...... Training and 46,240 46,240
Simulator
Facility.......
TX Kingsville NAS Youth Center.... 2,610 2,610
VA Norfolk....... Pier 9 & 10 2,400 2,400
Upgrades for
DDG 1000.......
VA Norfolk....... Pier 1 Upgrades 10,035 10,035
to Berth USNS
Comfort........
VA Portsmouth.... Ship Repair Pier 0 100,000
Replacement....
VA Quantico...... Academic 12,080 12,080
Facility
Addition -
Staff Non
Comissioned
Officer Academy

[[Page 9599]]

VA Quantico...... Bachelor 37,810 37,810
Enlisted
Quarters.......
VA Quantico...... Research Center 37,920 37,920
Addition- MCU..
VA Quantico...... Student Officer 55,822 55,822
Quarters - The
Basic School...
WA Kitsap NB..... Charleston Gate 6,150 6,150
ECP
Improvements...
WA Bangor........ Commander 16,170 16,170
Submarine
Development
Squadron 5
Laboratory
Expansion Ph1..
WA Bangor........ Limited Area 15,810 15,810
Emergency Power
WA Bangor........ Waterfront 24,913 24,913
Restricted Area
Emergency Power
WA Bremerton..... Limited Area 0 19,116
Product/STRG
Complex
(incremented)..
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of the Navy
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the installations or locations outside the
United States, and subject to the purpose, total amount
authorized, and authorization of appropriations specified for
each project, set forth in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy: Military Construction Outside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
Overseas Location Installation or Location Purpose of Project Project of
Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BI SW Asia.................... Navy Central Command 89,280 89,280
Ammunition Magazines.......
BI SW Asia.................... Operations and Support 60,002 60,002
Facilities.................
BI SW Asia.................... Waterfront Development, Ph 3 63,871 63,871
DJ Camp Lemonier.............. Camp Lemonier HQ Facility... 12,407 12,407
DJ Camp Lemonier.............. General Warehouse........... 7,324 7,324
DJ Camp Lemonier.............. Horn of Africa Joint 28,076 28,076
Operations Center..........
DJ Camp Lemonier.............. Pave External Roads......... 3,824 3,824
JA Atsugi..................... MH-60R/S Trainer Facility... 6,908 6,908
ML Guam....................... Anderson AFB North Ramp 0 93,588
Parking, Ph 1, Inc 2.......
ML Guam....................... Anderson AFB North Ramp 0 79,350
Utilities, Ph 1, Inc 2.....
ML Guam....................... Apra Harbor Wharves 0 40,000
Improvements, Ph 1.........
ML Guam....................... Defense Access Roads 66,730 66,730
Improvements...............
ML Guam....................... Finegayan Site Prep and 147,210 147,210
Utilities..................
SP Rota....................... Air Traffic Control Tower... 23,190 23,190
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Inside the united states.--For military construction
projects inside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $3,077,237,000.
(2) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(b), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $721,760,000.
(3) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total amount of
$20,877,000.
(4) Architectural and engineering services and construction
design.--For architectural and engineering services and
construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United
States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the
total amount of $121,765,000. None of the funds appropriated
pursuant to this authorization of appropriations may be used
for architectural and engineering services and construction
design of any military construction project necessary to
establish a homeport for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier
at Naval Station Mayport, Florida.

SEC. 2202. FAMILY HOUSING.

(a) Construction and Acquisition.--The Secretary of the
Navy may construct or acquire family housing units (including
land acquisition and supporting facilities) at the
installations or locations, and subject to the purpose and
number of units, total amount authorized, and authorization
of appropriations specified for each project, set forth in
the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy: Family Housing (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose of Project and Project Authorization of
Location Installation or Location Number of Units Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GB Guantanamo Bay............ Replace GTMO Housing...... 37,169 37,169
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Planning and Design.--The Secretary of the Navy may
carry out architectural and engineering services and
construction design activities with respect to the
construction or improvement of family housing units in an
amount not to exceed $3,255,000.
(c) Improvements to Military Family Housing Units.--Subject
to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, the
Secretary of the Navy may improve existing military family
housing units in an amount not to exceed $146,020,000.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning
after September 30, 2010--
(1) for construction and acquisition, planning and design,
and improvement of military family housing and facilities
authorized by subsections (a), (b), and (c) in the total
amount of $186,444,000; and
(2) for support of military family housing (including the
functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United
States Code), in the total amount of $366,346,000.

SEC. 2203. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT TO REFLECT MULTI-INCREMENT
FISCAL YEAR 2010 PROJECT.

Section 2204 of the Military Construction Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2010 (division B of Public Law 111-84; 123
Stat. 2634), is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(14) For the construction of the first increment of a
tertiary water treatment plant at Marine Corps Base, Camp
Pendleton, California, authorized by section 2201(a),
$112,330,000.''; and
(2) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(7) $30,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized
under section 2201(a) for North Region Tertiary Treatment
Plant, Camp Pendleton, California).''.

SEC. 2204. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR
2008 PROJECT.

(a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2002 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(division B of Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 503), the
authorization set forth in the table in subsection (b), as
provided in section 2201(c) of that Act (122 Stat. 511),
shall remain in effect until October 1, 2011, or the date of
the enactment of an Act authorizing

[[Page 9600]]

funds for military construction for fiscal year 2012,
whichever is later:
(b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as
follows:

Navy: Extension of 2008 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Installation or Location Project Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Worldwide............................. Unspecified.............. Host Nation Infrastructure.. $2,700,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

SEC. 2301. AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Air
Force may acquire real property and carry out military
construction projects for the installations or locations
inside the United States, and subject to the purpose, total
amount authorized, and authorization of appropriations
specified for each project, set forth in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Force: Military Construction Inside the United States (Amounts Are
Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK Eielson AFB... Repair Central 28,000 28,000
Heat Plant &
Power Plant
Boilers........
AK Elmendorf AFB. Add/Alter Air 4,749 4,749
Support
Operations
Squadron
Training.......
AK Elmendorf AFB. Construct 15,000 15,000
Railhead
Operations
Facility.......
AK Elmendorf AFB. F-22 Add/Alter 10,525 10,525
Weapons Release
Systems Shop...
AL Maxwell AFB... ADAL Air 13,400 13,400
University
Library........
AZ Davis-Monthan Aerospace 25,000 25,000
AFB.......... Maintenance and
Regeneration
Group Hangar...
AZ Davis-Monthan HC-130 Aerospace 4,600 4,600
AFB.......... Ground
Equipment
Maintenance
Facility.......
AZ Davis-Monthan HC-130J Aerial 10,700 10,700
AFB.......... Cargo Facility.
AZ Davis-Monthan HC-130J Parts 8,200 8,200
AFB.......... Store..........
AZ Fort Huachuca. Total Force 11,000 11,000
Integration-
Predator Launch
and Recovery
Element Beddown
CA Los Angeles Parking Garage, 4,500 4,500
AFB.......... Ph 2...........
CO Buckley AFB... Security Forces 12,160 12,160
Operations
Facility.......
CO Peterson AFB.. Rapid Attack 24,800 24,800
Identification
Detection
Repair System
Space Control
Facility.......
CO U.S. Air Force Const Center for 27,600 27,600
Academy...... Character &
Leadership
Development....
DC Bolling AFB... Joint Air 13,200 13,200
Defense
Operations
Center.........
DE Dover AFB..... C-5M/C-17 3,200 3,200
Maintenance
Training
Facility, Ph 2.
FL Eglin AFB..... F-35 Fuel Cell 11,400 11,400
Maintenance
Hangar.........
FL Hurlburt Field ADAL Special 6,170 6,170
Operations
School Facility
FL Hurlburt Field Add to Visiting 4,500 4,500
Quarters (24
Rm)............
FL Hurlburt Field Base Logistics 24,000 24,000
Facility.......
FL Patrick AFB... Air Force 158,009 79,009
Technical
Application
Center.........
GA Robins AFB.... Warehouse....... 5,500 5,500
LA Barksdale AFB. Weapons Load 18,140 18,140
Crew Training
Facility.......
MO Whiteman AFB.. Consolidated Air 23,500 23,500
Ops Facility...
NC Pope AFB...... Crash/Fire/ 13,500 13,500
Rescue Station.
ND Minot AFB..... Control Tower/ 18,770 18,770
Base Operations
Facility.......
NJ McGuire AFB... Base Ops/Command 8,000 8,000
Post Facility
(TFI)..........
NJ McGuire AFB... Dormitory (120 18,440 18,440
RM)............
NM Holloman AFB.. Parallel 8,000 8,000
Taxiway, Runway
07/25..........
NM Kirtland AFB.. Replace Fire 6,800 6,800
Station........
NM Cannon AFB.... Dormitory (96 14,000 14,000
rm)............
NM Cannon AFB.... UAS Squadron Ops 20,000 20,000
Facility.......
NM Holloman AFB.. UAS Add/Alter 15,470 15,470
Maintenance
Hangar.........
NM Holloman AFB.. UAS Maintenance 22,500 22,500
Hangar.........
NM Kirtland AFB.. Aerial Delivery 3,800 3,800
Facility
Addition.......
NM Kirtland AFB.. Armament Shop... 6,460 6,460
NM Kirtland AFB.. H/MC-130 Fuel 14,142 14,142
System
Maintenance
Facility.......
NV Creech AFB.... UAS Airfield 11,710 11,710
Fire/Crash
Rescue Station.
NV Nellis AFB.... F-35 Add/Alter 7,870 7,870
422 Test
Evaluation
Squadron
Facility.......
NV Nellis AFB.... F-35 Add/Alter 1,900 1,900
Flight Test
Instrumentation
Facility.......
NV Nellis AFB.... F-35 Flight 13,110 13,110
Simulator
Facility.......
NV Nellis AFB.... F-35 Maintenance 28,760 28,760
Hangar.........
NY Fort Drum..... 20th Air Support 20,440 20,440
Operations
Squadron
Complex........
OK Tinker AFB.... Upgrade Building 14,000 14,000
3001
Infrastructure,
Ph 3...........
SC Charleston AFB Civil Engineer 15,000 15,000
Complex (TFI) -
Ph 1...........
TX Laughlin AFB.. Community Event 10,500 10,500
Complex........
TX Dyess AFB..... C-130J Add/Alter 4,080 4,080
Flight
Simulator
Facility.......
TX Ellington Upgrade Unmanned 7,000 7,000
Field........ Aerial Vehicle
Maintenance
Hangar.........
TX Lackland AFB.. Basic Military 32,000 32,000
Training
Satellite
Classroom/
Dining Facility
No 2...........
TX Lackland AFB.. One-Company Fire 5,500 5,500
Station........
TX Lackland AFB.. Recruit 67,980 67,980
Dormitory, Ph 3
TX Lackland AFB.. Recruit/Family 21,800 21,800
Inprocessing &
Info Center....
UT Hill AFB...... F-22 T-10 Engine 2,800 2,800
Test Cell......
VA Langley AFB... F-22 Add/Alter 8,800 8,800
Hangar Bay LO/
CR Facility....
WY Camp Guernsey. Nuclear/Space 4,650 4,650
Security
Tactics
Training Center
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of the Air
Force may acquire real property and carry out military
construction projects for the installations or locations
outside the United States, and subject to the purpose, total
amount authorized, and authorization of appropriations
specified for each project, set forth in the following table:

[[Page 9601]]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Force: Military Construction Outside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
Overseas Location Installation or Location Purpose of Project Project of
Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AF Bagram AFB................. Consolidated Rigging 9,900 9,900
Facility...................
AF Bagram AFB................. Fighter Hangar.............. 16,480 16,480
AF Bagram AFB................. MEDEVAC Ramp Expansion/Fire 16,580 16,580
Station....................
BI SW Asia.................... North Apron Expansion....... 45,000 45,000
GU Andersen AFB............... Combat Communications 9,200 9,200
Operations Facility........
GU Andersen AFB............... Commando Warrior Open Bay 11,800 11,800
Student Barracks...........
GU Andersen AFB............... Guam Strike Ops Group & 9,100 9,100
Tanker Task Force..........
GU Andersen AFB............... Guam Strike South Ramp 12,200 12,200
Utilities, Ph 1............
GU Andersen AFB............... Red Horse Headquarters/ 8,000 8,000
Engineering Facility.......
GY Kapaun..................... Dormitory (128 RM).......... 19,600 19,600
GY Ramstein AB................ Unmanned Aerial System 10,800 10,800
Satellite Communication
Relay Pads & Facility......
GY Ramstein AFB............... Construct C-130J Flight 8,800 8,800
Simulator Facility.........
GY Ramstein AFB............... Deicing Fluid Storage & 2,754 2,754
Dispensing Facility........
GY Vilseck.................... Air Support Operations 12,900 12,900
Squadron Complex...........
IT Aviano AFB................. Air Support Operations 10,200 10,200
Squadron Facility..........
IT Aviano AFB................. Dormitory (144 RM).......... 19,000 19,000
KR Kunsan AFB................. Construct Distributed 7,500 7,500
Mission Training Flight
Simulator Facility.........
QA Al Udeid................... Blatchford-Preston Complex 62,300 62,300
Ph 2.......................
UK Royal Air Force Mildenhall. Extend Taxiway Alpha........ 15,000 15,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Unspecified Worldwide.--The Secretary of the Air Force
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects at various unspecified installations or locations,
and subject to the purpose, total amount authorized, and
authorization of appropriations specified for each project,
set forth in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Force: Unspecified Worldwide (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
Overseas Location Installation or Location Purpose of Project Project of
Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ZU Unspecified Worldwide F-35 Academic Training 54,150 54,150
Locations................. Center.....................
ZU Unspecified Worldwide F-35 Flight Simulator 12,190 12,190
Locations................. Facility...................
ZU Various Worldwide Locations F-35 Squadron Operations 10,260 10,260
Facility...................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Inside the united states.--For military construction
projects inside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $836,635,000.
(2) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(b), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $307,114,000.
(3) Unspecified worldwide.--For the military construction
projects at unspecified worldwide locations authorized by
subsection (c), funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30,
2010, in the total amount of $76,600,000.
(4) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total amount of
$21,000,000.
(5) Architectural and engineering services and construction
design.--For architectural and engineering services and
construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United
States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the
total amount of $74,424,000.

SEC. 2302. FAMILY HOUSING.

(a) Construction and Acquisition.--The Secretary of the Air
Force may construct or acquire family housing units
(including land acquisition and supporting facilities) at the
installations or locations, and subject to the purpose and
number of units, total amount authorized, and authorization
of appropriations specified for each project, set forth in
the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Force: Family Housing (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose of Project and Project Authorization of
Location Installation or Location Number of Units Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ZU Various Worldwide Classified Project........ 50 50
locations................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Planning and Design.--The Secretary of the Air Force
may carry out architectural and engineering services and
construction design activities with respect to the
construction or improvement of family housing units in an
amount not to exceed $4,225,000.
(c) Improvements to Military Family Housing Units.--Subject
to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, the
Secretary of the Air Force may improve existing military
family housing units in an amount not to exceed $73,750,000.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning
after September 30, 2010--
(1) for construction and acquisition, planning and design,
and improvement of military family housing and facilities
authorized by subsections (a), (b), and (c) in the total
amount of $78,025,000; and
(2) for support of military family housing (including the
functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United
States Code), in the total amount of $513,792,000.

SEC. 2303. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR
2007 PROJECT.

(a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2701 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
(division B of Public Law 109-364; 120 Stat. 2463),
authorization set forth in the table in subsection (b), as
provided in section 2302 of that Act (120 Stat. 2455) and
extended by section 2306 of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (division B of Public
Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2638), shall remain in effect until
October 1, 2011, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2012, whichever is later.
(b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as
follows:

[[Page 9602]]

Air Force: Extension of 2007 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Installation Project Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho................................. Mountain Home Air Force Replace Family Housing (457 $107,800,000
Base.................... units).....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Subtitle A--Defense Agency Authorizations

SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of Defense may
acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the Defense Agencies at installations or
locations inside the United States, and subject to the
purpose, total amount authorized, and authorization of
appropriations specified for each project, set forth in the
following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense Wide: Inside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In
Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZ Marana........ Special 6,250 6,250
Operations
Forces
Parachute
Training
Facility.......
AZ Yuma.......... Special 8,977 8,977
Operations
Forces Military
Free Fall
Simulator......
CA Point Loma Replce Storage 0 20,000
Annex........ Facility, Incr
3..............
CA Point Mugu.... Aircraft Direct 3,100 3,100
Fueling Station
CO Fort Carson... Special 3,717 3,717
Operations
Forces Tactical
Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle Hangar.
DC Bolling AFB... Replace Parking 3,000 3,000
Structure, Ph 1
FL Eglin AFB..... Special 6,030 6,030
Operations
Forces Ground
Support
Battalion
Detachment.....
GA Augusta....... National 12,855 12,855
Security Agency/
Central
Security
Service Georgia
Training
Facility.......
GA Fort Benning.. Dexter 2,800 2,800
Elementary
School
Construct Gym..
GA Fort Benning.. Special 20,441 20,441
Operations
Forces Company
Support
Facility.......
GA Fort Benning.. Special 3,624 3,624
Operations
Forces Military
Working Dog
Kennel Complex.
GA Fort Stewart.. Health Clinic 35,100 35,100
Addtion/
Alteration.....
GA Hunter ANGS... Fuel Unload 2,400 2,400
Facility.......
GA Hunter Army Special 3,318 3,318
Airfield..... Operations
Forces Tactical
Equipment
Maintenance
Facility
Expansion......
HI Hickam AFB.... Alter Fuel 8,500 8,500
Storage Tanks..
HI Pearl Harbor.. Naval Special 28,804 28,804
Warfare Group 3
Command and
Operations
Facility.......
ID Mountain Home Replace Fuel 27,500 27,500
AFB.......... Storage Tanks..
IL Scott Air Field Command 1,388 1,388
Force Base... Facility
Upgrade........
KY Fort Campbell. Special 38,095 38,095
Operations
Forces
Battalion Ops
Complex........
MA Hanscom AFB... Mental Health 2,900 2,900
Clinic Addition
MD Aberdeen US Army Medical 0 105,000
Proving Research
Ground....... Institue of
Infectious
Diseases
Replacement,
Inc 3..........
MD Andrews AFB... Replace Fuel 14,000 14,000
Storage &
Distribution
Facility.......
MD Bethesda Naval National Naval 17,100 17,100
Hospital..... Medical Center
Parking
Expansion......
MD Bethesda Naval Transient 62,900 62,900
Hospital..... Wounded Warrior
Lodging........
MD Fort Detrick.. Consolidated 23,100 23,100
Logistics
Facility.......
MD Fort Detrick.. Information 4,300 4,300
Services
Facility
Expansion......
MD Fort Detrick.. National 2,700 2,700
Interagency
Biodefense
Campus Security
Fencing And
Equipment......
MD Fort Detrick.. Supplemental 3,700 3,700
Water Storage..
MD Fort Detrick.. US Army Medical 0 17,400
Research
Institue of
Infectious
Diseases- Stage
I, Inc 5.......
MD Fort Detrick.. Water Treatment 11,900 11,900
Plant Repair &
Supplement.....
MD Fort Meade.... North Campus 219,360 219,360
Utility Plant..
MS Stennis Space Special 8,000 8,000
Center....... Operations
Forces Land
Acquisition, Ph
3..............
NC Camp Lejeune.. Tarawa Terrace I 16,646 16,646
Elementry
School Replace
School.........
NC Fort Bragg.... McNair Elementry 23,086 23,086
School- Replace
School.........
NC Fort Bragg.... Murray Elementry 22,000 22,000
School -
Replace School.
NC Fort Bragg.... Special 10,347 10,347
Operations
Forces Admin/
Company
Operations.....
NC Fort Bragg.... Special 41,000 41,000
Operations
Forces C4
Facility.......
NC Fort Bragg.... Special 32,000 32,000
Operations
Forces Joint
Intelligence
Brigade
Facility.......
NC Fort Bragg.... Special 11,000 11,000
Operations
Forces
Operational
Communications
Facility.......
NC Fort Bragg.... Special 15,795 15,795
Operations
Forces
Operations
Additions......
NC Fort Bragg.... Special 13,465 13,465
Operations
Forces
Operations
Support
Facility.......
NM Cannon AFB.... Special 13,287 13,287
Operations
Forces ADD/ALT
Simulator
Facility For MC-
130............
NM Cannon AFB.... Special 12,636 12,636
Operations
Forces Aircraft
Parking Apron
(MC-130j)......
NM Cannon AFB.... Special 26,006 26,006
Operations
Forces C-130
Parking Apron
Phase I........
NM Cannon AFB.... Special 24,622 24,622
Operations
Forces Hangar/
AMU (MC-130j)..
NM Cannon AFB.... Special 39,674 39,674
Operations
Forces
Operations And
Training
Complex........
NM White Sands... Health And 22,900 22,900
Dental Clinics.
NY U.S. Military West Point MS 27,960 27,960
Academy...... Add/Alt........
OH Columbus...... Replace Public 7,400 7,400
Safety Facility
PA Def Replace 96,000 96,000
Distribution Headquarters
Depot New Facility.......
Cumberland...
TX Fort Bliss.... Hospital 0 147,100
Replacement,
Incr 2.........
TX Lackland AFB.. Ambulatory Care 162,500 162,500
Center, Ph 2...
UT Camp Williams. Comprehensive 0 398,358
National
Cybersecurity
Initiative Data
Center
Increment 2....
VA Craney Island. Replace Fuel 58,000 58,000
Pier...........
VA Fort Belvoir.. Dental Clinic 6,300 6,300
Replacement....

[[Page 9603]]

VA Pentagon...... Pentagon Metro & 6,473 6,473
Corridor 8
Screening
Facility.......
VA Pentagon...... Power Plant 51,928 51,928
Modernization,
Ph 3...........
VA Pentagon...... Secure Access 4,923 4,923
Lane-Remote
Vehicle
Screening......
VA Quantico...... New Consolidated 47,355 47,355
Elementary
School.........
WA Fort Lewis.... Special 4,700 4,700
Operations
Forces Military
Working Dogs
Kennel.........
WA Fort Lewis.... Preventive 8,400 8,400
Medicine
Facility.......
ZU Unspecified General -150,000
Locations.... Reduction......
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of Defense
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the Defense Agencies at the installations or
locations outside the United States, and subject to the
purpose, total amount authorized, and authorization of
appropriations specified for each project, set forth in the
following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense Wide: Outside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In
Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BE Brussels...... NATO 31,863 31,863
Headquarters
Facility.......
BE Brussels...... Replace Shape 67,311 67,311
Middle School/
High School....
GU Agana NAS..... Hospital 0 70,000
Replacement,
Incr 2.........
GY Katterbach.... Health/Dental 37,100 37,100
Clinic
Replacement....
GY Panzer Kaserne Replace 48,968 48,968
Boeblingen High
School.........
GY Vilseck....... Health Clinic 34,800 34,800
Add/Alt........
JA Kadena AB..... Install Fuel 3,000 3,000
Filters-
Separators.....
JA Misawa AB..... Hydrant Fuel 31,000 31,000
System.........
KR Camp Carroll.. Health/Dental 19,500 19,500
Clinic
Replacement....
PR Fort Buchanan. Antilles 58,708 58,708
Elementry
School/
Intermediate
School -
Replace School.
QA Al Udeid...... Qatar Warehouse. 1,961 1,961
UK Menwith Hill Menwith Hill 2,000 2,000
Station...... Station PSC
Construction -
Generators 10 &
11.............
UK Royal Air Alconbury 30,308 30,308
Force Elementry
Alconbury.... School
Replacement....
UK Royal Air Replace Hydrant 15,900 15,900
Force Fuel
Mildenhall... Distribution
System.........
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Inside the united states.--For military construction
projects inside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $1,930,120,000.
(2) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(b), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $452,419,000.
(3) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total amount of
$42,856,000.
(4) Contingency construction.--For contingency construction
projects of the Secretary of Defense under section 2804 of
title 10, United States Code, funds are hereby authorized to
be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September
30, 2010, in the total amount of $10,000,000.
(5) Architectural and engineering services and construction
design.--For architectural and engineering services and
construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United
States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the
total amount of $434,185,000.

SEC. 2402. FAMILY HOUSING.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 2010--
(1) for support of military family housing (including the
functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United
States Code), in the total amount of $50,464,000; and
(2) for credits to the Department of Defense Family Housing
Improvement Fund under section 2883 of title 10, United
States Code, and the Homeowners Assistance Fund established
under section 1013 of the Demonstration Cities and
Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 3374), in the
total amount of $17,611,000.

SEC. 2403. ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJECTS.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning
after September 30, 2010, for energy conservation projects
under chapter 173 of title 10, United States Code,
$130,000,000.
(b) Availability of Funds for Reserve Component Projects.--
Of the amount authorized to be appropriated by subsection (a)
for energy conservation projects, the Secretary of Defense
shall reserve a portion of the amount for energy conservation
projects for the reserve components in an amount that is not
less than an amount that bears the same proportion to the
total amount authorized to be appropriated as the total
quantity of energy consumed by reserve facilities (as defined
in section 18232(2) of title 10, United States Code) during
fiscal year 2010 bears to the total quantity of energy
consumed by all military installations (as defined in section
2687(e)(1) of such title) during that fiscal year, as
determined by the Secretary.

Subtitle B--Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations

SEC. 2411. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, CHEMICAL
DEMILITARIZATION CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 2010, for military
construction and land acquisition for chemical
demilitarization in the total amount of $124,971,000, as
follows:
(1) For the construction of phase 12 of a chemical
munitions demilitarization facility at Pueblo Chemical
Activity, Colorado, authorized by section 2401(a) of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997
(division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2775), as
amended by section 2406 of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public
Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 839), section 2407 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (division
B of Public Law 107-314; 116 Stat. 2698), and section 2413 of
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2009 (division B of Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4697),
$65,569,000.
(2) For the construction of phase 11 of a munitions
demilitarization facility at Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky,
authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public
Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 835), as amended by section 2405 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
(division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1298), section
2405 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2003 (division B of Public Law 107-314; 116 Stat.
2698), and section 2414 of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (division B of Public
Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4697), $59,402,000.

SEC. 2412. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN
FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROJECT.

(a) Modification.--The table in section 2401(a) of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(division B of Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 835), as amended
by section 2405 of the Military Construction Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107;
115 Stat. 1298), section 2405 of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (division B of Public
Law 107-314; 116 Stat. 2698), and section 2414 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009
(division B of Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4697), is
amended--

[[Page 9604]]

(1) under the agency heading relating to Chemical
Demilitarization, in the item relating to Blue Grass Army
Depot, Kentucky, by striking ``$492,000,000'' in the amount
column and inserting ``$746,000,000''; and
(2) by striking the amount identified as the total in the
amount column and inserting ``$1,203,920,000''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2405(b)(3) of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(division B of Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 839), as amended
by section 2405 of the Military Construction Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107;
115 Stat. 1298), section 2405 of the Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (division B of Public
Law 107-314; 116 Stat. 2698), and section 2414 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009
(division B of Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4697), is
amended by striking ``$469,200,000'' and inserting
``$723,200,000''.
(c) Limitation.--The Secretary of the Army may not enter
into a solicitation or task order using Federal Acquisition
Regulation Subpart 16.3, titled ``Cost Reimbursement
Contracts'', to carry out the military construction project
covered by the authorization modification provided by the
amendment made by subsection (a).

TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM

SEC. 2501. AUTHORIZED NATO CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROJECTS.

The Secretary of Defense may make contributions for the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
Program as provided in section 2806 of title 10, United
States Code, in an amount not to exceed the sum of the amount
authorized to be appropriated for this purpose in section
2502 and the amount collected from the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization as a result of construction previously financed
by the United States.

SEC. 2502. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NATO.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 2010, for contributions
by the Secretary of Defense under section 2806 of title 10,
United States Code, for the share of the United States of the
cost of projects for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program authorized by section 2501, in
the amount of $258,884,000.

TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

SEC. 2601. AUTHORIZED ARMY NATIONAL GUARD CONSTRUCTION AND
LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Army
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the Army National Guard locations inside the
United States, and subject to the purpose, total amount
authorized, and authorization of appropriations specified for
each project, set forth in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard: Inside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Location Purpose of Project Project of
Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AR Camp Robinson............. Combined Support Maintenance 30,000 30,000
Shop...........................
AR Fort Chaffee.............. Combined Arms Collective 19,000 19,000
Training Facility..............
AR Fort Chaffee.............. Live Fire Shoot House........... 2,500 2,500
AZ Florence.................. Readiness Center................ 16,500 16,500
CA Camp Roberts.............. Combined Arms Collective 19,000 19,000
Training Facility..............
CO Watkins................... Parachute Maintenance Facility.. 3,569 3,569
CO Colorado Springs.......... Readiness Center................ 20,000 20,000
CO Fort Carson............... Regional Training Institute..... 40,000 40,000
CO Gypsum.................... High Altitude Army Aviation 39,000 39,000
Training Site/ Army Aviation
Support Facility...............
CO Windsor................... Readiness Center................ 7,500 7,500
CT Windsor Locks............. Readiness Center (Aviation)..... 41,000 41,000
DE New Castle................ Armed Forces Reserve 27,000 27,000
Center(JFHQ)...................
GA Cumming................... Readiness Center................ 17,000 17,000
GA Dobbins ARB............... Readiness Center Add/Alt........ 10,400 10,400
HI Kalaeloa.................. Combined Support Maintenance 38,000 38,000
Shop...........................
ID Gowen Field............... Barracks (Operational Readiness 17,500 17,500
Training Complex) Ph1..........
ID Mountain Home............. Tactical Unmanned Aircraft 6,300 6,300
System Facility................
IL Marseilles TA............. Simulation Center............... 2,500 2,500
IL Springfield............... Combined Support Maintenance 15,000 15,000
Shop Add/Alt...................
KS Wichita................... Field Maintenance Shop.......... 24,000 24,000
KS Wichita................... Readiness Center................ 43,000 43,000
KY Burlington................ Readiness Center................ 19,500 19,500
LA Fort Polk................. Tactical Unmanned Aircraft 5,500 5,500
System Facility................
LA Minden.................... Readiness Center................ 28,000 28,000
MA Hanscom AFB............... Armed Forces Reserve 23,000 23,000
Center(JFHQ)Ph2................
MD St. Inigoes............... Tactical Unmanned Aircraft 5,500 5,500
System Facility................
MI Camp Grayling Range....... Combined Arms Collective 19,000 19,000
Training Facility..............
MN Arden Hills............... Field Maintenance Shop.......... 29,000 29,000
MN Camp Ripley............... Infantry Squad Battle Course.... 4,300 4,300
MN Camp Ripley............... Tactical Unmanned Aircraft 4,450 4,450
System Facility................
NC Morrisville............... AASF 1 Fixed Wing Aircraft 8,815 8,815
Hangar Annex...................
NC High Point................ Readiness Center Add/Alt........ 1,551 1,551
ND Camp Grafton.............. Readiness Center Add/Alt........ 11,200 11,200
NE Lincoln................... Readiness Center Add/Alt........ 3,300 3,300
NE Mead...................... Readiness Center................ 11,400 11,400
NH Pembroke.................. Barracks Facility (Regional 15,000 15,000
Training Institute)............
NH Pembroke.................. Classroom Facility (Regional 21,000 21,000
Training Institute)............
NM Farmington................ Readiness Center Add/Alt........ 8,500 8,500
NV Las Vegas................. CST Ready Building.............. 8,771 8,771
NY Ronkonkoma................ Flightline Rehabilitation....... 2,780 2,780
OH Camp Sherman.............. Maintenance Building Add/Alt.... 3,100 3,100
RI Middletown................ Readiness Center Add/Alt........ 3,646 3,646
RI East Greenwich............ United States Property & Fiscal 27,000 27,000
Office.........................
SD Watertown................. Readiness Center................ 25,000 25,000
TX Camp Maxey................ Combat Pistol/Military Pistol 2,500 2,500
Qualification Course...........
TX Camp Swift................ Urban Assault Course............ 2,600 2,600
WA Tacoma.................... Combined Support Maintenance 25,000 25,000
Shop...........................
WI Wausau.................... Field Maintenance Shop.......... 12,008 12,008
WI Madison................... Aircraft Parking................ 5,700 5,700
WV Moorefield................ Readiness Center................ 14,200 14,200
WV Morgantown................ Readiness Center................ 21,000 21,000
WY Laramie................... Field Maintenance Shop.......... 14,400 14,400
ZU Various................... Various......................... 60,000 60,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 9605]]

(b) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of the Army
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the Army National Guard locations outside the
United States, and subject to the purpose, total amount
authorized, and authorization of appropriations specified for
each project, set forth in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard: Outside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
Overseas Location Installation or Location Purpose of Project Project of
Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GU Barrigada.................. Combined Support Maint Shop 19,000 19,000
Ph1........................
PR Camp Santiago.............. Live Fire Shoot House....... 3,100 3,100
PR Camp Santiago.............. Multipurpose Machine Gun 9,200 9,200
Range......................
VI St. Croix.................. Readiness Center (JFHQ)..... 25,000 25,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Army
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, for the
costs of acquisition, architectural and engineering services,
and construction of facilities for the Army National Guard of
the United States, and for contributions therefor, under
chapter 1803 of title 10, United States Code (including the
cost of acquisition of land for those facilities), in the
total amount of $1,019,902,000.

SEC. 2602. AUTHORIZED ARMY RESERVE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Army
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the Army Reserve locations inside the United
States, and subject to the purpose, total amount authorized,
and authorization of appropriations specified for each
project, set forth in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve: Inside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In
Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA Fairfield..... Army Reserve 26,000 26,000
Center.........
CA Fort Hunter Equipment 22,000 22,000
Liggett...... Concentration
Site Tactical
Equipment Maint
Facility.......
CA Fort Hunter Equipment 15,000 15,000
Liggett...... Concentration
Site Warehouse.
CA Fort Hunter Grenade Launcher 1,400 1,400
Liggett...... Range..........
CA Fort Hunter Hand Grenade 1,400 1,400
Liggett...... Familiarization
Range (Live)...
CA Fort Hunter Light Demolition 2,700 2,700
Liggett...... Range..........
CA Fort Hunter Tactical Vehicle 9,500 9,500
Liggett...... Wash Rack......
FL Miami......... Army Reserve 13,800 13,800
Center/Land....
FL Orlando....... Army Reserve 10,200 10,200
Center/Land....
FL West Palm Army Reserve 10,400 10,400
Beach........ Center/Land....
GA Macon......... Army Reserve 11,400 11,400
Center/Land....
IA Des Moines.... Army Reserve 8,175 8,175
Center.........
IL Quincy........ Army Reserve 12,200 12,200
Center/Land....
IN Michigan City. Army Reserve 15,500 15,500
Center/Land....
MA Devens Reserve Automated Record 4,700 4,700
Forces Fire Range.....
Training Area
MO Kansas City... Army Reserve 11,800 11,800
Center.........
NJ Fort Dix...... Automated 9,800 9,800
Multipurpose
Machine Gun
Range..........
NM Las Cruces.... Army Reserve 11,400 11,400
Center/Land....
NY Binghamton.... Army Reserve 13,400 13,400
Center/Land....
TX Dallas........ Army Reserve 12,600 12,600
Center/Land....
TX Rio Grande.... Army Reserve 6,100 6,100
Center/Land....
TX San Marcos.... Army Reserve 8,500 8,500
Center/Land....
VA Fort A.P. Hill Army Reserve 15,500 15,500
Center.........
VA Roanoke....... Army Reserve 14,800 14,800
Center/Land....
VA Virginia Beach Army Reserve 11,000 11,000
Center.........
WI Fort McCoy.... AT/MOB Billeting 9,800 9,800
Complex, Ph 1..
WI Fort McCoy.... NCO Academy, Ph 10,000 10,000
2..............
ZU Various....... Various......... 30,000 30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Army
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, for the
costs of acquisition, architectural and engineering services,
and construction of facilities for the Army Reserve, and for
contributions therefor, under chapter 1803 of title 10,
United States Code (including the cost of acquisition of land
for those facilities), in the total amount of $358,331,000.

SEC. 2603. AUTHORIZED NAVY RESERVE AND MARINE CORPS RESERVE
CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND
AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Navy
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve
locations inside the United States, and subject to the
purpose, total amount authorized, and authorization of
appropriations specified for each project, set forth in the
following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve: Inside the United States (Amounts
Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA Twentynine Tank Vehicle 5,991 5,991
Palms........ Maintenance
Facility.......
LA New Orleans... Joint Air 16,281 16,281
Traffic Control
Facility.......
VA Williamsburg.. Navy Ordnance 21,346 21,346
Cargo Logistics
Training Camp..
WA Yakima........ Marine Corps 13,844 13,844
Reserve Center.
ZU Various....... Various......... 15,000 15,000
ZU Various....... Various......... 15,000 15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 9606]]

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Navy
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, for the
costs of acquisition, architectural and engineering services,
and construction of facilities for the Navy Reserve and
Marine Corps Reserve, and for contributions therefor, under
chapter 1803 of title 10, United States Code (including the
cost of acquisition of land for those facilities), in the
total amount of $91,557,000.

SEC. 2604. AUTHORIZED AIR NATIONAL GUARD CONSTRUCTION AND
LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Air
Force may acquire real property and carry out military
construction projects for the Air National Guard locations
inside the United States, and subject to the purpose, total
amount authorized, and authorization of appropriations
specified for each project, set forth in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air National Guard: Inside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In
Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AL Montgomery Fuel Cell And 7,472 7,472
Regional Corrosion
Airport (ANG) Control Hangar.
Base.........
AZ Davis Monthan Predator Foc- 4,650 4,650
AFB.......... Active Duty
Associate......
CO Buckely AFB... Taxiway Juliet 4,000 4,000
and Lima.......
DE New Castle Joint Forces 1,500 1,500
County Operations
Airport...... Center-Ang
Share..........
FL Jacksonville Security Forces 6,700 6,700
IAP.......... Training
Facility.......
GA Savannah/ Relocate Air 7,450 7,450
Hilton Head Supt Opers Sqdn
IAP.......... (Asos) Fac.....
HI Hickam AFB.... F-22 Beddown 5,950 5,950
Intrastructure
Support........
HI Hickam AFB.... F-22 Hangar, 48,250 48,250
Squadron
Operations And
Amu............
HI Hickam AFB.... F-22 Upgrade 17,250 17,250
Munitions
Complex........
IA Des Moines IAP Corrosion 4,750 4,750
Control Hangar.
IL Capital Map... CNAF Beddown- 16,700 16,700
Upgrade
Facilities.....
IN Hulman ASOS Beddown- 4,100 4,100
Regional Upgrade
Airport...... Facilities.....
MA Barnes ANGB... Add to Aircraft 6,000 6,000
Maintenance
Hangar.........
MD Martin State Replace Ops and 11,400 11,400
Airport...... Medical
Training
Facility.......
MN Duluth........ Load Crew 8,000 8,000
Training and
Weapon Release
Shops..........
NC Stanly County Upgrade Asos 2,000 2,000
Airport...... Facilities.....
NJ Atlantic City Fuel Cell and 8,500 8,500
IAP.......... Corrosion
Control Hangar.
NY Stewart ANGB.. Aircraft 3,750 3,750
Conversion
Facility.......
NY Fort Drum..... Reaper 2,500 2,500
Infrastructure
Support........
NY Stewart IAP... Base Defense 14,250 14,250
Group Beddown..
OH Toledo Express Replace Security 7,300 7,300
Airport...... Forces Complex.
PA State College Add to and Alter 4,100 4,100
ANGS......... AOS Facility...
SC McEntire Joint Replace 9,100 9,100
National Operations and
Guard Base... Training.......
TN Nashville IAP. Renovate Intel 5,500 5,500
Squadron
Facilities.....
ZU Various....... Various......... 50,000 50,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Air
Force for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010,
for the costs of acquisition, architectural and engineering
services, and construction of facilities for the Air National
Guard of the United States, and for contributions therefor,
under chapter 1803 of title 10, United States Code (including
the cost of acquisition of land for those facilities), in the
total amount of $292,371,000.

SEC. 2605. AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE RESERVE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Inside the United States.--The Secretary of the Air
Force may acquire real property and carry out military
construction projects for the Air Force Reserve locations
inside the United States, and subject to the purpose, total
amount authorized, and authorization of appropriations
specified for each project, set forth in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Force Reserve: Inside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In
Thousands of Dollars)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
State Installation or Purpose of Project of
Location Project Amount Appropriations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FL Patrick AFB... Weapons 3,420 3,420
Maintenance
Facility.......
NY Niagara ARS... C-130 Flightline 9,500 9,500
Operations
Facility, Ph 1.
ZU Various....... Various......... 30,000 30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Air
Force for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010,
for the costs of acquisition, architectural and engineering
services, and construction of facilities for the Air Force
Reserve, and for contributions therefor, under chapter 1803
of title 10, United States Code (including the cost of
acquisition of land for those facilities), in the total
amount of $47,332,000.

SEC. 2606. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR
2008 PROJECTS.

(a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2002 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(division B of Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 503), the
authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as
provided in sections 2601 and 2604 of that Act (122 Stat.
527, 528), shall remain in effect until October 1, 2011, or
the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for
military construction for fiscal year 2012, whichever is
later:
(b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as
follows:

National Guard: Extension of 2008 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Installation or Location Project Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania.......................... East Fallowfield Township Readiness Center............ $8,300,000
Vermont............................... Burlington............... Security Improvements....... $6,600,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 9607]]

TITLE XXVII--BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES

Subtitle A--Authorizations

SEC. 2701. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR BASE
REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES FUNDED
THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE
ACCOUNT 1990.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 2010, for base
realignment and closure activities, including real property
acquisition and military construction projects, as authorized
by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part
A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note)
and funded through the Department of Defense Base Closure
Account 1990 established by section 2906 of such Act, in the
total amount of $360,474,000 as follows:
(1) For the Department of the Army, $73,600,000.
(2) For the Department of the Navy, $162,000,000.
(3) For the Department of the Air Force, $124,874,000.

SEC. 2702. AUTHORIZED BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES
FUNDED THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BASE
CLOSURE ACCOUNT 2005.

Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of
appropriations in section 2703, the Secretary of Defense may
carry out base realignment and closure activities, including
real property acquisition and military construction projects,
as authorized by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act
of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10
U.S.C. 2687 note) and funded through the Department of
Defense Base Closure Account 2005 established by section
2906A of such Act, in the amount of $2,354,285,000.

SEC. 2703. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR BASE
REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIVITIES FUNDED
THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE
ACCOUNT 2005.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 2010, for base
realignment and closure activities, including real property
acquisition and military construction projects, as authorized
by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part
A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note)
and funded through the Department of Defense Base Closure
Account 2005 established by section 2906A of such Act, in the
total amount of $2,354,285,000, as follows:
(1) For the Department of the Army, $1,012,420,000.
(2) For the Department of the Navy, $342,146,000.
(3) For the Department of the Air Force, $127,255,000.
(4) For the Defense Agencies, $872,464,000.

Subtitle B--Other Matters

SEC. 2711. TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR BRAC 133 PROJECT UNDER
FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA, BRAC INITIATIVE.

(a) Limitation on Project Implementation.--The Secretary of
the Army may not take beneficial occupancy of more than 1,000
parking spaces provided by the combination spaces provided by
the BRAC 133 project and the lease of spaces in the immediate
vicinity of the BRAC 133 project until both of the following
occur:
(1) The Secretary submits to the congressional defense
committees a viable transportation plan for the BRAC 133
project.
(2) The Secretary certifies to the congressional defense
committees that construction has been completed to provide
adequate ingress to and egress from the business park at
which the BRAC 133 project is located.
(b) Viability of Transportation Plan.--To be considered a
viable transportation plan under subsection (a)(1), the
transportation plan must provide for the ingress and egress
of all personnel to and from the BRAC 133 project site
without further reducing the level of service at the
following six intersections:
(1) The intersection of Beauregard Street and Mark Center
Drive.
(2) The intersection of Beauregard Street and Seminary
Road.
(3) The intersection of Seminary Road and Mark Center
Drive.
(4) The intersection of Seminary Road and the northbound
entrance-ramp to I-395.
(5) The intersection of Seminary Road and the northbound
exit-ramp from I-395.
(6) The intersection of Seminary Road and the southbound
exit-ramp from I-395.
(c) Inspector General Report.--Not later than September 30,
2011, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
evaluating the sufficiency and coordination conducted in
completing the requisite environmental studies associated
with the site selection of the BRAC 133 project pursuant to
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.). The Inspector General shall give specific attention
to the transportation determinations associated with the BRAC
133 project and review and provide comment on the Secretary
of Army's transportation plan and adherence to the
limitations imposed by subsection (a).
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) BRAC 133 project.--The term ``BRAC 133 project'' refers
to the proposed office complex to be developed at an
established mixed-use business park in Alexandria, Virginia,
to implement recommendation 133 of the Defense Base Closure
and Realignment Commission contained in the report of the
Commission transmitted to Congress on September 15, 2005,
under section 2903(e) of the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law
101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
(2) Level of service.--The term ``level of service'' has
the meaning given that term in the most-recent Highway
Capacity Manual of the Transportation Research Board.

TITLE XXVIII--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing
Changes

SEC. 2801. AVAILABILITY OF MILITARY CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION
ON INTERNET.

(a) Modification of Information Required To Be Provided.--
Paragraph (2) of subsection (c) of section 2851 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking subparagraph (F); and
(2) by redesignating subparagraphs (G) and (H) as
subparagraphs (F) and (G), respectively.
(b) Expanded Availability of Information.--Such subsection
is further amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (3); and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3).
(c) Conforming Amendments.--Such subsection is further
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``that, when activated by
a person authorized under paragraph (3), will permit the
person'' and inserting ``that will permit a person''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), as redesignated by subsection
(b)(2)--
(A) by striking ``to the persons referred to in paragraph
(3)'' and inserting ``on the Internet site required by such
paragraph''; and
(B) by striking ``to such persons''.

SEC. 2802. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF
MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING TO DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND.

(a) Authority To Transfer Proceeds.--Section 2831 of title
10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``There'' in the matter
preceding paragraph (1) and inserting ``Except as authorized
by subsection (e), there'';
(2) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections
(f) and (g), respectively;
(3) in subsection (g) (as so redesignated), by striking
``subsection (e)'' both places it appears and inserting
``subsection (f)''; and
(4) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new
subsection (e):
``(e) Authority To Transfer Family Housing Proceeds.--(1)
The Secretary concerned may transfer proceeds of the handling
and the disposal of family housing received under subsection
(b)(3), less those expenses payable pursuant to section
572(a) of title 40, to the Department of Defense Family
Housing Improvement Fund established under section 2883(a) of
this title.
``(2) A transfer under paragraph (1) may be made only after
the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date the
Secretary concerned submits written notice of, and
justification for, the transfer to the appropriate committees
of Congress or, if earlier, the end of the 14-day period
beginning on the date on which a copy of the notice and
justification is provided in an electronic medium pursuant to
section 480 of this title.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment to Department of Defense Family
Housing Improvement Fund.--Section 2883(c)(1) of such title
is amended by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(H) Any amounts from the proceeds of the handling and
disposal of family housing of a military department
transferred to that Fund pursuant to section 2831(e) of this
title.''.

SEC. 2803. ENHANCED AUTHORITY FOR PROVISION OF EXCESS
CONTRIBUTIONS FOR NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT
PROGRAM.

Section 2806 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking ``Secretary'' the first
two places it appears and inserting ``Secretary of Defense'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) If the Secretary of Defense determines that
construction of facilities described in subsection (a) is
necessary to advance United States national security or
national interest, the Secretary may include the pre-
financing and initiation of construction services, which will
be provided by the Department of Defense and are not
otherwise authorized by law, as an element of the excess
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment
program contributions made under subsection (c).''.

SEC. 2804. DURATION OF AUTHORITY TO USE PENTAGON RESERVATION
MAINTENANCE REVOLVING FUND FOR CONSTRUCTION AND
REPAIRS AT PENTAGON RESERVATION.

Section 2674(e) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Monies'' and inserting
``Subject to paragraph (3), monies''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) The authority of the Secretary to use monies from the
Fund to support construction, repair, alteration, or related
activities for the

[[Page 9608]]

Pentagon Reservation expires on September 30, 2012.''.

SEC. 2805. AUTHORITY TO USE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDS
FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS INSIDE THE UNITED
STATES CENTRAL COMMAND AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY.

(a) One-year Extension of Authority.--Subsection (h) of
section 2808 of the Military Construction Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (division B of Public Law 108-136; 117
Stat. 1723), as added by section 2806 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (division
B of Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2662), is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``September 30, 2010''
and inserting ``September 30, 2011''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``fiscal year 2011'' and
inserting ``fiscal year 2012''.
(b) Availability of Authority.--Subsection (a)(1) of such
section is amended--
(1) by striking ``war,'' and inserting ``war or''; and
(2) by striking ``, or a contingency operation''.
(c) Waiver of Advance Notification Requirement.--Subsection
(b) of such section is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (4) as
subparagraphs (A) through (D); respectively;
(2) by striking ``Before using'' and inserting ``(1) Before
using''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) During fiscal year 2011, the Secretary of Defense may
waive the prenotification requirements under paragraph (1)
and section 2805(b) of title 10, United States Code, with
regard to a construction project carried out under the
authority of this section. In the case of any such waiver,
the Secretary of Defense shall include in the next quarterly
report submitted under subsection (d) the information
otherwise required in advance by subparagraphs (A) through
(D) of paragraph (1) with regard to the construction
project.''.
(d) Annual Limitation on Use of Authority in Afghanistan.--
Subsection (c)(2) of such section is amended--
(1) by striking ``$300,000,000 in funds available for
operation and maintenance for fiscal year 2010 may be used in
Afghanistan upon completing the prenotification requirements
under subsection (b)'' and inserting ``$100,000,000 in funds
available for operation and maintenance for fiscal year 2011
may be used in Afghanistan subject to the notification
requirements under subsection (b)''; and
(2) by striking ``$500,000,000'' and inserting
``$300,000,000''.

SEC. 2806. VETERANS TO WORK PILOT PROGRAM FOR MILITARY
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

(a) Veterans to Work Program.--Subchapter III of chapter
169 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after section 2856 the following new section:

``Sec. 2857. Veterans to Work Pilot Program

``(a) Pilot Program; Purposes.--(1) The Secretary of
Defense shall establish the Veterans to Work pilot program to
determine--
``(A) the maximum feasible extent to which apprentices who
are also veterans may be employed to work on military
construction projects designated under subsection (b); and
``(B) the feasibility of expanding the employment of
apprentices who are also veterans to include military
construction projects in addition to those projects
designated under subsection (b).
``(2) The Secretary of Defense shall establish and conduct
the pilot program in consultation with the Secretary of Labor
and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
``(b) Designation of Military Construction Projects for
Pilot Program.--(1) For each of fiscal years 2011 through
2015, the Secretary of Defense shall designate for inclusion
in the pilot program not less than 20 military construction
projects (including unspecified minor military construction
projects under section 2805(a) of this title) that will be
conducted in that fiscal year.
``(2) In designating military construction projects under
this subsection, the Secretary of Defense shall--
``(A) designate military construction projects that are
located where there are veterans enrolled in qualified
apprenticeship programs or veterans who could be enrolled in
qualified apprenticeship programs in a cost-effective,
timely, and feasible manner; and
``(B) ensure geographic diversity among the States in the
military construction projects designated.
``(3) Unspecified minor military construction projects may
not exceed 40 percent of the military construction projects
designated under this subsection for a fiscal year.
``(c) Contract Provisions.--Any agreement that the
Secretary of Defense enters into for a military construction
project that is designated for inclusion in the pilot program
shall ensure that--
``(1) to the maximum extent feasible, apprentices who are
also veterans are employed on that military construction
project; and
``(2) contractors participate in a qualified apprenticeship
program.
``(d) Report.--(1) Not later than 150 days after the end of
each fiscal year during which the pilot program is active,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report
that includes the following:
``(A) The progress of designated military construction
projects and the role of apprentices who are also veterans in
achieving that progress.
``(B) Any challenges, difficulties, or problems encountered
in recruiting veterans to become apprentices.
``(C) Cost differentials in the designated military
construction projects compared to similar projects completed
contemporaneously, but not designated for the pilot program.
``(D) Evaluation of benefits derived from employing
apprentices, including the following:
``(i) Workforce sustainability.
``(ii) Workforce skills enhancement.
``(iii) Increased short- and long-term cost-effectiveness.
``(iv) Improved veteran employment in sustainable wage
fields.
``(E) Any other information the Secretary of Defense
determines appropriate.
``(2) Not later than March 1, 2016, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to Congress a report that--
``(A) analyzes the pilot program in terms of its effect on
the sustainability of a workforce to meet the military
construction needs of the Armed Forces;
``(B) analyzes the effects of the pilot program on veteran
employment in sustainable wage fields or professions; and
``(C) makes recommendations on the continuation,
modification, or expansion of the pilot program on the basis
of such factors as the Secretary of Defense determines
appropriate, including the following:
``(i) Workforce sustainability.
``(ii) Cost-effectiveness.
``(iii) Community development.
``(3) The Secretary of Defense shall prepare the report
required by paragraph (2) in consultation with the Secretary
of Labor and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `apprentice' means an individual who is
employed pursuant to, and individually registered in, a
qualified apprenticeship program.
``(2) The term `pilot program' means the Veterans to Work
pilot program established under subsection (a).
``(3)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the term
`qualified apprenticeship program' means an apprenticeship or
other training program that qualifies as an employee welfare
benefit plan, as defined in section 3(1) of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1002(1)).
``(B) If the Secretary of Labor determines that a qualified
apprenticeship program (as defined in subparagraph (A)) for a
craft or trade classification of workers that a prospective
contractor or subcontractor intends to employ for a military
construction project included in the pilot program is not
operated in the locality of the project, the Secretary of
Labor may expand the definition of qualified apprenticeship
program to include another apprenticeship or training
program, so long as the apprenticeship or training program is
registered for Federal purposes with the Office of
Apprenticeship of the Department of Labor or a State
apprenticeship agency recognized by such Office.
``(4) The term `State' means any of the States, the
District of Columbia, or territories of Guam, Puerto Rico,
the Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States Virgin
Islands.
``(5) The term `veteran' has the meaning given such term
under section 101(2) of title 38.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such subchapter is amended by inserting after
the item relating to section 2856 the following new item:

``2857. Veterans to Work Pilot Program.''.

Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

SEC. 2811. NOTICE-AND-WAIT REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO REAL
PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS.

(a) Exception for Leases Under Base Closure Process.--
Subsection (a)(1)(C) of section 2662 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by inserting after ``United States''
the following: ``(other than a lease or license entered into
under section 2667(g) of this title)''.
(b) Repeal of Annual Report on Minor Real Estate
Transactions.--Subsection (b) of such section is repealed.
(c) Geographic Scope of Requirements.--Subsection (c) of
such section is amended--
(1) by striking ``Geographic Scope; Excepted'' and
inserting ``Excepted'';
(2) by striking the first sentence; and
(3) by striking ``It does not'' and inserting ``This
section does not''.
(d) Repeal of Notice and Wait Requirement Regarding GSA
Leases of Space for DOD.--Subsection (e) of such section is
repealed.
(e) Additional Reporting Requirements Regarding Leases of
Real Property Owned by the United States.--Such section is
further amended by inserting after subsection (a) the
following new subsection:
``(b) Additional Reporting Requirements Regarding Leases of
Real Property Owned by the United States.--(1) In the case of
a proposed lease or license of real property owned by the
United States covered by paragraph (1)(C) of subsection (a),
the Secretary concerned shall comply with the notice-and wait
requirements of paragraph (3) of such subsection before--
``(A) issuing a contract solicitation or other lease
offering with regard to the transaction; and
``(B) providing public notice regarding any meeting to
discuss a proposed contract solicitation with regard to the
transaction.

[[Page 9609]]

``(2) The report under paragraph (3) of subsection (a)
shall include the following with regard to a proposed
transaction covered by paragraph (1)(C) of such subsection:
``(A) A description of the proposed transaction, including
the proposed duration of the lease or license.
``(B) A description of the authorities to be used in
entering into the transaction.
``(C) A statement of the scored cost of the entire
transaction, determined using the scoring criteria of the
Office of Management and Budget.
``(D) A determination that the property involved in the
transaction is not excess property, as required by section
2667(a)(3) of this title, including the basis for the
determination.
``(E) A determination that the proposed transaction is
directly compatible with the mission of the military
installation or Defense Agency at which the property is
located and a description of the anticipated long-term use of
the property at the conclusion of the lease or license.
``(F) A description of the requirements or conditions
within the contract solicitation or other lease offering for
the person making the offer to address taxation issues,
including payments-in-lieu-of taxes, and other development
issues related to local municipalities.
``(G) If the proposed lease involves a project related to
energy production, a certification by the Secretary of
Defense that the project, as it will be specified in the
contract solicitation or other lease offering, is consistent
with the Department of Defense performance goals and plan
required by section 2911 of this title.
``(3) The Secretary concerned may not enter into the actual
lease or license with respect to property for which the
information required by paragraph (2) was submitted in a
report under subsection (a)(3) unless the Secretary again
complies with the notice-and wait requirements of such
subsection. The subsequent report shall include the following
with regard to the proposed transaction:
``(A) A cross reference to the prior report that contained
the information submitted under paragraph (2) with respect to
the transaction.
``(B) A description of the differences between the
information submitted under paragraph (2) and the information
regarding the transaction being submitted in the subsequent
report.
``(C) A description of the payment to be required in
connection with the lease or license, including a description
of any in-kind consideration that will be accepted.
``(D) A description of any community support facility or
provision of community support services under the lease or
license, regardless of whether the facility will be operated
by a covered entity (as defined in section 2667(d) of this
title) or the lessee or the services will be provided by a
covered entity or the lessee.
``(E) A description of the competitive procedures used to
select the lessee or, in the case of a lease involving the
public benefit exception authorized by section 2667(h)(2) of
this title, a description of the public benefit to be served
by the lease.''.
(f) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the Secretary submits''
in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) and inserting ``the
Secretary concerned submits''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``the Secretary of a
military department or the Secretary of Defense'' and
inserting ``the Secretary concerned'';
(2) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections
(e) and (f), respectively;
(3) in subsection (f), as so redesignated--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``, and the reporting
requirement set forth in subsection (e) shall not apply with
respect to a real property transaction otherwise covered by
that subsection,'';
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``or (e), as the case may
be''; and
(C) by striking paragraph (4); and
(4) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(g) Secretary Concerned Defined.--In this section, the
term `Secretary concerned' includes, with respect to Defense
Agencies, the Secretary of Defense.''.
(g) Conforming Amendments To Lease of Non-excess Property
Authority.--Section 2667 of such title is amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking paragraph (4);
(2) in subsection (d), by striking paragraph (6);
(3) in subsection (e)(1), by striking subparagraph (E); and
(4) in subsection (h)--
(A) by striking paragraphs (3) and (5); and
(B) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3).

SEC. 2812. TREATMENT OF PROCEEDS GENERATED FROM LEASES OF
NON-EXCESS PROPERTY INVOLVING MILITARY MUSEUMS.

Section 2667(e)(1) of title 10, United States Code, as
amended by section 2811(g), is amended by inserting after
subparagraph (D) the following new subparagraph (E):
``(E) If the proceeds deposited in the special account
established for the Secretary concerned are derived from
activities associated with a military museum described in
section 489(a) of this title, the proceeds shall be available
for activities described in subparagraph (C) only at that
museum.''.

SEC. 2813. REPEAL OF EXPIRED AUTHORITY TO LEASE LAND FOR
SPECIAL OPERATIONS ACTIVITIES.

(a) Repeal.--Section 2680 of title 10, United States Code,
is repealed.
(b) Effect of Repeal.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall not affect the validity of any contract entered into
under section 2680 of title 10, United States Code, on or
before September 30, 2005.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 159 of such title is amended by striking
the item relating to section 2680.

SEC. 2814. FORMER NAVAL BOMBARDMENT AREA, CULEBRA ISLAND,
PUERTO RICO.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 204(c) of the
Military Construction Authorization Act, 1974 (Public Law 93-
166; 87 Stat. 668), and paragraph 9 of the quitclaim deed
relating to the island of Culebra in the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, the Secretary of Defense--
(1) may provide for the removal of any unexploded ordnance
and munitions scrap on that portion of Flamenco Beach located
within the former bombardment area of the island; and
(2) shall conduct a study relating to the presence of
unexploded ordnance in the former bombardment area
transferred to the Commonwealth, with the exception of the
area referred to in paragraph (1).
(b) Contents of Study.--The study required by subsection
(a)(2) shall include the following:
(1) An estimate of the type and amount of unexploded
ordnance.
(2) An estimate of the cost of removing unexploded
ordnance.
(3) An examination of the impact of such removal on any
endangered or threatened species and their habitat
(4) An examination of current public access to the former
bombardment area.
(5) An examination of any threats to public health or
safety and the environment from unexploded ordnance.
(c) Consultation With Commonwealth.--In conducting the
study under subsection (a)(2), the Secretary of Defense shall
consult with the Commonwealth regarding the Commonwealth's
planned future uses of the former bombardment area. The
Secretary shall consider the Commonwealth's planned future
uses in developing any conclusions or recommendations the
Secretary may include in the study.
(d) Submission of Report.--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 containing the results of the study conducted under
subsection (a)(2).
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``quitclaim deed'' refers to the quitclaim
deed from the United States to the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, signed by the Secretary of the Interior on August 11,
1982, for that portion of Tract (1b) consisting of the former
bombardment area on the island of Culebra, Puerto Rico.
(2) The term ``unexploded ordnance'' has the meaning given
that term by section 101(e)(5) of title 10, United States
Code.

Subtitle C--Provisions Related to Guam Realignment

SEC. 2821. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING IMPORTANCE OF
PROVIDING COMMUNITY ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE TO
GOVERNMENT OF GUAM.

It is the Sense of Congress that--
(1) for national security reasons, the United States is
required from time to time to construct major, new military
installations despite the serious adverse impacts that the
installations will have on the communities and the areas in
which the installations are constructed; and
(2) neither the impacted local governments nor the
communities in which the installations are constructed should
be expected to bear the full cost of mitigating such adverse
impacts.

SEC. 2822. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ASSISTANCE FOR COMMUNITY
ADJUSTMENTS RELATED TO REALIGNMENT OF MILITARY
INSTALLATIONS AND RELOCATION OF MILITARY
PERSONNEL ON GUAM.

(a) Temporary Assistance Authorized.--
(1) Assistance to government of guam.--The Secretary of
Defense may assist the Government of Guam in meeting the
costs of providing increased municipal services and
facilities required as a result of the realignment of
military installations and the relocation of military
personnel on Guam (in this section referred to as the ``Guam
realignment'') if the Secretary determines that an unfair and
excessive financial burden will be incurred by the Government
of Guam to provide the services and facilities in the absence
of the Department of Defense assistance.
(2) Mitigation of identified impacts.--The Secretary of
Defense may take such actions as the Secretary considers to
be appropriate to mitigate the significant impacts identified
in the Record of Decision of the ``Guam and CNMI Military
Relocation Environmental Impact Statement'' by providing
increased municipal services and facilities to activities
that directly support the Guam realignment.
(b) Methods To Provide Assistance.--
(1) Use of existing programs.--The Secretary of Defense
shall carry out subsection (a) through existing Federal
programs.
(2) Transfer authority.--To the extent necessary to carry
out subsection (a), the Secretary may transfer appropriated
funds available to the Department of Defense or a military
department for operation and maintenance to supplement funds
made available to Guam under a Federal program. The transfer
authority provided by this paragraph is in addition to the
transfer authority provided by section 1001.

[[Page 9610]]

Amounts so transferred shall be merged with and be available
for the same purposes as the appropriation to which
transferred.
(3) Cost share assistance.--The Secretary may use
appropriated amounts referred to in paragraph (2) to provide
financial assistance to the Government of Guam to assist the
Government of Guam to pay its share of the costs under
Federal programs utilized by the Secretary under paragraph
(1).
(c) Limitation on Provision of Assistance.--The total cost
of the construction of facilities carried out utilizing the
authority provided by subsection (a) may not exceed
$500,000,000.
(d) Special Considerations.--In determining the amount of
financial assistance to be made available under this section
to the Government of Guam for any community service or
facility, the Secretary of Defense shall consult with the
head of the department or agency of the Federal Government
concerned with the type of service or facility for which
financial assistance is being made available and shall take
into consideration--
(1) the time lag between the initial impact of increased
population on Guam and any increase in the local tax base
that will result from such increased population;
(2) the possible temporary nature of the increased
population and the long-range cost impact on the permanent
residents of Guam; and
(3) such other pertinent factors as the Secretary of
Defense considers appropriate.
(e) Progress Reports Required.--The Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives semiannual reports
indicating the total amount expended under the authority of
this section during the preceding six-month period, the
specific projects for which assistance was provided during
such period, and the total amount provided for each project
during such period.
(f) Termination.--The authority to provide assistance under
subsection (a) expires September 30, 2017. Amounts obligated
before that date may be expended after that date.

SEC. 2823. EXTENSION OF TERM OF DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE'S
LEADERSHIP OF GUAM OVERSIGHT COUNCIL.

Subsection (d) of section 132 of title 10, United States
Code, as added by section 2831(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat. 2669), is amended by striking ``September 30,
2015'' and inserting ``September 30, 2020''.

SEC. 2824. UTILITY CONVEYANCES TO SUPPORT INTEGRATED WATER
AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM ON GUAM.

(a) Conveyance of Utilities.--The Secretary of Defense may
convey to the Guam Waterworks Authority (in this section
referred to as the ``Authority'') all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to the water and
wastewater treatment utility systems on Guam, including the
Fena Reservoir, for the purpose of establishing an integrated
water and wastewater treatment system on Guam.
(b) Consideration.--
(1) Consideration required.--As consideration for the
conveyance of the water and wastewater treatment utility
systems on Guam, the Authority shall pay to the Secretary of
Defense an amount equal to the fair market value of the
utility infrastructure to be conveyed, as determined pursuant
to an agreement between the Secretary and the Authority.
(2) Deferred payments.--At the discretion of the Authority,
the Authority may elect to pay the consideration determined
under paragraph (1) in equal annual payments over a period of
not more than 25 years, starting with the first year
beginning after the date of the conveyance of the water and
wastewater treatment utility systems to the Authority.
(3) Acceptance of in-kind services.--The consideration
required by paragraph (1) may be paid in cash or in-kind, as
acceptable to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior,
shall consider the value of in-kind services provided by the
Government of Guam pursuant to section 311 of the Compact of
Free Association between the Government of the United States
and the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia,
approved by Congress in the Compact of Free Association
Amendments Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-188; 117 Stat. 2781),
section 311 of the Compact of Free Association between the
Government of the United States and the Government of the
Republic of the Marshall Islands, approved by Congress in
such Act, and the Compact of Free Association between the
Government of the United States and the Government of the
Republic of Palau, approved by Congress in the Palau Compact
of Free Association Act (Public Law 99-658; 100 Stat. 3672).
(c) Condition of Conveyance.--As a condition of the
conveyance under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense
must obtain at least a 33 percent voting representation on
the Guam Consolidated Commission on Utilities, including a
proportional representation as chairperson of the Commission.
(d) Implementation Report.--
(1) Report required.--If the Secretary of Defense
determines to use the authority provided by subsection (a) to
convey the water and wastewater treatment utility systems to
the Authority, the Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report containing--
(A) a description of the actions needed to efficiently
convey the water and wastewater treatment utility systems to
the Authority; and
(B) an estimate of the cost of the conveyance.
(2) Submission.--The Secretary shall submit the report not
later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary
makes the determination triggering the report requirement.
(e) New Water Systems.--If the Secretary of Defense
determines to use the authority provided by subsection (a) to
convey the water and wastewater treatment utility systems to
the Authority, the Secretary shall also enter into an
agreement with the Authority, under which the Authority will
manage and operate any water well or wastewater treatment
plant that is constructed by the Secretary of a military
department on Guam on or after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(f) Additional Term and Conditions.--The Secretary of
Defense may require such additional terms and conditions in
connection with the conveyance under this section as the
Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests of
the United States.
(g) Technical Assistance.--
(1) Assistance authorized; reimbursement.--The Secretary of
the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of the Bureau
of Reclamation, may provide technical assistance to the
Secretary of Defense and the Authority regarding the
development of plans for the design, construction, operation,
and maintenance of integrated water and wastewater treatment
utility systems on Guam.
(2) Contracting authority; condition.--The Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the Commissioner of the Bureau of
Reclamation, may enter into memoranda of understanding,
cooperative agreements, and other agreements with the
Secretary of Defense to provide technical assistance as
described in paragraph (1) under such terms and conditions as
the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Defense
consider appropriate, except that costs incurred by the
Secretary of the Interior to provide technical assistance
under paragraph (1) shall be covered by the Secretary of
Defense.
(3) Report and other assistance.--Not later than one year
after date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the
Interior and the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees, the Committee on Natural
Resources of the House of Representatives, and the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report
detailing the following:
(A) Any technical assistance provided under paragraph (1)
and information pertaining to any memoranda of understanding,
cooperative agreements, and other agreements entered into
pursuant to paragraph (2).
(B) An assessment of water and wastewater systems on Guam,
including cost estimates and budget authority, including
authorities available under the Acts of June 17, 1902, and
June 12, 1906 (popularly known as the Reclamation Act; 43
U.S.C. 391) and other authority available to the Secretary of
the Interior, for financing the design, construction,
operation, and maintenance of such systems.
(C) The needs related to water and wastewater
infrastructure on Guam and the protection of water resources
on Guam identified by the Authority.

SEC. 2825. REPORT ON TYPES OF FACILITIES REQUIRED TO SUPPORT
GUAM REALIGNMENT.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of the Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the structural integrity of facilities required to support
the realignment of military installations and the relocation
of military personnel on Guam.
(b) Contents of Report.--The report required by subsection
(a) shall contain the following elements:
(1) A threat assessment to the realigned forces, including
natural and manmade threats.
(2) An evaluation of the types of facilities and the
enhanced structural requirements required to deter the threat
assessment specified in paragraph (1).
(3) An assessment of the costs associated with the enhanced
structural requirements specified in paragraph (2).

SEC. 2826. REPORT ON CIVILIAN INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS FOR GUAM.

(a) Report Required.--The Secretary of the Interior shall
prepare a report--
(1) detailing the civilian infrastructure improvements
needed on Guam to directly and indirectly support and sustain
the realignment of military installations and the relocation
of military personnel on Guam; and
(2) identifying, to the maximum extent practical, the
potential funding sources for such improvements from other
Federal departments and agencies and from existing
authorities and funds within the Department of Defense.
(b) Consultation.--The Secretary of the Interior shall
prepare the report required by subsection (a) in consultation
with the Secretary of Defense, the Government of Guam, and
the Interagency Group on the Insular Areas established by
Executive Order 13537.
(c) Submission.--The Secretary of the Interior shall submit
the report required by subsection (a) to the congressional
defense committees and the Committee on Natural Resources of
the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 2827. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON PLANNED REPLACEMENT
NAVAL HOSPITAL ON GUAM.

(a) Assessment Required.--The Comptroller General of the
United States shall review and

[[Page 9611]]

assess the proposed replacement Naval Hospital on Guam to
determine whether the size and scope of the hospital will be
sufficient to support the current and projected military
mission requirements and Department of Defense beneficiary
population on Guam.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report containing
the results of the review and assessment under subsection
(a).

Subtitle D--Energy Security

SEC. 2831. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE
PRACTICES IN DEPARTMENT ENERGY PERFORMANCE
PLAN.

Section 2911(c) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``and hybrid-electric
drive'' after ``alternative fuels'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (11) and
paragraphs (5) through (8) as paragraphs (6) through (9),
respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new
paragraph:
``(5) Opportunities for the high-performance construction,
lease, operation, and maintenance of buildings.''; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (9) (as redesignated by
paragraph (2)) the following new paragraph:
``(10) The value of incorporating electric, hybrid-
electric, and high efficiency vehicles into vehicle
fleets.''.

SEC. 2832. PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES FOR ACHIEVING
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GOAL REGARDING USE OF
RENEWABLE ENERGY TO MEET FACILITY ENERGY NEEDS.

(a) Plan and Guidelines Required.--Section 2911(e) of title
10, 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) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
Secretaries of the military departments, shall develop a plan
and implementation guidelines for achieving the percentage
goal specified in paragraph (1)(A).''.
(b) Submission.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
House of Representatives a report containing the plan and
implementation guidelines required by paragraph (2) of
section 2911(e) of title 10, United States Code, as added by
subsection (a).

SEC. 2833. INSULATION RETROFITTING ASSESSMENT FOR DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE FACILITIES.

(a) Submission and Contents of Insulation Retrofitting
Assessment.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House
of Representatives an assessment containing an estimate of--
(1) the number of Department of Defense facilities
described in subsection (b); and
(2) the overall cost savings and energy savings to the
Department that would result from retrofitting those
facilities with improved insulation.
(b) Facilities Included in Assessment.--The assessment
requirement in subsection (a) shall apply with respect to
each Department of Defense facility the retrofitting of which
(as described in such subsection) would result, over the
remaining expected life of the facility, in an amount of cost
savings that is at least twice the amount of the cost of the
retrofitting.

Subtitle E--Land Conveyances

SEC. 2841. CONVEYANCE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY RELATED TO WASTE-
TO-ENERGY POWER PLANT SERVING EIELSON AIR FORCE
BASE, ALASKA.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Air Force
may convey to the Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska (in
this section referred to as the ``Borough''), personal
property acquired for the Eielson Air Force Base Alternate
Energy Source Program to be used for a waste-to-energy power
plant that would generate electricity through the burning of
waste generated by the Borough, Eielson Air Force Base, and
other Federal facilities or State or local government
entities.
(b) Consideration.--As consideration for the conveyance of
personal property under subsection (a), the Secretary shall
require the Borough to offset Eielson Air Force Base waste
disposal fees by the fair market value of the conveyed
property.
(c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.

SEC. 2842. LAND CONVEYANCE, WHITTIER PETROLEUM, OIL, AND
LUBRICANT TANK FARM, WHITTIER, ALASKA.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may
convey, without consideration, to the City of Whittier,
Alaska (in this section referred to as the ``City''), all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to
parcels of real property, including any improvements thereon,
consisting of approximately 31 acres at the Whittier
Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricant Tank Farm, Whittier, Alaska,
for the purpose of permitting the City to use the property
for local public activities.
(b) Payment of Costs of Conveyances.--
(1) Payment required.--The Secretary shall require the City
to cover costs to be incurred by the Secretary, or to
reimburse the Secretary for costs incurred by the Secretary,
to carry out the conveyance under subsection (a), including
survey costs, costs related to environmental documentation,
and other administrative costs related to the conveyance.
(2) Treatment of amounts received.--Amounts received as
reimbursements under paragraph (1) shall be credited to the
fund or account that was used to cover the costs incurred by
the Secretary in carrying out the conveyance. 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.
(c) Savings Provision.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect or limit the application of, or any
obligation to comply with, any environmental law, including
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) and the Solid
Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.).
(d) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
descriptions of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary.
(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a), including easements
or covenants to protect cultural or natural resources, as the
Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests of
the United States.

SEC. 2843. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT KNOX, KENTUCKY.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may
convey, without consideration, to the Department of Veterans
Affairs of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (in this section
referred to as the ``Department'') all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to a parcel of real
property, including any improvements thereon, consisting of
approximately 194 acres at Fort Knox, Kentucky, for the
purpose of permitting the Department to establish and operate
a State veterans home and future expansion of the adjacent
State veterans cemetery for veterans and eligible family
members of the Armed Forces.
(b) Reimbursement for Costs of Conveyance.--(1) The
Department shall reimburse the Secretary for any costs
incurred by the Secretary in making the conveyance under
subsection (a), including costs related to environmental
documentation and other administrative costs. This paragraph
does not apply to costs associated with the environmental
remediation of the property to be conveyed.
(2) Amounts received as reimbursement under paragraph (1)
shall be credited to the fund or account that was used to
cover the costs incurred by the Secretary in carrying out the
conveyance. 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 other amounts in such fund or account.
(c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary.
(d) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a), as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.

SEC. 2844. LAND CONVEYANCE, NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY (WEST
BANK), NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--Except as provided in
subsection (b), the Secretary of the Navy may convey to the
Algiers Development District all right, title, and interest
of the United States in and to the real property comprising
the Naval Support Activity (West Bank), New Orleans,
Louisiana, including--
(1) any improvements and facilities on the real property;
and
(2) available personal property on the real property.
(b) Certain Property Excluded.--The conveyance under
subsection (a) may not include--
(1) the approximately 29-acre area known as the Secured
Area of the real property described in such subsection, which
shall remain subject to the Lease; and
(2) the Quarters A site, which is located at Sanctuary
Drive, as determined by a survey satisfactory to the
Secretary of the Navy.
(c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary of the Navy.
(d) Timing.--The authority provided in subsection (a) may
only be exercised after--
(1) the Secretary of the Navy determines that the property
described in subsection (a) is no longer needed by the
Department of the Navy; and
(2) the Algiers Development District delivers the full
consideration as required by Article 3 of the Lease.
(e) Condition of Conveyance.--The conveyance authorized by
subsection (a) shall include a condition that expressly
prohibits any use of the property that would interfere or
otherwise restrict operations of the Department of the Navy
in the Secured Area referred to in subsection (b), as
determined by the Secretary of the Navy.

[[Page 9612]]

(f) Subsequent Conveyance of Secured Area.--If at any time
the Secretary of the Navy determines and notifies the Algiers
Development District that there is no longer a continuing
requirement to occupy or otherwise control the Secured Area
referred to in subsection (b) to support the mission of the
Marine Forces Reserve or other comparable Marine Corps use,
the Secretary may convey to the Algiers Development District
the Secured Area and the any improvements situated thereon.
(g) Subsequent Conveyance of Quarters A.--If at any time
the Secretary of the Navy determines that the Department of
the Navy no longer has a continuing requirement for general
officers quarters to be located on the Quarters A site
referred to in subsection (b) or the Department of the Navy
elects or offers to transfer, sell, lease, assign, gift or
otherwise convey any or all of the Quarters A site or any
improvements thereon to any third party, the Secretary may
convey to the Algiers Development District the real property
containing the Quarters A site.
(h) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary of the
Navy may require such additional terms and conditions in
connection with the conveyance of property under this
section, consistent with the Lease, as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interest of the United
States.
(i) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``Algiers Development District'' means the
Algiers Development District, a local political subdivision
of the State of Louisiana.
(2) The term ``Lease'' means that certain Real Estate Lease
for Naval Support Activity New Orleans, West Bank, New
Orleans, Louisiana, Lease No. N47692-08-RP-08P30, by and
between the United States, acting by and through the
Department of the Navy, and the Algiers Development District
dated September 30, 2008.

SEC. 2845. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORMER NAVY EXTREMELY LOW
FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS PROJECT SITE,
REPUBLIC, MICHIGAN.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may
convey, without consideration, to Humboldt Township in
Marquette County, Michigan, all right, title, and interest of
the United States in and to a parcel of real property,
including any improvements thereon, in Republic, Michigan,
consisting of approximately seven acres and formerly used as
an Extremely Low Frequency communications project site, for
the purpose of permitting the Township to use the property
for local public activities.
(b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary.
(c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.

SEC. 2846. LAND CONVEYANCE, MARINE FORCES RESERVE CENTER,
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may
convey to the North Carolina State Port Authority of
Wilmington, North Carolina (in this section referred to as
the ``Port Authority''), all right, title, and interest of
the United States in and to a parcel of real property,
including any improvements thereon, consisting of
approximately 3.03 acres and known as the Marine Forces
Reserve Center in Wilmington, North Carolina, for the purpose
of permitting the Port Authority to use the parcel for
development of a port facility and for other public purposes.
(b) Inclusion of Personal Property.--The Secretary of the
Navy may include as part of the conveyance under subsection
(a) personal property of the Navy at the Marine Forces
Reserve Center that the Secretary of Transportation
recommends is appropriate for the development or operation of
the port facility and the Secretary of the Navy agrees is
excess to the needs of the Navy.
(c) Interim Lease.--Until such time as the real property
described in subsection (a) is conveyed by deed, the
Secretary of the Navy may lease the property to the Port
Authority.
(d) Consideration.--
(1) Conveyance.--The conveyance under subsection (a) shall
be made without consideration as a public benefit conveyance
for port development if the Secretary of the Navy determines
that the Port Authority satisfies the criteria specified in
section 554 of title 40, United States Code, and regulations
prescribed to implement such section. If the Secretary
determines that the Port Authority fails to qualify for a
public benefit conveyance, but still desires to acquire the
property, the Port Authority shall pay to the United States
an amount equal to the fair market value of the property to
be conveyed. The fair market value of the property shall be
determined by the Secretary.
(2) Lease.--The Secretary of the Navy may accept as
consideration for a lease of the property under subsection
(c) an amount that is less than fair market value if the
Secretary determines that the public interest will be served
as a result of the lease.
(e) 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 Navy and the Port Authority. The cost of
such survey shall be borne by the Port Authority.
(f) Additional Terms.--The Secretary of the Navy 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.

Subtitle F--Other Matters

SEC. 2851. REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO PROVIDING WORLD CLASS
MILITARY MEDICAL FACILITIES.

(a) Unified Construction Standard for Military Construction
and Repairs to Military Medical Facilities.--Not later than
90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall establish a unified construction
standard for military construction and repairs for military
medical facilities that provides a single standard of care.
This standard shall also include a size standard for
operating rooms and patient recovery rooms.
(b) Independent Review Panel.--
(1) Establishment; purpose.--The Secretary of Defense shall
establish an independent advisory panel for the purpose of--
(A) advising the Secretary regarding whether the
Comprehensive Master Plan for the National Capital Region
Medical, dated April 2010, is adequate to fulfill statutory
requirements, as required by section 2714 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (division
B of Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 2656), to ensure that the
facilities and organizational structure described in the plan
result in world class military medical facilities in the
National Capital Region;
(B) monitoring the implementation and any subsequent
modification of the master plan referred to in subparagraph
(A); and
(C) making recommendations regarding any adjustments of the
master plan referred to in subparagraph (A) needed to ensure
the provision of world class military medical facilities and
delivery system in the National Capital Region.
(2) Members.--
(A) Appointments by secretary.--The panel shall be composed
of such members as determined by the Secretary of Defense,
except that the Secretary shall include as members--
(i) medical facility design experts;
(ii) military healthcare professionals;
(iii) representatives of premier health care facilities in
the United States; and
(iv) former retired senior military officers with joint
operational and budgetary experience.
(B) Congressional appointments.--The chairmen and ranking
members of the Committees on the Armed Services of the Senate
and House of Representatives may each designate one member of
the panel.
(C) Term.--Members of the panel may serve on the panel
until the termination date specified in paragraph (7).
(D) Compensation.--While performing duties on behalf of the
panel, a member and any adviser referred to in paragraph (4)
shall be reimbursed under Government travel regulations for
necessary travel expenses.
(3) Meetings.--The panel shall meet not less than
quarterly. The panel or its members may make other visits to
military treatment facilities and military headquarters in
connection with the duties of the panel.
(4) Staff and advisors.--The Secretary of Defense shall
provide necessary administrative staff support to the panel.
The panel may call in advisers for consultation.
(5) Reports.--
(A) Initial report.--Not later than 120 days after the
first meeting of the panel, the panel shall submit to the
Secretary of Defense a written report containing an
assessment of the adequacy of the master plan referred to in
paragraph (1)(A) and the recommendations of the panel to
improve the plan.
(B) Additional reports.--Not later than February 28, 2011,
and February 29, 2012, the panel shall submit to the
Secretary of Defense a report on the findings and
recommendations of the panel to address any deficiencies
identified by the panel.
(6) Assessment of recommendations.--Not later than 30 days
after the date of the submission of each report under
paragraph (5), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report including--
(A) an assessment by the Secretary of the findings and
recommendations of the panel; and
(B) the plans of the Secretary for addressing such findings
and recommendations.
(7) Termination.--The panel shall terminate on September
30, 2015.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) National capital region.--The term ``National Capital
Region'' has the meaning given the term in section 2674(f) of
title 10, United States Code.
(2) World class military medical facility.--The term
``world class military medical facility'' has the meaning
given the term by the National Capital Region Base
Realignment and Closure Health Systems Advisory Subcommittee
of the Defense Health Board in appendix B of the report
titled ``Achieving World Class--An Independent Review of the
Design Plans for the Walter Reed National Military Medical
Center and the Fort Belvoir Community Hospital'' and
published in May 2009, as required by section 2721 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009
(division B of Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4716).

SEC. 2852. NAMING OF ARMED FORCES RESERVE CENTER, MIDDLETOWN,
CONNECTICUT.

The newly constructed Armed Forces Reserve Center in
Middletown, Connecticut, shall be known and designated as the
``Major General Maurice Rose Armed Forces Reserve Center''.
Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or
other record of the United States

[[Page 9613]]

to such Armed Forces Reserve Center shall be deemed to be a
reference to the Major General Maurice Rose Armed Forces
Reserve Center.

TITLE XXIX--OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

Subtitle A--Fiscal Year 2010 Projects

SEC. 2901. AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of the Army
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for various locations outside the United States, and
subject to the purpose, total amount authorized, and
authorization of appropriations specified for the projects,
set forth in the following table:

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2009, in the total
amount of $195,600,000.
(2) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2009, in the total amount of
$40,000,000.
(3) Architectural and engineering services and construction
design.--For architectural and engineering services and
construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United
States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2009, in the
total amount of $6,696,000.

SEC. 2902. AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of the Air
Force may acquire real property and carry out military
construction projects for various locations outside the
United States, and subject to the purpose, total amount
authorized, and authorization of appropriations specified for
the projects, set forth in the following table:

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2009, in the total
amount of $245,050,000.
(2) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2009, in the total amount of
$15,000,000.
(3) Architectural and engineering services and construction
design.--For architectural and engineering services and
construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United
States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2009, in the
total amount of $19,040,000.

Subtitle B--Fiscal Year 2011 Projects

SEC. 2911. AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $761,950,000.
(2) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total amount of
$78,330,000.
(3) Architectural and engineering services and construction
design.--For architectural and engineering services and
construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United
States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the
total amount of $89,716,000.

SEC. 2912. AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

[[Page 9614]]

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Outside the united states.--For military construction
projects outside the United States authorized by subsection
(a), funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total
amount of $217,500,000.
(2) Unspecified minor military construction projects.--For
unspecified minor military construction projects authorized
by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years
beginning after September 30, 2010, in the total amount of
$49,584,000.
(3) Architectural and engineering services and construction
design.--For architectural and engineering services and
construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United
States Code, funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2010, in the
total amount of $13,422,000.

SEC. 2913. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE WIDE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Outside the United States.--The Secretary of Defense
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the Defense Agencies for a classified project at
a classified location outside the United States, and subject
to the total amount authorized and authorization of
appropriations specified for the project, set forth in the
following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense Wide: Military Construction Outside the United States (Amounts Are Specified In Thousands of Dollars)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization
Overseas Location Installation or Location Purpose of Project Project of
Amount Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XC Classified Location........ Classified Project.......... 41,900 41,900
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 2914. CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION FOR NATIONAL SECURITY
AGENCY FACILITIES IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY.

Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated by this
subtitle, the Secretary of Defense may use not more than
$46,500,000 to plan, design, and construct facilities in a
foreign country for the National Security Agency.

Subtitle C--Other Matters

SEC. 2921. NOTIFICATION OF OBLIGATION OF FUNDS AND QUARTERLY
REPORTS.

(a) Notification of Obligation of Funds.--
(1) Notice and wait requirement.--Before using appropriated
funds to carry out a construction project outside the United
States that is authorized by section 2901, 2902, 2911, or
2912 and has an estimated cost in excess of the amounts
authorized for unspecified minor military construction
projects under section 2805(c) of title 10, United States
Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a notice regarding the
construction project. The project may be carried out only
after the end of the 10-day period beginning on the date the
notice is received by the committees or, if earlier, the end
of the 7-day period beginning on the date on which a copy of
the notification is provided in an electronic medium pursuant
to section 480 of title 10, United States Code.
(2) Contents of notice.--The notice for a construction
project covered by subsection (a) shall include the
following:
(A) Certification that the construction--
(i) is necessary to meet urgent military operational
requirements of a temporary nature involving the use of the
Armed Forces;
(ii) is carried out in support of a non-enduring mission;
and
(iii) is the minimum construction necessary to meet
temporary operational requirements.
(B) A description of the purpose for which appropriated
funds are being obligated.
(C) All relevant documentation detailing the construction
project.
(D) An estimate of the total amount obligated for the
construction.
(b) Quarterly Reports.--
(1) Report required.--Not later than 45 days after the end
of each fiscal-year quarter during which appropriated funds
are obligated or expended to carry out construction projects
outside the United States that are authorized by section
2901, 2902, 2911, or 2912, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on
the worldwide obligation and expenditure during that quarter
of appropriated funds for such construction projects.
(2) Project authority contingent on submission of
reports.--The ability to use section 2901, 2902, 2911, or
2912 as authority during a fiscal year to obligate
appropriated funds available to carry out construction
projects outside the United States shall commence for that
fiscal year only after the date on which the Secretary of
Defense submits to the congressional defense committees all
of the quarterly reports (if any) that were required under
paragraph (1) for the preceding fiscal year.
(c) Limitation on Transfer Authority.--If the Secretary of
the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force determines that
amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of
appropriation in section 2901, 2902, 2911, or 2912 are
required for any construction project that will cause
obligations to exceed any of the category amounts specified
in this title or for a construction project that is not
within the scope of the category, the Secretary shall notify
the congressional defense committees of this determination at
least 14 days before obligating funds for the project.

DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations

SEC. 3101. NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for
fiscal year 2011 for the activities of the National Nuclear
Security Administration in carrying out programs necessary
for national security in the amount of $11,214,755,000, to be
allocated as follows:
(1) For weapons activities, $7,008,835,000.
(2) For defense nuclear nonproliferation activities,
$2,687,167,000.
(3) For naval reactors, $1,070,486,000.
(4) For the Office of the Administrator for Nuclear
Security, $448,267,000.
(b) Authorization of New Plant Projects.--From funds
referred to in subsection (a) that are available for carrying
out plant projects, the Secretary of Energy may carry out new
plant projects for the National Nuclear Security
Administration as follows:
(1) Project 11-D-801, reinvestment project phase 2, Los
Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico,
$23,300,000.
(2) Project 11-D-601, sanitary effluent reclamation
facility expansion, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los
Alamos, New Mexico, $15,000,000.

SEC. 3102. DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Energy for fiscal year 2011 for defense
environmental cleanup activities in carrying out programs
necessary for national security in the amount of
$5,588,039,000.

SEC. 3103. OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Energy for fiscal year 2011 for other defense
activities in carrying out programs necessary for national
security in the amount of $878,209,000.

SEC. 3104. ENERGY SECURITY AND ASSURANCE.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Energy for fiscal

[[Page 9615]]

year 2011 for energy security and assurance programs
necessary for national security in the amount of $6,188,000.

Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

SEC. 3111. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY RELATING TO THE
INTERNATIONAL MATERIALS PROTECTION, CONTROL,
AND ACCOUNTING PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY.

Section 3156(b)(1) of the Bob Stump National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314;
116 Stat. 2739; 50 U.S.C. 2343(b)(1)) is amended by striking
``January 1, 2013'' and inserting ``January 1, 2018''.

SEC. 3112. ENERGY PARKS INITIATIVE.

(a) In General.--Subtitle B of title XLVIII of the Atomic
Energy Defense Act (division D of Public Law 107-314; 50
U.S.C. 2501 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:

``SEC. 4815. ENERGY PARKS INITIATIVE.

``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy may facilitate
the development of energy parks described in subsection (b)
on defense nuclear facility reuse property through the use of
collaborative partnerships with State and local governments,
the private sector, and community reuse organizations
approved by the Secretary.
``(b) Energy Parks.--An energy park described in this
subsection is a facility (or group of facilities) developed
for the purpose of--
``(1) promoting energy security, environmental
sustainability, economic competitiveness, and energy sector
jobs; and
``(2) encouraging pilot programs, demonstration projects,
or commercial projects, at or near such facility, with
respect to energy generation, energy efficiency, and advanced
manufacturing technologies that will contribute to a
stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations
through the reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of energy-
related emissions.
``(c) Infrastructure.--In facilitating the development of
an energy park under this section, the Secretary shall--
``(1) use existing infrastructure, facilities, workforces,
and other assets in the vicinity of the energy park; and
``(2) ensure that such energy park does not interfere with
the Secretary's other responsibilities at any defense nuclear
facility.
``(d) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2011, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services and
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services and the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a
report on steps taken to facilitate the development of energy
parks under this section.
``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `defense nuclear facility' has the meaning
given the term `Department of Energy defense nuclear
facility' in section 318 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2286g).
``(2) The term `defense nuclear facility reuse property'
means property that--
``(A) is located at a defense nuclear facility; and
``(B) the Secretary of Energy determines--
``(i) has been adequately remediated by the Secretary or
was not in need of remediation; and
``(ii) is ready for use as an energy park.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
4001(b) of such Act (division D of Public Law 107-314) is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 4814
the following new item:

``Sec. 4815. Energy parks initiative.''.

SEC. 3113. ESTABLISHMENT OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CENTERS.

(a) Technology Transfer Centers.--
(1) In general.--Section 4813 of the Atomic Energy Defense
Act (division D of Public Law 107-314; 50 U.S.C. 2794) is
amended--
(A) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
(B) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new
subsection (b):
``(b) Technology Transfer Centers.--(1) Subject to the
availability of appropriations provided for such purpose, the
Administrator shall establish a technology transfer center
described in paragraph (2) at each national security
laboratory.
``(2) A technology transfer center described in this
paragraph is a center to foster collaborative scientific
research, technology development, and the appropriate
transfer of research and technology to users in addition to
the national security laboratories.
``(3) In establishing a technology transfer center under
this subsection, the Administrator--
``(A) shall enter into cooperative research and development
agreements with governmental, public, academic, or private
entities; and
``(B) may enter into a contract with respect to
constructing, purchasing, managing, or leasing buildings or
other facilities.''.
(2) Definition.--Subsection (c) of such section, as
redesignated by paragraph (1)(A), is amended by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(5) The term `national security laboratory' has the
meaning given that term in section 3281 of the National
Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2471).''.
(3) Section heading.--The heading of such section is
amended by inserting ``AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CENTERS''
after ``PARTNERSHIPS''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
4001(b) of such Act (division D of Public Law 107-314) is
amended by striking the item relating to section 4813 and
inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 4813. Critical technology partnerships and technology transfer
centers.''.

SEC. 3114. AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT.

Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated under section
3101(a)(1) for fiscal year 2011 for weapons activities, the
Secretary of Energy may procure not more than two aircraft.

Subtitle C--Reports

SEC. 3121. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON NNSA BIENNIAL
COMPLEX MODERNIZATION STRATEGY.

Section 3255 of the National Nuclear Security
Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2455) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new
subsection (d):
``(d) GAO Study and Reports.--(1) For each plan and
assessment submitted under subsection (a), the Comptroller
General of the United States shall conduct a study that
includes the following:
``(A) An analysis of the plan under subsection (a)(1).
``(B) An analysis of the assessment under subsection
(a)(2).
``(C) Whether both the budget for the fiscal year in which
the plan and assessment are submitted and the future-years
nuclear security program submitted to Congress in relation to
such budget under section 3253 provide for funding of the
nuclear security complex at a level that is sufficient for
the modernization and refurbishment of the nuclear security
complex in accordance with the plan.
``(D) An analysis of any assessment submitted by the
Administrator under subsection (c).
``(E) With respect to the facilities infrastructure
recapitalization program--
``(i) whether such program achieved its mission of
addressing deferred and backlogged maintenance;
``(ii) to what extent deferred and backlogged maintenance
remains unaddressed;
``(iii) whether the expiration of such program's
authorities has weakened or strengthened plans under
subsection (a); and
``(iv) whether the reauthorization of such program would
further the goal of modernizing and refurbishing the nuclear
security complex.
``(2) Not later than 180 days after the date on which the
Administrator submits the plan and assessment under
subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the study under
paragraph (1), including--
``(A) the findings of the study under paragraph (1);
``(B) whether the plan and assessment submitted under
subsection (a) support each element under subsection (b); and
``(C) the role of the United States Strategic Command in
making an assessment under subsection (c).
``(3) Not later than 90 days after the date on which a
budget is submitted to Congress during an even-numbered
fiscal year, the Comptroller General shall submit to the
congressional defense committees an update to the previous
study under paragraph (1) taking into account the nuclear
security budget materials included with such budget.''.

SEC. 3122. REPORT ON GRADED SECURITY PROTECTION POLICY.

(a) Report.--Not later than February 1, 2011, the Secretary
of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on the implementation of the graded
security protection policy of the Department of Energy.
(b) Matters Included.--The report under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) A comprehensive plan and schedule (including any
benchmarks, milestones, or other deadlines) for implementing
the graded security protection policy.
(2) An explanation of the current status of the graded
security protection policy for each site with respect to the
comprehensive plan under paragraph (1).
(3) An explanation of the Secretary's objective end-state
for implementation of the graded security protection policy
(such end-state shall include supporting justification and
rationale to ensure that robust and adaptive security
measures meet the graded security protection policy
requirements).
(4) Identification of each site that has received an
exception or waiver to the graded security protection policy,
including the justification for each such exception or
waiver.
(5) A schedule for ``force-on-force'' exercises that the
Secretary considers necessary to maintain operational
readiness.
(6) A description of a program that will provide proper
training and equipping of personnel to a certifiable
standard.
(c) Form.--The report required by subsection (a) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified
annex.

TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

SEC. 3201. AUTHORIZATION.

There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year
2011, $28,640,000 for the operation of the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board under chapter 21 of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2286 et seq.).

TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

SEC. 3401. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Amount.--There are hereby authorized to be appropriated
to the Secretary of Energy

[[Page 9616]]

$23,614,000 for fiscal year 2011 for the purpose of carrying
out activities under chapter 641 of title 10, United States
Code, relating to the naval petroleum reserves.
(b) Period of Availability.--Funds appropriated pursuant to
the authorization of appropriations in subsection (a) shall
remain available until expended.

TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

SEC. 3501. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR NATIONAL
SECURITY ASPECTS OF THE MERCHANT MARINE FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2011.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2011, to be available without fiscal year limitation if
so provided in appropriations Acts, for the use of the
Department of Transportation for Maritime Administration
programs associated with maintaining national security
aspects of the merchant marine, as follows:
(1) For expenses necessary for operations of the United
States Merchant Marine Academy, $100,020,000, of which--
(A) $63,120,000 shall remain available until expended for
Academy operations;
(B) $6,000,000 shall remain available until expended for
refunds to Academy midshipmen for improperly charged fees;
and
(C) $30,900,000 shall remain available until expended for
capital improvements at the Academy.
(2) For expenses necessary to support the State maritime
academies, $15,007,000, of which--
(A) $2,000,000 shall remain available until expended for
student incentive payments;
(B) $2,000,000 shall remain available until expended for
direct payments to such academies; and
(C) $11,007,000 shall remain available until expended for
maintenance and repair of State maritime academy training
vessels.
(3) For expenses necessary to dispose of vessels in the
National Defense Reserve Fleet, $10,000,000.
(4) For expenses to maintain and preserve a United States-
flag merchant marine to serve the national security needs of
the United States under chapter 531 of title 46, United
States Code, $174,000,000.
(5) For the cost (as defined in section 502(5) of the
Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661a(5)) of loan
guarantees under the program authorized by chapter 537 of
title 46, United States Code, $60,000,000, of which
$3,688,000 shall remain available until expended for
administrative expenses of the program.

SEC. 3502. EXTENSION OF MARITIME SECURITY FLEET PROGRAM.

Chapter 531 of title 46, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in section 53104(a), by striking ``2015'' and inserting
``2025'';
(2) in section 53106(a)(1)(C), by striking ``for each
fiscal years 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015'' and inserting ``for
each of fiscal years 2012 though 2025''; and
(3) in section 53111(3), by striking ``2015'' and inserting
``2025''.

SEC. 3503. UNITED STATES MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY NOMINATIONS
OF RESIDENTS OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS.

Section 51302(b) of title 46, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``the Northern Mariana
Islands,'' after ``Guam,''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (5) and redesignating paragraph
(6) as paragraph (5).

SEC. 3504. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES FOR PORT OF GUAM
IMPROVEMENT ENTERPRISE PROGRAM.

Section 3512(c)(4) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (48 U.S.C.
1421r(c)(4)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``, and of other amounts appropriated or
otherwise made available to the Maritime Administration for
the purposes of the Program for fiscal year 2011 or
thereafter,'' after ``for a fiscal year''; and
(2) by inserting ``under this section'' before the period
at the end.

SEC. 3505. VESSEL LOAN GUARANTEES: PROCEDURES FOR TRADITIONAL
AND NONTRADITIONAL APPLICATIONS.

(a) Definitions.--Section 53701 of title 46, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (14) as paragraph (16);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (10) through (13) as
paragraphs (11) through (14), respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following new
paragraph:
``(9) Nontraditional application.--The term `nontraditional
application' means an application for a loan, guarantee, or
commitment to guarantee under this chapter, that is not a
traditional application, as determined by the
Administrator.''; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (14), as so redesignated,
the following new paragraph:
``(15) Traditional application.--The term `traditional
application' means an application for a loan, guarantee, or
commitment to guarantee under this chapter that involves a
market, technology, and financial structure of a type that
has proven successful in previous applications and does not
present an unreasonable risk to the United States, as
determined by the Administrator.''.
(b) Deadline for Decision on Application; Extension.--
Section 53703(a) of title 46, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) In general.--The Secretary or Administrator shall
approve or deny an application for a loan guarantee under
this chapter--
``(A) in the case of a traditional application, before the
end of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which the
signed application is received by the Secretary or
Administrator; and
``(B) in the case of a nontraditional application, before
the end of the 120-day period beginning on such date of
receipt.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the 270-day period in
paragraph (1) to a date not later than 2 years'' and
inserting ``the applicable period under paragraph (1) to a
date that is not later than 1 year after the date on which
the signed application was received by the Secretary or
Administrator''.
(c) Independent Analysis.--Section 53708(d) of title 46,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``an application''
and inserting ``a nontraditional application''.
(d) Application.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply only to applications submitted after the date of
enactment of this Act.

The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute is in order except those printed in House Report 111-498 and
amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House Resolution 1404.
Except as specified in section 4 of the resolution, each amendment
printed in the report shall be offered only in the order printed, may
be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be
considered read, 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 the report not earlier disposed of or germane
modifications of any such amendments.
Amendments en bloc shall be considered read, except that
modifications shall be reported, shall be debatable for 20 minutes,
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
or their designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be
subject to a demand for division of the question.
For the purpose of inclusion in such amendments en bloc, an amendment
printed in the form of a motion to strike may be modified to the form
of a germane perfecting amendment to the text originally proposed to be
stricken.
The original proponent of an amendment included in the amendments en
bloc may insert a statement in the Congressional Record immediately
before disposition of the amendments en bloc.
The Chair of the Committee of the Whole may recognize for
consideration of any amendment out of the order printed, but not sooner
than 30 minutes after the chair of the Committee on Armed Services or
his designee announces from the floor a request to that effect.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Skelton

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, amendment
No. 1.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Skelton:
Page 172, line 10, strike ``of an enlisted member of the
Armed Forces'' and insert ``of a candidate''.
Page 172, beginning line 12, strike ``member,'' and insert
``candidate''.
Page 172, line 15, insert after ``(1)'' the following: ``is
an enlisted member of the Armed Forces and''.
Page 404, line 6, strike ``or later''.
Page 437, strike line 19 and all that follows through page
438, line 14 (and redesignate subsequent sections
accordingly).
Page 603, in the table above line 1, in the column titled
``Installation or Location'', strike ``Miami'' and insert
``North Fort Myers'', strike ``West Palm Beach'' and insert
``Tallahassee'', strike ``Kansas City'' and insert
``Belton'', strike ``Dallas'' and insert ``Denton'', and
strike ``Virginia Beach'' and insert ``Fort Story''.
Page 670, lines 1 and 2, strike ``NATIONAL SECURITY
AGENCY'' and insert ``DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE'' (and conform
the table of contents in section 2(b)).
Page 670, line 7, strike ``National Security Agency'' and
insert ``Department of Defense''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman

[[Page 9617]]

from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the
gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas).
Ms. TSONGAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding and for your
leadership on this important legislation.
I rise in support of the Fiscal Year 2011 National Defense
Authorization Act and the accompanying manager's amendment.
This bipartisan legislation supports the ongoing efforts of our Armed
Forces to keep our country safe, to maintain our resolve against
extremists, and to sustain nuclear weapons nonproliferation.
It provides our men and women with the crucial tools they need to
protect our country and to effectively find and hold accountable those
who wish us harm. Equally as important, the NDAA includes protections
for our servicemembers, such as lighter weight body armor that will
keep our servicemembers safe but will lighten the burden we ask them to
carry.
This bill also expands legal rights for servicemembers who have been
victims of sexual assault, and it improves training related to the
prevention of and to the response to this crime. I also look forward to
the long overdue repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
The unanimous support that this bill received in committee is a
testament to our continued commitment to provide the technology,
equipment, and manpower required to protect our country at all times.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5136.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from New Jersey
will control the time.
There was no objection.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to my
friend and colleague, a gentleman who has made a tremendous
contribution to the committee already in the area of nuclear weaponry,
the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich).
Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this amendment, which
improves and perfects strong underlying legislation to keep the
American people safe and to spur economic growth in places like central
New Mexico.
The bill, as amended, will expand TRICARE coverage to include
dependent children up to the age of 26, something our troops and
military families deserve. It also provides our military with the
cutting-edge resources that they need to defend our Nation.
Many of these advancements originate in central New Mexico at
Kirtland Air Force Base and at Sandia National Laboratories. For
example, the Operationally Responsive Space satellite program and the
Airborne Laser Test Bed will both receive greater resources to
accomplish their important missions, and the bill will authorize a
secure microgrid energy pilot program on a military installation to
advance our goal of energy security and independence.
This bill is a true reflection of our 21st century military strategy
for keeping Americans safe, and I urge my colleagues to support the
amendment and the underlying legislation.

{time} 1415

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I
will not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, for the benefit of the House, we will be
calling several speakers.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to our friend and colleague who has
been a leader on port security issues here in the country, who has
worked very hard on them, the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Richardson).
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5136.
I want to thank Chairman Skelton, the committee, and all of the staff
that have brought us to this point.
Having visited Afghanistan and Iraq, I strongly agree that this bill
will help us to restore and enhance the readiness of our troops. But
with the limited time that I have to speak, I would like to focus on
one part of the amendment today, and that is my amendment that would
allow the Transportation Command to update and expand its Port Look
2008 strategic seaports study. This study remains a crucial tool to
ensure that our ports remain ready to respond in the case of an
emergency, and, worse, an attack.
My amendment would expand the scope of the report to include the
consideration of infrastructure in the vicinity of strategic ports,
including bridges, roads, and rail capacity. We must be ready to move
our troops immediately and to get them the resources that they need.
I stand to say something that I have said before: ``The role of our
ports is to connect the forts.'' If the transportation systems and
infrastructure in and around our strategic ports are deficient, the
ability of our ports to fulfill their readiness would fail.
I stand in support of this amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Hawaii (Mr. Djou), a new Member that will be serving on our committee
that we are really happy to hear from at this time.
Mr. DJOU. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5136, the fiscal
year 2011 Defense Authorization Act, as approved unanimously by the
Armed Services Committee. I am pleased today to give my first
substantive speech as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives.
It is a great honor to speak on the Defense Authorization Act, not
only as a Member of Congress, but also as the Member who represents
Hawaii's First Congressional District,the home of the U.S. Pacific
Command, and speaking also, of course, as an Army Reservist. It is also
my honor to be speaking on this measure the week before Memorial Day.
To defend America, we need the best-trained and best-equipped United
States Armed Forces. I am pleased this bill attempts to ensure that the
Department of Defense is fully equipped and well prepared to fight all
of our current and future battles on behalf of our Nation.
I am pleased to support this particular resolution, which contains
important measures for the Pacific Command, particularly, of course,
for myself, representing Hawaii's First Congressional District, home of
the United States Navy's Pacific Fleet, the U.S. Air Force's Pacific
Air Force, and the 25th Infantry Division of the United States Army.
These measures and provisions contained in here will help defend the
United States and the Asia-Pacific region from the looming threats to
our national security, in particular the region right now in the Korean
Peninsula, which I believe deserves our Nation's critical attention.
I am happy also to support the Republican efforts to deploy a
comprehensive missile defense system. As the Representative from
Hawaii, the one region which is in the flight arc of North Korea's
ballistic missiles, this is an important development and something that
I encourage the United States Congress to continue to develop further.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to my
friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney), who has worked
very hard on the issue of special combat pay for those facing the
fierce actions we are engaged in.
Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, last year I was in Afghanistan. Some
paratroopers were transporting me outside the city of Kandahar, and one
of them stopped and turned to me and said, Are you a Congressman? I
said yes. He said, Can you help us? We haven't had a pay raise in 10
years. I said, Can I help you? You bet I can.
Upon returning, I introduced the COMBAT Act to increase specialty pay
for troops serving overseas and separated from their families. Over the
past

[[Page 9618]]

several months, I have worked to incorporate hostile fire, imminent
danger, and family separation allowance pay increases into the 2011
National Defense Authorization Act. This increase will help hundreds of
thousands of servicemembers and their families.
Our servicemembers and their families have made enormous sacrifices
to keep us safe. They deserve this pay raise, and I am proud to see
that the increases are included in the 2011 defense authorization bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your efforts, and for working with me on
this issue, and for all the work that you have done for our Armed
Forces. I support this important legislation.
Mr. McKEON. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, many of the Members on our side have been talking about
the Murphy amendment that will be coming up later today. We were
concerned that we were only given 10 minutes to debate that amendment,
something that will be very far-reaching, very important to all of the
members of the armed services and to the country. I would like to talk
just a little bit about the process that we have been going through
this year.
Earlier this year, the President, in his State of the Union speech,
told the Nation that he wanted to see Don't Ask, Don't Tell repealed by
the end of the year. The Secretary, in responding to the President's
message, put a process in place, a process that would give to the
Congress a report covering many items.
In March, the Secretary selected General Ham and Jeh Johnson, Defense
Counsel for the Defense Department, two very good men, men of high
integrity, men that have taken this responsibility very seriously. I
met with them, and I talked to them about the process, about what they
were going to do, how they would work to make it fair.
This month, just a couple of weeks ago, they have let a contract to
Westat, a Rockville-based firm that has done survey work for the
Defense Manpower Data Center to conduct surveys on military personnel,
military spouses, and the comprehensive review working group. They have
set their criteria on how they are going to move forward on this
survey.
They will sample 350,000 members of the military and their families.
They will survey 100,000 active duty military, 70,000 of their spouses,
100,000 of the Reserve component military, and 80,000 of their spouses.
The sample size will be dictated by randomized statistically valid
responses from various subelements of each component. Servicemembers
will be asked to respond by mid-July, spouses by the end of August.
They will develop and identify the sample of servicemembers and
spouses.
I specifically asked them if they would reach out to make sure that
all members were represented, which is what they are going to do. They
are going to set up a system whereby members of the military who may be
homosexual will be able to have their feelings known and keep their
confidence. That report, as they have been set out now to work on, will
reach out to the military.
They will then report back to us no later than the first of December,
and at that point we are asked to move forward.
I have a letter here from Secretary Gates that says in part, I
believe in the strongest possible terms that the department must, prior
to any legislative action, be allowed the opportunity to conduct a
thorough, objective, and systematic assessment of the impact of such a
policy change; develop an attentive, comprehensive implementation plan,
and provide the President and the Congress with the results of this
effort in order to ensure that this step is taken in the most informed
and effective manner.
Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record the entire letter from Admiral
Mullen and Secretary Gates.

The Secretary of Defense,

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Schrader) to talk about his ideas to help improve health
care for those who serve in our National Guard.
Mr. SCHRADER. Mr. Chairman, I am here offering an amendment in the
Defense reauthorization bill for 2011 because of some of the treatment
that Oregon, Washington, California, Arizona, Nevada, Maryland, and
Vermont Guardsmen may have received when they got back from tours in
Iraq and Afghanistan this spring.
The National Guard and the Army have been fighting side-by-side
through nearly 9 years of war. It is time to make a full assessment of
the treatment our National Guard soldiers receive when they get home.
My first amendment directs the Department of Defense Inspector
General to report back to Congress by the end of the year on the
treatment and medical care our National Guard soldiers receive in
comparison to regular Army.
The second amendment requires the Secretary of Defense to provide
each member of the National Guard with a clear and comprehensive
statement of the medical care and treatment they are entitled to
receive. When they are in theater, the Army makes no distinction
between the National Guard, Army Reserves, and regular Army soldiers.
There should be no distinction in the care when they return home.
I ask the House to continue this work by supporting my amendments.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. 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 Missouri
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Bartlett

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. BARTLETT. 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:

Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Bartlett:
Page 28, after line 3, insert the following:

SEC. 113. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR LINE-HAUL TRACTORS.

(a) Limitation.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by section 101(5) for other procurement, Army,
may be obligated or expended by the Secretary of the Army for
line-haul tractors unless the source selection is made based
on a full and open competition.
(b) Waiver.--The Secretary of the Army may waive the
limitation under subsection (a) if the Secretary certifies to
the congressional defense committees by not later than 90
days after the date of the enactment of this Act that a sole
source selection--

[[Page 9619]]

(1) is needed to fulfill mission requirements; or
(2) is more cost effective than a full and open
competition.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Chairman, we have noted two concerns relative to
the Army Reserve line-haul tractors. The first concern is that they are
procuring these tractors sole-source, without the benefits and
advantages of full and open competition; and, secondly, their
procurement is way, way, behind the need. They are in fact about 1,000
tractors short. So I have a very simple amendment which addresses these
two concerns:
(A) Congressional encouragement of full and open competition.
Congress encourages the Secretary of the Army to use full and open
competition for the M915 tractor-trailer program beginning in fiscal
year 2012; and,
(B) Report. Not later than February 15, 2011, the Secretary of the
Army shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on
line-haul tractors, including possible courses of action that would
accelerate meeting the line-haul tractor requirement of the Army
Reserve.
We have vetted this with the Army Reserves, Mr. Chairman, and they
are in support of it. I encourage a ``yes'' vote on this.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition,
although I do not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from New Jersey is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. It is
a very well-thought-out amendment that encourages competition, which
will be a service to the servicemembers of our country, as well as to
our taxpayers. We thank the gentleman from Maryland for offering it and
would urge Members to support it.
I yield back my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution
1404, as the designee of the chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services, I request that during further consideration of H.R. 5136 in
the Committee of the Whole and following consideration of Amendment No.
82 printed in House Report 111-498, the following amendments be
considered: en bloc No. 3, followed by en bloc No 4.

{time} 1430

Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Smith of Washington

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in House Report 111-498.
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:

Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Smith of Washington:
At the end of subtitle I of title V, insert the following:

SEC. 5__. ANNUAL LEAVE FOR FAMILY OF DEPLOYED MEMBERS OF THE
UNIFORMED SERVICES.

(a) In General.--Part III of title 38, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following new chapter:

``CHAPTER 44--ANNUAL LEAVE FOR FAMILY OF DEPLOYED MEMBERS OF THE
UNIFORMED SERVICES

``Sec.
``4401. Definitions.
``4402. Leave requirement.
``4403. Certification.
``4404. Employment and benefits protection.
``4405. Prohibited acts.
``4406. Enforcement.
``4407. Miscellaneous provisions.

``Sec. 4401. Definitions

``In this chapter:
``(1) The terms `benefit', `rights and benefits',
`employee', `employer', and `uniformed services' have the
meaning given such terms in section 4303 of this title.
``(2) The term `contingency operation' has the same meaning
given such term in section 101(a)(13) of title 10.
``(3) The term `eligible employee' means an individual who
is--
``(A) a family member of a member of a uniformed service;
``(B) an employee of the employer with respect to whom
leave is requested under section 4402 of this title; and
``(C) not entitled to leave under section 102(a)(1)(E) of
the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C.
2612(a)(1)(E)).
``(4) The term `family member' means an individual who is,
with respect to another individual, one of the following:
``(A) The spouse of the other individual.
``(B) A son or daughter of the other individual.
``(C) A parent of the other individual.
``(5) The term `reduced leave schedule' means a leave
schedule that reduces the usual number of hours per workweek,
or hours per workday, of an employee.
``(6) The terms `spouse', `son or daughter', and `parent'
have the meaning given such terms in section 101 of the
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611).

``Sec. 4402. Leave requirement

``(a) Entitlement to Leave.--In any 12-month period, an
eligible employee shall be entitled to two workweeks of leave
for each family member of the eligible employee who, during
such 12-month period--
``(1) is in the uniformed services; and
``(2)(A) receives notification of an impending call or
order to active duty in support of a contingency operation;
or
``(B) is deployed in connection with a contingency
operation.
``(b) Leave Taken Intermittently or on Reduced Leave
Schedule.--(1) Leave under subsection (a) may be taken by an
eligible employee intermittently or on a reduced leave
schedule as the eligible employee considers appropriate.
``(2) The taking of leave intermittently or on a reduced
leave schedule pursuant to this subsection shall not result
in a reduction in the total amount of leave to which the
eligible employee is entitled under subsection (a) beyond the
amount of leave actually taken.
``(c) Paid Leave Permitted.--Leave granted under subsection
(a) may consist of paid leave or unpaid leave as the employer
of the eligible employee considers appropriate.
``(d) Relationship to Paid Leave.--(1) If an employer
provides paid leave to an eligible employee for fewer than
the total number of workweeks of leave that the eligible
employee is entitled to under subsection (a), the additional
amount of leave necessary to attain the total number of
workweeks of leave required under subsection (a) may be
provided without compensation.
``(2) An eligible employee may elect, and an employer may
not require the eligible employee, to substitute any of the
accrued paid vacation leave, personal leave, or family leave
of the eligible employee for leave provided under subsection
(a) for any part of the total period of such leave the
eligible employee is entitled to under such subsection.
``(e) Notice for Leave.--In any case in which an eligible
employee chooses to use leave under subsection (a), the
eligible employee shall provide such notice to the employer
as is reasonable and practicable.

``Sec. 4403. Certification

``(a) In General.--An employer may require that a request
for leave under section 4402(a) of this title be supported by
a certification of entitlement to such leave.
``(b) Timeliness of Certification.--An eligible employee
shall provide, in a timely manner, a copy of the
certification required by subsection (a) to the employer.
``(c) Sufficient Certification.--A copy of the
notification, call, or order described in section 4402(a)(2)
of this title shall be considered sufficient certification of
entitlement to leave for purposes of providing certification
under this section. The Secretary may prescribe such
additional forms and manners of certification as the
Secretary considers appropriate for purposes of providing
certification under this section.

``Sec. 4404. Employment and benefits protection

``(a) In General.--An eligible employee who takes leave
under section 4402 of this title for the intended purpose of
the leave shall be entitled, on return from such leave--
``(1) to be restored by the employer to the position of
employment held by the eligible employee when the leave
commenced; or
``(2) to be restored to an equivalent position with
equivalent rights and benefits of employment.
``(b) Loss of Benefits.--The taking of leave under section
4402 of this title shall not result in the loss of any
employment benefit accrued prior to the date on which the
leave commenced.
``(c) Limitations.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to entitle any restored employee to--
``(1) the accrual of any seniority or employment benefits
during any period of leave; or
``(2) any right, benefit, or position of employment other
than any right, benefit, or position to which the employee
would have been entitled had the employee not taken the
leave.

[[Page 9620]]

``Sec. 4405. Prohibited acts

``(a) Exercise of Rights.--It shall be unlawful for any
employer to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of
or the attempt to exercise, any right provided under this
chapter.
``(b) Discrimination.--It shall be unlawful for any
employer to discharge or in any other manner discriminate
against any individual for opposing any practice made
unlawful by this chapter.

``Sec. 4406. Enforcement

``The provisions of subchapter III of chapter 43 of this
title shall apply with respect to the provisions of this
chapter as if such provisions were incorporated into and made
part of this chapter.

``Sec. 4407. Miscellaneous provisions

``The provisions of subchapter IV of chapter 43 of this
title shall apply with respect to the provisions of this
chapter as if such provisions were incorporated into and made
part of this chapter.''.
(b) Clerical Amendments.--The table of chapters at the
beginning of title 38, United States Code, and at the
beginning of part III of such title, are each amended by
inserting after the item relating to chapter 43 the following
new item:

``44. Annual Leave for Family of Deployed Members of the Uniformed
Services...............................................4401.''.....

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, 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. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment
regarding military family leave. This committee and this body has, in
the past, taken great steps to make sure that our military families,
when they're deployed, they have and do qualify for the Military Family
Leave Act. Unfortunately, there are some specifics of the military
family--sorry, of the Family Leave Act--that leave out some of our
military personnel when they are deployed because of the jobs that they
have. They do not qualify for the existing Family Leave Act.
What this amendment does is it makes sure that all military
personnel, even if they don't qualify for the Family and Medical Leave
Act, will have the ability to take at least--I'm sorry, the spouses,
children and parents of our military personnel, will have the ability
to take at least 2 weeks of unpaid leave when a servicemember receives
a notification or order to active duty in support of a contingency
operation or is deployed in connection with such an operation.
One of the things that we've really struggled to deal with is the
amount that we have asked of the members of the Guard and Reserve. They
have been deployed far more since 9/11 than they ever were before, and
that has a tremendous impact on their families.
Now, the Guard and Reserve has performed an unbelievable service to
this country. Every time I travel abroad, go to Iraq and Afghanistan
and meet members of the Guard and Reserve who are serving over there, I
come away enormously impressed with their immense dedication and the
job they're doing on our behalf. They continue to do it. They continue
to sign up. Recruitment and retention are at all-time highs. They are
absolutely committed to serving this country.
But they also need our help and support because members of the Guard
and Reserve typically have families and jobs here at home, and that is
disrupted every time they're called up and sent overseas. This is one
small way that we can help them deal with that disruption, by making
sure that their loved ones qualify for the Family Medical Leave Act.
This would be unpaid leave, but it would make sure that they have the
time to help support their loved one who is being deployed.
I ask the body to support this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition,
although I do not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, continuing my earlier comments, I was right
in the middle of a letter by Secretary Gates. I will catch everybody up
to speed.
The Secretary said, prior to any legislative action, the military
should be allowed the opportunity to conduct a thorough, objective, and
systematic assessment of the impact of such a policy change, develop an
attentive comprehensive implementation plan, and provide the President
and the Congress with the results of this effort in order to ensure
that this step is taken in the most informed and effective manner.
I'm inserting some of my own language now. I would like to say that
we will be asked to vote on an amendment later today without having the
value and the important information that would come from this, without
being able to act in a most informed and effective manner.
The Secretary goes on to say a critical element of this effort is the
need to systematically engage our forces, their families and the
broader military community throughout the process. Our military must be
afforded the opportunity to inform us of their concerns, insights, and
suggestions if we are to carry out this change successfully. Therefore,
I strongly oppose any legislation that seeks to change this policy
prior to the completion of this vital assessment process.
Further, I hope Congress will not do so, as it would send a very
damaging message to our men and women in uniform that, in essence,
their views, concerns, and perspectives do not matter on an issue with
such a direct impact and consequence for them and their families.
Now, Mr. Skelton, chairman of the committee, spoke to the Secretary 2
days ago, and the Secretary said, I stand by my letter.
Next I have a letter from Admiral Roughead, Chief of Naval
Operations. I spoke to each of the chiefs day before yesterday, I
believe it was, on May 26, and he sent a letter, part of which says, I
share the view of Secretary Gates that the best approach would be to
complete the DOD review before there's any legislation to change the
law. My concern is that legislative changes, at this point, regardless
of the precise language used, may cause confusion on the status of the
law in the fleet and disrupt the review process itself by leading
sailors to question whether their input matters.
Obtaining the views and opinions of the force and assessing them in
light of the issues involved will be complicated by a shifting
legislative backdrop and its associated debate.
The admiral told me he was very concerned about what it would do in
the force, the confusion that would be caused, and losing the
credibility, actually, of him and his colleagues, because they have
gone out. Based on what the President said, based on what the Secretary
said earlier this year, they have gone to the force and told them they
would be involved in this process; and it breaks faith with them and
the things that they have tried to tell the force.
I will read General Schwartz's letter. General Schwartz is the Chief
of the Air Force. He said, I believe it's important, a matter of
keeping faith with those currently serving in the Armed Forces, that
the Secretary of Defense commission review be completed before there is
any legislation to repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell law, which is the
Murphy amendment which we'll be discussing and voting on later today or
tomorrow.
Such action allows me to provide the best military advice to the
President and sends an important signal to our airmen and their
families that their opinion matters. To do otherwise, in my view, would
be presumptive, and would reflect an intent to act before all relevant
factors are assessed, digested and understood.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I will assume that there is
support for my amendment. I just want to quickly address what Mr.
McKeon has said on two levels. First of all, the amendment that we will
be voting on later today on Don't Ask, Don't Tell specifically leaves
it in the hands of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff to be

[[Page 9621]]

the one who will chair the policy. The policy will not be changed as a
result of the amendment that we are passing. It will meet, absolutely,
the requirement that the Secretary of Defense and others have put out
to get input from the Armed Forces. And it will not, let me repeat,
will not be changed until the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that change. They will have to
certify it before we go forward.
Second of all, this policy, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, this ridiculous
policy that has driven people out of the military who are only too
anxious to serve, has been in existence for 16 years.
And I cannot speak for the gentleman from California, but I have
spoken to many members of the Armed Forces during the course of that
16-year period about this policy, as I'm sure others have. So the main
thing I object to is the characterization that the men and women of our
Armed Forces have been left out of this debate. Nothing could be
further from the truth. We've had 16 years, and a year and a half since
President Obama said that he felt the policy should be changed, to have
those conversations, and we're having them. And again, we will continue
to have them, even after Congress pulls itself out of this policy.
We're the ones who inserted ourselves into the debate by passing it in
the first place 16 years ago. This will now go back to the Secretary of
Defense to have precisely those conversations that Mr. McKeon wants
them to have. And I'm sure that they will.
I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Andrews).
Mr. ANDREWS. I think that the process that my friend from California
lays out is a correct one, that there should be wide solicitation of
views from those who wear the uniform, and there will be.
And the amendment that Mr. Murphy will be offering later today simply
says this: If, after that process the Secretary of Defense and the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Staff believe that the evidence shows that
implementation of the repeal would undercut the readiness or
effectiveness of our troops, they will not certify that the policy
should be put into effect, and it won't be. The Secretary has
repeatedly said, Admiral Mullen has repeatedly said the question is not
whether repeal should take place, but how.
Mr. Murphy's amendment will set up a rational process for that to
take place. I believe it's the right thing to do, and I support Mr.
Smith's amendment which is before us right now.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, 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 amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Marshall

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. MARSHALL. 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:

Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Marshall:
Page 122, after line 18, insert the following:

SEC. 359. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING FIRE-RESISTANT UTILITY
ENSEMBLES FOR NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL IN CIVIL
AUTHORITY MISSIONS.

It is the sense of Congress that the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau should issue fire-resistant utility ensembles to
National Guard personnel who are engaged, or likely to become
engaged, in defense support to civil authority missions that
routinely involve serious fire hazards, such as wildfire
recovery efforts.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Marshall) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, this is a pretty simple amendment. We
give fire retardant uniforms to all soldiers deploying to our combat
zones. National Guard soldiers here in the United States do not have
fire retardant uniforms, for the most part. And yet some National Guard
soldiers, as an ordinary part of their duties, are exposed to fire
hazards.
The amendment's pretty simple. It simply says we acknowledge that
there's a cost issue associated with the issuing of fire retardant
uniforms to all of our National Guard soldiers here in the United
States. But at least we should encourage the Guard to consider issuing
those uniforms to those soldiers who, as a normal course of their
duties, from time to time are exposed to fire hazards. And I hope that
everybody would agree that that's a wise thing for us to do.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition. I
will not oppose the amendment. I will support the amendment as a good
member of the committee.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chair, we do have other things we can talk about here
today, and seeing how the Rules Committee didn't give us time to fully
debate the Murphy amendment on Don't Ask, Don't Tell, we will use the
time for that.
I yield 2 minutes the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman), a member
of the committee.

{time} 1445

Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the
amendment offered and in support of the bill as well, the defense
authorization bill as well, but in opposition certainly to the Murphy
amendment on the Don't Ask, Don't Tell, reversing Don't Ask, Don't
Tell.
One thing that I think hasn't been raised, certainly what the
amendment states is that the Congress of the United States will in fact
delegate to the Department of Defense, to the Secretary of the
Department of Defense and to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
the ability to simply do the assessment based on the survey to make
that decision. But I think the reality is, unfortunately, these are not
independent positions.
The President, at the end of the day, is the Commander in Chief, and
the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
report to the Commander in Chief. So I question the ability for them to
make an independent decision. This policy was put in place by the
Congress of the United States, and it ought to be the Congress of the
United States that ultimately repeals it based on the findings of the
study for which I believe that we have the responsibility to review.
So I would hope that we would, in fact, vote down the Murphy
amendment, do our job in terms of reviewing the findings of the views
of the men and women of the Armed Forces of the United States that this
study is, in fact, to put forward their concerns about the challenges
of reversing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. Then, upon our reading
of that information, we will then make an informed decision going
forward as to whether or not we will reverse this policy or we will
continue this policy or we will, in fact, reform this policy in some
other way. But it is wrong for us to delegate this to somebody else,
and I believe, again, we should vote down the Murphy amendment.
Mr. MARSHALL. I agree with Mr. Coffman, who cochairs, along with me,
the Balanced Budget Caucus. I agree with him on both counts: one, that
I have got a good amendment here, and that we ought not to pass the
Murphy amendment.
I think everybody understood the course that we were headed on with
regard to Don't Ask, Don't Tell was for the military to do a study of
the issue, give the study to us, we look at the study and then make a
decision. We don't have the results of the military's analysis. What we
do have is pretty well expressed concerns by the service Chiefs of each
one of our branches that we ought not to move forward, that we are
getting the cart before the horse here on this issue.
It seems to me we have been committed for some time to a course where

[[Page 9622]]

we are going to look at the information and then make the decision.
This reverses that course. I think it's a mistake.
As long as we are talking about different issues here, I would like
to talk about the F-35 alternate engine as well. We cochair, Mr.
Coffman, the Balanced Budget Caucus. We are both very concerned about
unnecessary expenditures.
I talked to a retired commodore recently. He was an F-16 pilot. They
had a squadron where pretty routinely only four to six of their jets
would operate, and it was engine problems. At the time they were having
those problems, it was sole sourced. When competition was injected, the
effect of competition was that all of a sudden the engines that we were
getting improved in quality dramatically. So competition is good for
the soul.
We actually have a statute that requires competition. If we follow
our own law, we will insist upon competition for the engines where the
F-35 is concerned. But there is a specific example of competition
working where jet engines are concerned, and it's the F-16 and the
reliability of the F-16. GAO did a study of the cost savings associated
with this and concluded it was 21 percent.
Bottom line, there is not a good argument, except for near-term
dollar issues, there is not a single good argument why we wouldn't have
competition where the F-35 engine is concerned.
I appreciate the ranking member and the chairman of this committee
and both of the relevant subcommittees strongly supporting having
competition where the F-35 engine is concerned. I appreciate the
support that I have received for my amendment with regard to National
Guard uniforms.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I thank the gentleman for his agreement with us on this issue, where
we had a process set up. The process was set up by the Secretary in
conformance with the President's wishes, and the thing that they
thought was very important was having the input from those who would be
most affected.
In talking to the Chiefs yesterday, one of them made the comment to
me, in addition to the letters, he says, Hey, I understand the
politics. I understand what's going on here. And he said, The amendment
is very cleverly written. It says nothing will be done to implement
this until the study is done. However, the headline will be ``Don't
Ask, Don't Tell Repealed.'' He says, I understand how that works. But
the guy that's out on an FOB in Afghanistan is going to get the
headline and he is going to then, when somebody may send him a survey,
he is going to say, What is this? I know this is already decided. I
mean, we ought to treat this like it really is.
Many of your Members, I have been on the floor the whole day, I have
listened to this debate, and I was also in the Rules Committee
yesterday and heard it, and many of your Members say this repeals Don't
Ask, Don't Tell. This is it. And then some of your Members are saying,
Well, it doesn't really do anything. It just kind of moves the ball
down the field. Then why are we doing the debate? I think be honest in
what this really does. This precludes the study, the study we just
hired that we are going to pay good money for and we are going to hear
from the troops, but they are going to know that their wishes or their
desires or their comments or their participation is folly because the
decision's already made.
What it's supposed to be was we found out, we went out and did the
study, then it comes back and came to us with the Chief's and the
Secretary's recommendations, and then we do have a responsibility here.
We do pass the laws. And we are giving up that responsibility today by
voting on something without the complete information. And we're dissing
the troops. That's what we're doing. We're disrespecting them.
And as some of the chairmen said to me yesterday, it's going to cause
confusion in the force, and we don't keep faith with those who are
putting their lives on the line every day for us. And especially this
committee. This committee should stand for the force. This committee
should stand for the troops. This should have been discussed in our
committee before it came to the full floor.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MARSHALL. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Marshall).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. 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 Georgia will
be postponed.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 4 of House Resolution
1404, I hereby give notice that amendments number 21, 42, 47 may be
offered out of order.
The Acting CHAIR. Duly noted.

Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. Skelton

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, I offer
amendments en bloc No. 1.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 1 offered by Mr. Skelton consisting of
amendments numbered 9, 10, 16, 24, 36, 63, and 70 printed in House
Report 111-498:

Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Giffords of Arizona

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 452, after line 10, insert the following:

SEC. 1065. SHARED INFORMATION REGARDING TRAINING EXERCISES.

The Secretary of Defense, acting through Joint Task Force
North, may share with the Department of Homeland Security and
the Department of Justice any data gathered during training
exercises.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Nye of Virginia

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 79, after line 6, insert the following:

SEC. 244. REPORT ON REGIONAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY CLUSTERS.

(a) Report.--Not later than March 1, 2011, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees a report on regional advanced technology clusters.
(b) Matters Included.--The report under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) An analysis of regional advanced technology clusters
throughout the United States, including--
(A) an estimate of the amount of public and private funding
activities within each cluster;
(B) an assessment of the technical competencies of each of
these regional advanced technology clusters;
(C) a comparison of the technical competencies of each
regional advanced technology cluster with the technology
needs of the Department of Defense; and
(D) a review of current Department of Defense interaction,
cooperation, or investment in regional advanced technology
clusters.
(2) A strategic plan for encouraging the development of
innovative, advanced technologies, such as robotics and
autonomous systems, to address national security, homeland
security, and first responder challenges by--
(A) enhancing regional advanced technology clusters that
support the technology needs of the Department of Defense;
and
(B) identifying and assisting the expansion of additional
new regional advanced technology clusters to foster research
and development into emerging, disruptive technologies
identified through strategic planning documents of the
Department of Defense.
(3) An identification of the resources needed to establish,
sustain, or grow regional advanced technology clusters.
(4) An identification of mechanisms for collaborating and
cost sharing with other state, local, and Federal agencies
with respect to regional advanced technology clusters,
including any legal impediments that may inhibit
collaboration or cost sharing.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means
the following:
(A) The Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations, and
Small Business of the House of Representatives.
(B) The Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations, and
Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the Senate.
(2) The term ``regional advanced technology cluster'' means
geographic centers focused on building science and
technology-based innovation capacity in areas of local and
regional strength to foster economic growth and improve
quality of life.

[[Page 9623]]

Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Sessions of Texas

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 7__. PILOT PROGRAM ON PAYMENT FOR TREATMENT OF MEMBERS
OF THE ARMED FORCES AND VETERANS FOR TRAUMATIC
BRAIN INJURY AND POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS
DISORDER.

(a) Payment Process.--The Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall carry out a five-year
pilot program under which each such Secretary shall establish
a process through which each Secretary shall provide payment
for treatments (including diagnostic testing) of traumatic
brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder received by
members of the Armed Forces and veterans in health care
facilities other than military treatment facilities or
Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities. Such
process shall provide that payment be made directly to the
health care facility furnishing the treatment.
(b) Conditions for Payment.--The approval by a Secretary
for payment for a treatment pursuant to subsection (a) shall
be subject to the following conditions:
(1) Any drug or device used in the treatment must be
approved or cleared by the Food and Drug Administration for
any purpose.
(2) The treatment or study protocol used in treating the
member or veteran must have been approved by an institutional
review board operating in accordance with regulations issued
by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
(3) The approved treatment or study protocol (including any
patient disclosure requirements) must be used by the health
care provider delivering the treatment.
(4) The patient receiving the treatment or study protocol
must demonstrate an improvement as a result of the treatment
on one or more of the following:
(A) Standardized independent pre-treatment and post-
treatment neuropsychological testing.
(B) Accepted survey instruments.
(C) Neurological imaging.
(D) Clinical examination.
(5) The patient receiving the treatment or study protocol
must be receiving the treatment voluntarily.
(6) The patient receiving the treatment may not be a
retired member of the uniformed services or of the Armed
Forces who is entitled to benefits under part A, or eligible
to enroll under part B, of title XVIII of the Social Security
Act.
(c) Additional Restrictions Prohibited.--Except as provided
in this subsection (b), no restriction or condition for
reimbursement may be placed on any health care provider that
is operating lawfully under the laws of the State in which
the provider is located with respect to the receipt of
payment under this Act.
(d) Payment Deadline.--The Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall make a payment for a
treatment or study protocol pursuant to subsection (a) not
later than 30 days after a member of the Armed Forces or
veteran (or health care provider on behalf of such member or
veteran) submits to the Secretary documentation regarding the
treatment or study protocol. The Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall ensure that the
documentation required under this subsection may not be an
undue burden on the member of the Armed Forces or veteran or
on the health care provider.
(e) Payment Source.--Subsection (c)(1) of section 1074 of
title 10, United States Code, shall apply with respect to the
payment by the Secretary of Defense for treatment or study
protocols pursuant to subsection (a) of traumatic brain
injury and post-traumatic stress disorder received by members
of the Armed Forces.
(f) Payment Amount.--A payment under this Act shall be made
at the equivalent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
reimbursement rate in effect for appropriate treatment codes
for the State or territory in which the treatment or study
protocol is received. If no such rate is in effect, payment
shall be made at a fair market rate, as determined by the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, with respect to a patient who is a
member of the Armed Forces or the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs with respect to a patient who is a veteran.
(g) Data Collection and Availability.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs shall jointly develop and maintain a
database containing data from each patient case involving the
use of a treatment under this section. The Secretaries shall
ensure that the database preserves confidentiality and be
made available only--
(A) for third-party payer examination;
(B) to the appropriate congressional committees and
employees of the Department of Defense, the Department of
Veterans Affairs, the Department of Health and Human
Services, and appropriate State agencies; and
(C) to the primary investigator of the institutional review
board that approved the treatment or study protocol, in the
case of data relating to a patient case involving the use of
such treatment or study protocol.
(2) Enrollment in institutional review board study.--In the
case of a patient enrolled in a registered institutional
review board study, results may be publically distributable
in accordance with the regulations prescribed pursuant to the
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
(Public Law 104-191) and other regulations and practices in
effect as of the date of the enactment of this Act.
(3) Qualified institutional review boards.--The Secretary
of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall each
ensure that the Internet website of their respective
departments includes a list of all civilian institutional
review board studies that have received a payment under this
Act.
(h) Assistance for Members To Obtain Treatment.--
(1) Assignment to temporary duty.--The Secretary of a
military department may assign a member of the Armed Forces
under the jurisdiction of the Secretary to temporary duty or
allow the member a permissive temporary duty in order to
permit the member to receive treatment or study protocol for
traumatic brain injury or post- traumatic stress disorder,
for which payments shall be made under subsection (a), at a
location beyond reasonable commuting distance of the member's
permanent duty station.
(2) Payment of per diem.--A member who is away from the
member's permanent station may be paid a per diem in lieu of
subsistence in an amount not more than the amount to which
the member would be entitled if the member were performing
travel in connection with a temporary duty assignment.
(3) Gift rule waiver.--Notwithstanding any rule of any
department or agency with respect to ethics or the receipt of
gifts, any assistance provided to a member of the Armed
Forces with a service-connected injury or disability for
travel, meals, or entertainment incidental to receiving
treatment or study protocol under this Act, or for the
provision of such treatment or study protocol, shall not be
subject to or covered by any such rule.
(i) Retaliation Prohibited.--No retaliation may be made
against any member of the Armed Forces or veteran who
receives treatment or study protocol as part of registered
institutional review board study carried out by a civilian
health care practitioner.
(j) Treatment of University and Nationally Accredited
Institutional Review Boards.--For purposes of this Act, a
university-affiliated or nationally accredited institutional
review board shall be treated in the same manner as a
Government institutional review board.
(k) Memoranda of Understanding.--The Secretary of Defense
and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall seek to
expeditiously enter into memoranda of understandings with
civilian institutional review boards described in subsection
(j) for the purpose of providing for members of the Armed
Forces and veterans to receive treatment carried out by
civilian health care practitioners under a treatment or study
protocol approved by and under the oversight of civilian
institutional review boards that would qualify for payment
under this Act.
(l) Outreach Required.--
(1) Outreach to veterans.--The Secretary of Veterans
Affairs shall notify each veteran with a service-connected
injury or disability of the opportunity to receive treatment
or study protocol pursuant to this Act.
(2) Outreach to members of the armed forces.--The Secretary
of Defense shall notify each member of the Armed Forces with
a service-connected injury or disability of the opportunity
to receive treatment or study protocol pursuant to this Act.
(m) Report to Congress.--Not later than 30 days after the
last day of each fiscal year during which the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs are authorized
to make payments under this Act, the Secretaries shall
jointly submit to Congress an annual report on the
implementation of this Act. Such report shall include each of
the following for that fiscal year:
(1) The number of individuals for whom the Secretary has
provided payments under this Act.
(2) The condition for which each such individual receives
treatment for which payment is provided under this Act and
the success rate of each such treatment.
(3) Treatment methods that are used by entities receiving
payment provided under this Act and the respective rate of
success of each such method.
(4) The recommendations of the Secretaries with respect to
the integration of treatment methods for which payment is
provided under this Act into facilities of the Department of
Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs.
(n) Termination.--The authority to make a payment under
this Act shall terminate on the date that is five years after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
(o) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this Act $10,000,000 for each
fiscal year during which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
and the Secretary of Defense are authorized to make payments
under this Act.

[[Page 9624]]

Amendment No. 24 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. REPORT RELATED TO MINORITY-OWNED, WOMEN-OWNED, AND
DISADVANTAGED-OWNED SMALL BUSINESSES.

Not later than December 1, 2010, the Secretary of Defense
shall provide to the Congressional Black Caucus a report that
includes a list of minority-owned, women-owned, and
disadvantaged-owned small businesses that receive contracts
resulting from authorized funding to the Department of
Defense. The list shall cover the 10 calendar years preceding
the date of the enactment of this Act and shall include, for
each listed business, the name of the business and the
business owner and the amount of the contract award.

Amendment No. 36 Offered by Ms. Watson of California

The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of division A, add the following new title:

TITLE XVII--FEDERAL INFORMATION SECURITY

Subtitle A--Federal Information Security Amendments

SEC. 1701. COORDINATION OF FEDERAL INFORMATION POLICY.

Chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by
striking subchapters II and III and inserting the following:

``SUBCHAPTER II--INFORMATION SECURITY

``Sec. 3551. Purposes

``The purposes of this subchapter are to--
``(1) provide a comprehensive framework for ensuring the
effectiveness of information security controls over
information resources that support Federal operations and
assets;
``(2) recognize the highly networked nature of the current
Federal computing environment and provide effective
Governmentwide management and oversight of the related
information security risks, including coordination of
information security efforts throughout the civilian,
national security, and law enforcement communities;
``(3) provide for development and maintenance of minimum
controls required to protect Federal information and
information infrastructure;
``(4) provide a mechanism for improved oversight of Federal
agency information security programs;
``(5) acknowledge that commercially developed information
security products offer advanced, dynamic, robust, and
effective information security solutions, reflecting market
solutions for the protection of critical information
infrastructures important to the national defense and
economic security of the Nation that are designed, built, and
operated by the private sector; and
``(6) recognize that the selection of specific technical
hardware and software information security solutions should
be left to individual agencies from among commercially
developed products.

``Sec. 3552. Definitions

``(a) Section 3502 Definitions.--Except as provided under
subsection (b), the definitions under section 3502 shall
apply to this subchapter.
``(b) Additional Definitions.--In this subchapter:
``(1) The term `adequate security' means security that
complies with the regulations promulgated under section 3554
and the standards promulgated under section 3558.
``(2) The term `incident' means an occurrence that actually
or potentially jeopardizes the confidentiality, integrity, or
availability of an information system, information
infrastructure, or the information the system processes,
stores, or transmits or that constitutes a violation or
imminent threat of violation of security policies, security
procedures, or acceptable use policies.
``(3) The term `information infrastructure' means the
underlying framework that information systems and assets rely
on in processing, storing, or transmitting information
electronically.
``(4) The term `information security' means protecting
information and information infrastructure from unauthorized
access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or
destruction in order to provide--
``(A) integrity, which means guarding against improper
information modification or destruction, and includes
ensuring information nonrepudiation and authenticity;
``(B) confidentiality, which means preserving authorized
restrictions on access and disclosure, including means for
protecting personal privacy and proprietary information;
``(C) availability, which means ensuring timely and
reliable access to and use of information; and
``(D) authentication, which means using digital credentials
to assure the identity of users and validate access of such
users.
``(5) The term `information technology' has the meaning
given that term in section 11101 of title 40.
``(6)(A) The term `national security system' means any
information infrastructure (including any telecommunications
system) used or operated by an agency or by a contractor of
an agency, or other organization on behalf of an agency--
``(i) the function, operation, or use of which--

``(I) involves intelligence activities;
``(II) involves cryptologic activities related to national
security;
``(III) involves command and control of military forces;
``(IV) involves equipment that is an integral part of a
weapon or weapons system; or
``(V) subject to subparagraph (B), is critical to the
direct fulfillment of military or intelligence missions; or

``(ii) is protected at all times by procedures established
for information that have been specifically authorized under
criteria established by an Executive order or an Act of
Congress to be kept classified in the interest of national
defense or foreign policy.
``(B) Subparagraph (A)(i)(V) does not include a system that
is to be used for routine administrative and business
applications (including payroll, finance, logistics, and
personnel management applications).

``Sec. 3553. National Office for Cyberspace

``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
Executive Office of the President an office to be known as
the National Office for Cyberspace.
``(b) Director.--
``(1) In general.--There shall be at the head of the Office
a Director, who shall be appointed by the President by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Director of
the National Office for Cyberspace shall administer all
functions under this subchapter and collaborate to the extent
practicable with the heads of appropriate agencies, the
private sector, and international partners. The Office shall
serve as the principal office for coordinating issues
relating to achieving an assured, reliable, secure, and
survivable information infrastructure and related
capabilities for the Federal Government.
``(2) Basic pay.--The Director shall be paid at the rate of
basic pay for level III of the Executive Schedule.
``(c) Staff.--The Director may appoint and fix the pay of
additional personnel as the Director considers appropriate.
``(d) Experts and Consultants.--The Director may procure
temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of
title 5.

``Sec. 3554. Federal Cybersecurity Practice Board

``(a) Establishment.--Within the National Office for
Cyberspace, there shall be established a board to be known as
the `Federal Cybersecurity Practice Board' (in this section
referred to as the `Board').
``(b) Members.--The Board shall be chaired by the Director
of the National Office for Cyberspace and consist of not more
than 10 members, with at least one representative from--
``(1) the Office of Management and Budget;
``(2) civilian agencies;
``(3) the Department of Defense;
``(4) the Federal law enforcement community;
``(5) the Federal Chief Technology Office; and
``(6) such additional military and civilian agencies as the
Director considers appropriate.
``(c) Responsibilities.--
``(1) Development of policies and procedures.--Subject to
the authority, direction, and control of the Director of the
National Office for Cyberspace, the Board shall be
responsible for developing and periodically updating
information security policies and procedures relating to the
matters described in paragraph (2). In developing such
policies and procedures, the Board shall require that all
matters addressed in the policies and procedures are
consistent, to the maximum extent practicable and in
accordance with applicable law, among the civilian, military,
intelligence, and law enforcement communities.
``(2) Specific matters covered in policies and
procedures.--
``(A) Minimum security controls.--The Board shall be
responsible for developing and periodically updating
information security policies and procedures relating to
minimum security controls for information technology, in
order to--
``(i) provide Governmentwide protection of Government-
networked computers against common attacks; and
``(ii) provide agencywide protection against threats,
vulnerabilities, and other risks to the information
infrastructure within individual agencies.
``(B) Measures of effectiveness.--The Board shall be
responsible for developing and periodically updating
information security policies and procedures relating to
measurements needed to assess the effectiveness of the
minimum security controls referred to in subparagraph (A).
Such measurements shall include a risk scoring system to
evaluate risk to information security both Governmentwide and
within contractors of the Federal Government.
``(C) Products and services.--The Board shall be
responsible for developing and periodically updating
information security policies, procedures, and minimum
security

[[Page 9625]]

standards relating to criteria for products and services to
be used in agency information systems and information
infrastructure that will meet the minimum security controls
referred to in subparagraph (A). In carrying out this
subparagraph, the Board shall act in consultation with the
Office of Management and Budget and the General Services
Administration.
``(D) Remedies.--The Board shall be responsible for
developing and periodically updating information security
policies and procedures relating to methods for providing
remedies for security deficiencies identified in agency
information infrastructure.
``(3) Additional considerations.--The Board shall also
consider--
``(A) opportunities to engage with the international
community to set policies, principles, training, standards,
or guidelines for information security;
``(B) opportunities to work with agencies and industry
partners to increase information sharing and policy
coordination efforts in order to reduce vulnerabilities in
the national information infrastructure; and
``(C) options necessary to encourage and maintain
accountability of any agency, or senior agency official, for
efforts to secure the information infrastructure of such
agency.
``(4) Relationship to other standards.--The policies and
procedures developed under paragraph (1) are supplemental to
the standards promulgated by the Director of the National
Office for Cyberspace under section 3558.
``(5) Recommendations for regulations.--The Board shall be
responsible for making recommendations to the Director of the
National Office for Cyberspace on regulations to carry out
the policies and procedures developed by the Board under
paragraph (1).
``(d) Regulations.--The Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace, in consultation with the Director of the Office
of Management and the Administrator of General Services shall
promulgate and periodically update regulations to carry out
the policies and procedures developed by the Board under
subsection (c).
``(e) Annual Report.--The Director of the National Office
for Cyberspace shall provide to Congress a report containing
a summary of agency progress in implementing the regulations
promulgated under this section as part of the annual report
to Congress required under section 3555(a)(8).
``(f) No Disclosure by Board Required.--The Board is not
required to disclose under section 552 of title 5 information
submitted by agencies to the Board regarding threats,
vulnerabilities, and risks.

``Sec. 3555. Authority and functions of the Director of the
National Office for Cyberspace

``(a) In General.--The Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace shall oversee agency information security policies
and practices, including--
``(1) developing and overseeing the implementation of
policies, principles, standards, and guidelines on
information security, including through ensuring timely
agency adoption of and compliance with standards promulgated
under section 3558;
``(2) requiring agencies, consistent with the standards
promulgated under section 3558 and other requirements of this
subchapter, to identify and provide information security
protections commensurate with the risk and magnitude of the
harm resulting from the unauthorized access, use, disclosure,
disruption, modification, or destruction of--
``(A) information collected or maintained by or on behalf
of an agency; or
``(B) information infrastructure used or operated by an
agency or by a contractor of an agency or other organization
on behalf of an agency;
``(3) coordinating the development of standards and
guidelines under section 20 of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3) with agencies
and offices operating or exercising control of national
security systems (including the National Security Agency) to
assure, to the maximum extent feasible, that such standards
and guidelines are complementary with standards and
guidelines developed for national security systems;
``(4) overseeing agency compliance with the requirements of
this subchapter, including through any authorized action
under section 11303 of title 40, to enforce accountability
for compliance with such requirements;
``(5) reviewing at least annually, and approving or
disapproving, agency information security programs required
under section 3556(b);
``(6) coordinating information security policies and
procedures with related information resources management
policies and procedures;
``(7) overseeing the operation of the Federal information
security incident center required under section 3559;
``(8) reporting to Congress no later than March 1 of each
year on agency compliance with the requirements of this
subchapter, including--
``(A) a summary of the findings of audits required by
section 3557;
``(B) an assessment of the development, promulgation, and
adoption of, and compliance with, standards developed under
section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3) and promulgated under
section 3558;
``(C) significant deficiencies in agency information
security practices;
``(D) planned remedial action to address such deficiencies;
and
``(E) a summary of, and the views of the Director of the
National Office for Cyberspace on, the report prepared by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology under section
20(d)(10) of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3);
``(9) coordinating the defense of information
infrastructure operated by agencies in the case of a large-
scale attack on information infrastructure, as determined by
the Director;
``(10) establishing a national strategy, in consultation
with the Department of State, the United States Trade
Representative, and the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, to engage with the international community to set
the policies, principles, standards, or guidelines for
information security; and
``(11) coordinating information security training for
Federal employees with the Office of Personnel Management.
``(b) National Security Systems.--Except for the
authorities described in paragraphs (4) and (8) of subsection
(a), the authorities of the Director of the National Office
for Cyberspace under this section shall not apply to national
security systems.
``(c) Department of Defense and Central Intelligence Agency
Systems.--(1) The authorities of the Director of the National
Office for Cyberspace described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of
subsection (a) shall be delegated to the Secretary of Defense
in the case of systems described in paragraph (2) and to the
Director of Central Intelligence in the case of systems
described in paragraph (3).
``(2) The systems described in this paragraph are systems
that are operated by the Department of Defense, a contractor
of the Department of Defense, or another entity on behalf of
the Department of Defense that processes any information the
unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption,
modification, or destruction of which would have a
debilitating impact on the mission of the Department of
Defense.
``(3) The systems described in this paragraph are systems
that are operated by the Central Intelligence Agency, a
contractor of the Central Intelligence Agency, or another
entity on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency that
processes any information the unauthorized access, use,
disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction of which
would have a debilitating impact on the mission of the
Central Intelligence Agency.
``(d) Budget Oversight and Reporting.--(1) The head of each
agency shall submit to the Director of the National Office
for Cyberspace a budget each year for the following fiscal
year relating to the protection of information infrastructure
for such agency, by a date determined by the Director that is
before the submission of such budget by the head of the
agency to the Office of Management and Budget.
``(2) The Director shall review and offer a non-binding
approval or disapproval of each agency's annual budget to
each agency before the submission of such budget by the head
of the agency to the Office of Management and Budget.
``(3) If the Director offers a non-binding disapproval of
an agency's, budget, the Director shall transmit
recommendations to the head of such agency for strengthening
its proposed budget with regard to the protection of such
agency's information infrastructure.
``(4) Each budget submitted by the head of an agency
pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include--
``(A) a review of any threats to information technology for
such agency;
``(B) a plan to secure the information infrastructure for
such agency based on threats to information technology, using
the National Institute of Standards and Technology guidelines
and recommendations;
``(C) a review of compliance by such agency with any
previous year plan described in subparagraph (B); and
``(D) a report on the development of the credentialing
process to enable secure authentication of identity and
authorization for access to the information infrastructure of
such agency.
``(5) The Director of the National Office for Cyberspace
may recommend to the President monetary penalties or
incentives necessary to encourage and maintain accountability
of any agency, or senior agency official, for efforts to
secure the information infrastructure of such agency.

``Sec. 3556. Agency responsibilities

``(a) In General.--The head of each agency shall--
``(1) be responsible for--
``(A) providing information security protections
commensurate with the risk and magnitude of the harm
resulting from unauthorized access, use, disclosure,
disruption, modification, or destruction of--
``(i) information collected or maintained by or on behalf
of the agency; and
``(ii) information infrastructure used or operated by an
agency or by a contractor of an agency or other organization
on behalf of an agency;

[[Page 9626]]

``(B) complying with the requirements of this subchapter
and related policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines,
including--
``(i) the regulations promulgated under section 3554 and
the information security standards promulgated under section
3558;
``(ii) information security standards and guidelines for
national security systems issued in accordance with law and
as directed by the President;
``(iii) and ensuring the standards implemented for
information infrastructure and national security systems
under the agency head are complementary and uniform, to the
extent practicable; and
``(C) ensuring that information security management
processes are integrated with agency strategic and
operational planning processes;
``(2) ensure that senior agency officials provide
information security for the information and information
infrastructure that support the operations and assets under
their control, including through--
``(A) assessing the risk and magnitude of the harm that
could result from the unauthorized access, use, disclosure,
disruption, modification, or destruction of such information
or information infrastructure;
``(B) determining the levels of information security
appropriate to protect such information and information
infrastructure in accordance with regulations promulgated
under section 3554 and standards promulgated under section
3558, for information security classifications and related
requirements;
``(C) implementing policies and procedures to cost
effectively reduce risks to an acceptable level; and
``(D) continuously testing and evaluating information
security controls and techniques to ensure that they are
effectively implemented;
``(3) delegate to an agency official, designated as the
'Chief Information Security Officer', under the authority of
the agency Chief Information Officer the responsibility to
oversee agency information security and the authority to
ensure and enforce compliance with the requirements imposed
on the agency under this subchapter, including--
``(A) overseeing the establishment and maintenance of a
security operations capability on an automated and continuous
basis that can--
``(i) assess the state of compliance of all networks and
systems with prescribed controls issued pursuant to section
3558 and report immediately any variance therefrom and, where
appropriate and with the approval of the agency Chief
Information Officer, shut down systems that are found to be
non-compliant;
``(ii) detect, report, respond to, contain, and mitigate
incidents that impair adequate security of the information
and information infrastructure, in accordance with policy
provided by the Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace, in consultation with the Chief Information
Officers Council, and guidance from the National Institute of
Standards and Technology;
``(iii) collaborate with the National Office for Cyberspace
and appropriate public and private sector security operations
centers to address incidents that impact the security of
information and information infrastructure that extend beyond
the control of the agency; and
``(iv) not later than 24 hours after discovery of any
incident described under subparagraph (A)(ii), unless
otherwise directed by policy of the National Office for
Cyberspace, provide notice to the appropriate security
operations center, the National Cyber Investigative Joint
Task Force, and the Inspector General of the agency;
``(B) developing, maintaining, and overseeing an agency
wide information security program as required by subsection
(b);
``(C) developing, maintaining, and overseeing information
security policies, procedures, and control techniques to
address all applicable requirements, including those issued
under sections 3555 and 3558;
``(D) training and overseeing personnel with significant
responsibilities for information security with respect to
such responsibilities; and
``(E) assisting senior agency officials concerning their
responsibilities under paragraph (2);
``(4) ensure that the agency has trained and cleared
personnel sufficient to assist the agency in complying with
the requirements of this subchapter and related policies,
procedures, standards, and guidelines;
``(5) ensure that the Chief Information Security Officer,
in coordination with other senior agency officials, reports
biannually to the agency head on the effectiveness of the
agency information security program, including progress of
remedial actions; and
``(6) ensure that the Chief Information Security Officer
possesses necessary qualifications, including education,
professional certifications, training, experience and the
security clearance required to administer the functions
described under this subchapter; and has information security
duties as the primary duty of that official.
``(b) Agency Program.--Each agency shall develop,
document, and implement an agencywide information security
program, approved by the Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace under section 3555(a)(5), to provide information
security for the information and information infrastructure
that support the operations and assets of the agency,
including those provided or managed by another agency,
contractor, or other source, that includes--
``(1) continuous automated technical monitoring of
information infrastructure used or operated by an agency or
by a contractor of an agency or other organization on behalf
of an agency to assure conformance with regulations
promulgated under section 3554 and standards promulgated
under section 3558;
``(2) testing of the effectiveness of security controls
that are commensurate with risk (as defined by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Office
for Cyberspace) for agency information infrastructure;
``(3) policies and procedures that--
``(A) mitigate and remediate, to the extent practicable,
information security vulnerabilities based on the risk posed
to the agency;
``(B) cost effectively reduce information security risks to
an acceptable level;
``(C) ensure that information security is addressed
throughout the life cycle of each agency information system
and information infrastructure;
``(D) ensure compliance with--
``(i) the requirements of this subchapter;
``(ii) policies and procedures as may be prescribed by the
Director of the National Office for Cyberspace, and
information security standards promulgated under section
3558;
``(iii) minimally acceptable system configuration
requirements, as determined by the Director of the National
Office for Cyberspace; and
``(iv) any other applicable requirements, including--

``(I) standards and guidelines for national security
systems issued in accordance with law and as directed by the
President;
``(II) the policy of the Director of the National Office
for Cyberspace;
``(III) the National Institute of Standards and Technology
guidance; and
``(IV) the Chief Information Officers Council recommended
approaches;

``(E) develop, maintain, and oversee information security
policies, procedures, and control techniques to address all
applicable requirements, including those issued under
sections 3555 and 3558; and
``(F) ensure the oversight and training of personnel with
significant responsibilities for information security with
respect to such responsibilities;
``(4) ensuring that the agency has trained and cleared
personnel sufficient to assist the agency in complying with
the requirements of this subchapter and related policies,
procedures, standards, and guidelines;
``(5) to the extent practicable, automated and continuous
technical monitoring for testing, and evaluation of the
effectiveness and compliance of information security
policies, procedures, and practices, including--
``(A) management, operational, and technical controls of
every information infrastructure identified in the inventory
required under section 3505(b); and
``(B) management, operational, and technical controls
relied on for an evaluation under section 3556;
``(6) a process for planning, implementing, evaluating, and
documenting remedial action to address any deficiencies in
the information security policies, procedures, and practices
of the agency;
``(7) to the extent practicable, continuous automated
technical monitoring for detecting, reporting, and responding
to security incidents, consistent with standards and
guidelines issued by the Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace, including--
``(A) mitigating risks associated with such incidents
before substantial damage is done;
``(B) notifying and consulting with the appropriate
security operations response center; and
``(C) notifying and consulting with, as appropriate--
``(i) law enforcement agencies and relevant Offices of
Inspectors General;
``(ii) the National Office for Cyberspace; and
``(iii) any other agency or office, in accordance with law
or as directed by the President; and
``(8) plans and procedures to ensure continuity of
operations for information infrastructure that support the
operations and assets of the agency.
``(c) Agency Reporting.--Each agency shall--
``(1) submit an annual report on the adequacy and
effectiveness of information security policies, procedures,
and practices, and compliance with the requirements of this
subchapter, including compliance with each requirement of
subsection (b) to--
``(A) the National Office for Cyberspace;
``(B) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
``(C) the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of
the House of Representatives;
``(D) other appropriate authorization and appropriations
committees of Congress; and
``(E) the Comptroller General;
``(2) address the adequacy and effectiveness of information
security policies, procedures, and practices in plans and
reports relating to--

[[Page 9627]]

``(A) annual agency budgets;
``(B) information resources management of this subchapter;
``(C) information technology management under this chapter;
``(D) program performance under sections 1105 and 1115
through 1119 of title 31, and sections 2801 and 2805 of title
39;
``(E) financial management under chapter 9 of title 31, and
the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (31 U.S.C. 501 note;
Public Law 101-576) (and the amendments made by that Act);
``(F) financial management systems under the Federal
Financial Management Improvement Act (31 U.S.C. 3512 note);
and
``(G) internal accounting and administrative controls under
section 3512 of title 31; and
``(3) report any significant deficiency in a policy,
procedure, or practice identified under paragraph (1) or
(2)--
``(A) as a material weakness in reporting under section
3512 of title 31; and
``(B) if relating to financial management systems, as an
instance of a lack of substantial compliance under the
Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (31 U.S.C. 3512
note).
``(d) Performance Plan.--(1) In addition to the
requirements of subsection (c), each agency, in consultation
with the National Office for Cyberspace, shall include as
part of the performance plan required under section 1115 of
title 31 a description of the resources, including budget,
staffing, and training, that are necessary to implement the
program required under subsection (b).
``(2) The description under paragraph (1) shall be based on
the risk assessments required under subsection (a)(2).
``(e) Public Notice and Comment.--Each agency shall provide
the public with timely notice and opportunities for comment
on proposed information security policies and procedures to
the extent that such policies and procedures affect
communication with the public.

``Sec. 3557. Annual independent audit

``(a) In General.--(1) Each year each agency shall have
performed an independent audit of the information security
program and practices of that agency to determine the
effectiveness of such program and practices.
``(2) Each audit under this section shall include--
``(A) testing of the effectiveness of the information
infrastructure of the agency for automated, continuous
monitoring of the state of compliance of its information
infrastructure with regulations promulgated under section
3554 and standards promulgated under section 3558 in a
representative subset of--
``(i) the information infrastructure used or operated by
the agency; and
``(ii) the information infrastructure used, operated, or
supported on behalf of the agency by a contractor of the
agency, a subcontractor (at any tier) of such contractor, or
any other entity;
``(B) an assessment (made on the basis of the results of
the testing) of compliance with--
``(i) the requirements of this subchapter; and
``(ii) related information security policies, procedures,
standards, and guidelines;
``(C) separate assessments, as appropriate, regarding
information security relating to national security systems;
and
``(D) a conclusion regarding whether the information
security controls of the agency are effective, including an
identification of any significant deficiencies in such
controls.
``(3) Each audit under this section shall be performed in
accordance with applicable generally accepted Government
auditing standards.
``(b) Independent Auditor.--Subject to subsection (c)--
``(1) for each agency with an Inspector General appointed
under the Inspector General Act of 1978 or any other law, the
annual audit required by this section shall be performed by
the Inspector General or by an independent external auditor,
as determined by the Inspector General of the agency; and
``(2) for each agency to which paragraph (1) does not
apply, the head of the agency shall engage an independent
external auditor to perform the audit.
``(c) National Security Systems.--For each agency operating
or exercising control of a national security system, that
portion of the audit required by this section directly
relating to a national security system shall be performed--
``(1) only by an entity designated head; and
``(2) in such a manner as to ensure appropriate protection
for information associated with any information security
vulnerability in such system commensurate with the risk and
in accordance with all applicable laws.
``(d) Existing Audits.--The audit required by this section
may be based in whole or in part on another audit relating to
programs or practices of the applicable agency.
``(e) Agency Reporting.--(1) Each year, not later than such
date established by the Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace, the head of each agency shall submit to the
Director the results of the audit required under this
section.
``(2) To the extent an audit required under this section
directly relates to a national security system, the results
of the audit submitted to the Director of the National Office
for Cyberspace shall contain only a summary and assessment of
that portion of the audit directly relating to a national
security system.
``(f) Protection of Information.--Agencies and auditors
shall take appropriate steps to ensure the protection of
information which, if disclosed, may adversely affect
information security. Such protections shall be commensurate
with the risk and comply with all applicable laws and
regulations.
``(g) National Office for Cyberspace Reports to Congress.--
(1) The Director of the National Office for Cyberspace shall
summarize the results of the audits conducted under this
section in the annual report to Congress required under
section 3555(a)(8).
``(2) The Director's report to Congress under this
subsection shall summarize information regarding information
security relating to national security systems in such a
manner as to ensure appropriate protection for information
associated with any information security vulnerability in
such system commensurate with the risk and in accordance with
all applicable laws.
``(3) Audits and any other descriptions of information
infrastructure under the authority and control of the
Director of Central Intelligence or of National Foreign
Intelligence Programs systems under the authority and control
of the Secretary of Defense shall be made available to
Congress only through the appropriate oversight committees of
Congress, in accordance with applicable laws.
``(h) Comptroller General.--The Comptroller General shall
periodically evaluate and report to Congress on--
``(1) the adequacy and effectiveness of agency information
security policies and practices; and
``(2) implementation of the requirements of this
subchapter.
``(i) Contractor Audits.--Each year each contractor that
operates, uses, or supports an information system or
information infrastructure on behalf of an agency and each
subcontractor of such contractor--
``(1) shall conduct an audit using an independent external
auditor in accordance with subsection (a), including an
assessment of compliance with the applicable requirements of
this subchapter; and
``(2) shall submit the results of such audit to such agency
not later than such date established by the Agency.

``Sec. 3558. Responsibilities for Federal information systems
standards

``(a) Requirement To Prescribe Standards.--
``(1) In general.--
``(A) Requirement.--Except as provided under paragraph (2),
the Secretary of Commerce shall, on the basis of proposed
standards developed by the National Institute of Standards
and Technology pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) of section
20(a) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology
Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3(a)) and in consultation with the
Secretary of Homeland Security, promulgate information
security standards pertaining to Federal information systems.
``(B) Required standards.--Standards promulgated under
subparagraph (A) shall include--
``(i) standards that provide minimum information security
requirements as determined under section 20(b) of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C.
278g-3(b)); and
``(ii) such standards that are otherwise necessary to
improve the efficiency of operation or security of Federal
information systems.
``(C) Required standards binding.--Information security
standards described under subparagraph (B) shall be
compulsory and binding.
``(2) Standards and guidelines for national security
systems.--Standards and guidelines for national security
systems, as defined under section 3552(b), shall be
developed, promulgated, enforced, and overseen as otherwise
authorized by law and as directed by the President.
``(b) Application of More Stringent Standards.--The head of
an agency may employ standards for the cost-effective
information security for all operations and assets within or
under the supervision of that agency that are more stringent
than the standards promulgated by the Secretary of Commerce
under this section, if such standards--
``(1) contain, at a minimum, the provisions of those
applicable standards made compulsory and binding by the
Secretary; and
``(2) are otherwise consistent with policies and guidelines
issued under section 3555.
``(c) Requirements Regarding Decisions by the Secretary.--
``(1) Deadline.--The decision regarding the promulgation
of any standard by the Secretary of Commerce under subsection
(b) shall occur not later than 6 months after the submission
of the proposed standard to the Secretary by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, as provided under
section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3).
``(2) Notice and comment.--A decision by the Secretary of
Commerce to significantly

[[Page 9628]]

modify, or not promulgate, a proposed standard submitted to
the Secretary by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, as provided under section 20 of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3),
shall be made after the public is given an opportunity to
comment on the Secretary's proposed decision.

``Sec. 3559. Federal information security incident center

``(a) In General.--The Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace shall ensure the operation of a central Federal
information security incident center to--
``(1) provide timely technical assistance to operators of
agency information systems and information infrastructure
regarding security incidents, including guidance on detecting
and handling information security incidents;
``(2) compile and analyze information about incidents that
threaten information security;
``(3) inform operators of agency information systems and
information infrastructure about current and potential
information security threats, and vulnerabilities; and
``(4) consult with the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, agencies or offices operating or exercising
control of national security systems (including the National
Security Agency), and such other agencies or offices in
accordance with law and as directed by the President
regarding information security incidents and related matters.
``(b) National Security Systems.--Each agency operating or
exercising control of a national security system shall share
information about information security incidents, threats,
and vulnerabilities with the Federal information security
incident center to the extent consistent with standards and
guidelines for national security systems, issued in
accordance with law and as directed by the President.
(c) Review and Approval.--In coordination with the
Administrator for Electronic Government and Information
Technology, the Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace shall review and approve the policies, procedures,
and guidance established in this subchapter to ensure that
the incident center has the capability to effectively and
efficiently detect, correlate, respond to, contain, mitigate,
and remediate incidents that impair the adequate security of
the information systems and information infrastructure of
more than one agency. To the extent practicable, the
capability shall be continuous and technically automated.

``Sec. 3560. National security systems

``The head of each agency operating or exercising control
of a national security system shall be responsible for
ensuring that the agency--
``(1) provides information security protections
commensurate with the risk and magnitude of the harm
resulting from the unauthorized access, use, disclosure,
disruption, modification, or destruction of the information
contained in such system;
``(2) implements information security policies and
practices as required by standards and guidelines for
national security systems, issued in accordance with law and
as directed by the President; and
``(3) complies with the requirements of this subchapter.''.

SEC. 1702. INFORMATION SECURITY ACQUISITION REQUIREMENTS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 113 of title 40, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end of subchapter II the
following new section:

``Sec. 11319. Information security acquisition requirements.

``(a) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, beginning one year after the date of the enactment of
the Federal Information Security Amendments Act of 2010, no
agency may enter into a contract, an order under a contract,
or an interagency agreement for--
``(1) the collection, use, management, storage, or
dissemination of information on behalf of the agency;
``(2) the use or operation of an information system or
information infrastructure on behalf of the agency; or
``(3) information technology;

unless such contract, order, or agreement includes
requirements to provide effective information security that
supports the operations and assets under the control of the
agency, in compliance with the policies, standards, and
guidance developed under subsection (b), and otherwise
ensures compliance with this section.
``(b) Coordination of Secure Acquisition Policies.--
``(1) In general.--The Director, in consultation with the
Director of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, the Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace, and the Administrator of General Services, shall
oversee the development and implementation of policies,
standards, and guidance, including through revisions to the
Federal Acquisition Regulation and the Department of Defense
supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, to cost
effectively enhance agency-information security, including--
``(A) minimum information security requirements for agency
procurement of information technology products and services;
and
``(B) approaches for evaluating and mitigating significant
supply chain security risks associated with products or
services to be acquired by agencies.
``(2) Report.--Not later than two years after the date of
the enactment of the Federal Information Security Amendments
Act of 2010, the Director shall submit to Congress a report
describing--
``(A) actions taken to improve the information security
associated with the procurement of products and services by
the Federal Government; and
``(B) plans for overseeing and coordinating efforts of
agencies to use best practice approaches for cost-effectively
purchasing more secure products and services.
``(c) Vulnerability Assessments of Major Systems.--
``(1) Requirement for initial vulnerability assessments.--
The Director shall require each agency to conduct an initial
vulnerability assessment for any major system and its
significant items of supply prior to the development of the
system. The initial vulnerability assessment of a major
system and its significant items of supply shall include use
of an analysis-based approach to--
``(A) identify vulnerabilities;
``(B) define exploitation potential;
``(C) examine the system's potential effectiveness;
``(D) determine overall vulnerability; and
``(E) make recommendations for risk reduction.
``(2) Subsequent vulnerability assessments.--
``(A) The Director shall require a subsequent vulnerability
assessment of each major system and its significant items of
supply within a program if the Director determines that
circumstances warrant the issuance of an additional
vulnerability assessment.
``(B) Upon the request of a congressional committee, the
Director may require a subsequent vulnerability assessment of
a particular major system and its significant items of supply
within the program.
``(C) Any subsequent vulnerability assessment of a major
system and its significant items of supply shall include use
of an analysis-based approach and, if applicable, a testing-
based approach, to monitor the exploitation potential of such
system and reexamine the factors described in subparagraphs
(A) through (E) of paragraph (1).
``(3) Congressional oversight.--The Director shall provide
to the appropriate congressional committees a copy of each
vulnerability assessment conducted under paragraph (1) or (2)
not later than 10 days after the date of the completion of
such assessment.
``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Item of supply.--The term `item of supply'--
``(A) means any individual part, component, subassembly,
assembly, or subsystem integral to a major system, and other
property which may be replaced during the service life of the
major system, including a spare part or replenishment part;
and
``(B) does not include packaging or labeling associated
with shipment or identification of an item.
``(2) Vulnerability assessment.--The term `vulnerability
assessment' means the process of identifying and quantifying
vulnerabilities in a major system and its significant items
of supply.
``(3) Major system.--The term `major system' has the
meaning given that term in section 4 of the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403).''.

SEC. 1703. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

(a) Table of Sections in Title 44.--The table of sections
for chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by
striking the matter relating to subchapters II and III and
inserting the following:

``SUBCHAPTER II--INFORMATION SECURITY

``3551. Purposes.
``3552. Definitions.
``3553. National Office for Cyberspace.
``3554. Federal Cybersecurity Practice Board.
``3555. Authority and functions of the Director of the National Office
for Cyberspace.
``3556. Agency responsibilities.
``3557. Annual independent audit.
``3558. Responsibilities for Federal information systems standards.
``3559. Federal information security incident center.
``3560. National security systems.''.

(b) Table of Sections in Title 40.--The table of sections
for chapter 113 of title 40, United States Code, is amended
by inserting after the item relating to section 11318 the
following new item:
``Sec. 11319. Information security acquisition
requirements.''.

(c) Other References.--
(1) Section 1001(c)(1)(A) of the Homeland Security Act of
2002 (6 U.S.C. 511(c)(1)(A)) is amended by striking ``section
3532(3)'' and inserting ``section 3552(b)''.

[[Page 9629]]

(2) Section 2222(j)(6) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``section 3542(b)(2))'' and inserting
``section 3552(b)''.
(3) Section 2223(c)(3) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended, by striking ``section 3542(b)(2))'' and inserting
``section 3552(b)''.
(4) Section 2315 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``section 3542(b)(2))'' and inserting
``section 3552(b)''.
(5) Section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3) is amended--
(A) in subsections (a)(2) and (e)(5), by striking ``section
3532(b)(2)'' and inserting ``section 3552(b)'';
(B) in subsection (e)(2), by striking ``section 3532(1)''
and inserting ``section 3552(b)''; and
(C) in subsections (c)(3) and (d)(1), by striking ``section
11331 of title 40'' and inserting ``section 3558 of title
44''.
(6) Section 8(d)(1) of the Cyber Security Research and
Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7406(d)(1)) is amended by striking
``section 3534(b)'' and inserting ``section 3556(b)''.
(d) Repeal.--
(1) Subchapter III of chapter 113 of title 40, United
States Code, is repealed.
(2) The table of sections for chapter 113 of such title is
amended by striking the matter relating to subchapter III.
(e) Executive Schedule Pay Rate.--Section 5314 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``Director of the National Office for Cyberspace.''.
(f) Membership on the National Security Council.--Section
101(a) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C.
402(a)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (7) and (8) as paragraphs
(8) and (9), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
``(7) the Director of the National Office for
Cyberspace;''.

SEC. 1704. EFFECTIVE DATE.

(a) In General.--Unless otherwise specified in this
section, this subtitle (including the amendments made by this
subtitle) shall take effect 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(b) National Office for Cyberspace.--Section 3553 of title
44, United States Code, as added by section 1701 of this
division, shall take effect 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(c) Federal Cybersecurity Practice Board.--Section 3554 of
title 44, United States Code, as added by section 1701 of
this division, shall take effect one year after the date of
enactment of this Act.

Subtitle B--Federal Chief Technology Officer

SEC. 1711. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER.

(a) Establishment and Staff.--
(1) Establishment.--
(A) In general.--There is established in the Executive
Office of the President an Office of the Federal Chief
Technology Officer (in this section referred to as the
``Office'').
(B) Head of the office.--
(i) Federal chief technology officer.--The President shall
appoint a Federal Chief Technology Officer (in this section
referred to as the ``Federal CTO'') who shall be the head of
the Office.
(ii) Compensation.--Section 5314 of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Federal Chief Technology Officer.''.
(2) Staff of the office.--The President may appoint
additional staff members to the Office.
(b) Duties of the Office.--The functions of the Federal CTO
are the following:
(1) Undertake fact-gathering, analysis, and assessment of
the Federal Government's information technology
infrastructures, information technology strategy, and use of
information technology, and provide advice on such matters to
the President, heads of Federal departments and agencies, and
government chief information officers and chief technology
officers.
(2) Lead an interagency effort, working with the chief
technology and chief information officers of each of the
Federal departments and agencies, to develop and implement a
planning process to ensure that they use best-in-class
technologies, share best practices, and improve the use of
technology in support of Federal Government requirements.
(3) Advise the President on information technology
considerations with regard to Federal budgets and with regard
to general coordination of the research and development
programs of the Federal Government for information
technology-related matters.
(4) Promote technological innovation in the Federal
Government, and encourage and oversee the adoption of robust
cross-governmental architectures and standards-based
information technologies, in support of effective operational
and management policies, practices, and services across
Federal departments and agencies and with the public and
external entities.
(5) Establish cooperative public-private sector partnership
initiatives to achieve knowledge of technologies available in
the marketplace that can be used for improving governmental
operations and information technology research and
development activities.
(6) Gather timely and authoritative information concerning
significant developments and trends in information
technology, and in national priorities, both current and
prospective, and analyze and interpret the information for
the purpose of determining whether the developments and
trends are likely to affect achievement of the priority goals
of the Federal Government.
(7) Develop, review, revise, and recommend criteria for
determining information technology activities warranting
Federal support, and recommend Federal policies designed to
advance the development and maintenance of effective and
efficient information technology capabilities, including
human resources, at all levels of government, academia, and
industry, and the effective application of the capabilities
to national needs.
(8) Any other functions and activities that the President
may assign to the Federal CTO.
(c) Policy Planning; Analysis and Advice.--The Office shall
serve as a source of analysis and advice for the President
and heads of Federal departments and agencies with respect to
major policies, plans, and programs of the Federal Government
in accordance with the functions described in subsection (b).
(d) Coordination of the Office With Other Entities.--
(1) Federal cto on domestic policy council.--The Federal
CTO shall be a member of the Domestic Policy Council.
(2) Federal cto on cyber security practice board.--The
Federal CTO shall be a member of the Federal Cybersecurity
Practice Board.
(3) Obtain information from agencies.--The Office may
secure, directly from any department or agency of the United
States, information necessary to enable the Federal CTO to
carry out this section. On request of the Federal CTO, the
head of the department or agency shall furnish the
information to the Office, subject to any applicable
limitations of Federal law.
(4) Staff of federal agencies.--On request of the Federal
CTO, to assist the Office in carrying out the duties of the
Office, the head of any Federal department or agency may
detail personnel, services, or facilities of the department
or agency to the Office.
(e) Annual Report.--
(1) Publication and contents.--The Federal CTO shall
publish, in the Federal Register and on a public Internet
website of the Federal CTO, an annual report that includes
the following:
(A) Information on programs to promote the development of
technological innovations.
(B) Recommendations for the adoption of policies to
encourage the generation of technological innovations.
(C) Information on the activities and accomplishments of
the Office in the year covered by the report.
(2) Submission.--The Federal CTO shall submit each report
under paragraph (1) to--
(A) the President;
(B) the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the
House of Representatives;
(C) the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of
Representatives; and
(D) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
of the Senate.

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

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 389, after line 7, insert the following:

SEC. 1025. EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE
NAMING OF A NAVAL COMBAT VESSEL AFTER FATHER
VINCENT CAPODANNO.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Father Vincent Capodanno was born on February 13, 1929,
in Staten Island, New York.
(2) After attending Fordham University for a year, he
entered the Maryknoll Missionary Seminary in upstate New York
in 1949, and was ordained a Catholic priest in June 1957.
(3) Father Capodanno's first assignment as a missionary was
working with aboriginal Taiwanese people in the mountains of
Taiwan where he served in a parish and later in a school.
After several years, Father Capodanno returned to the United
States for leave and then was assigned to a Maryknoll school
in Hong Kong.
(4) Father Vincent Capodanno volunteered as a Navy Chaplain
and was commissioned a Lieutenant in the Chaplain Corps of
the United States Naval Reserve in December 28, 1965.
(5) Father Vincent Capodanno selflessly extended his combat
tour in Vietnam on the condition he was allowed to remain
with the infantry.
(6) On September 4, 1967, during a fierce battle in the
Thang Binh District of the Que-Son Valley in Vietnam, Father
Capodanno went among the wounded and dying, giving last rites
and caring for the injured. He was killed that day while
taking care of his Marines.
(7) On January 7, 1969, Father Vincent Capodanno was
awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously for comforting the
wounded and dying during the Vietnam conflict. For

[[Page 9630]]

his dedicated service, Father Capodanno was also awarded the
Bronze Star, the Purple Heart, the Presidential Unit
Citation, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam
Service Medal, the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, and the
Vietnam Campaign Medal.
(8) In his memory, the U.S.S. Capodanno was commissioned on
September 17, 1973. It is the only Naval vessel to date to
have received a Papal blessing by Pope John Paul II in
Naples, Italy, on September 4, 1981.
(9) The U.S.S. Capodanno was decommissioned on July 30,
1993.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Secretary of the Navy should name a combat vessel of the
United States Navy the ``U.S.S. Father Vincent Capodanno'',
in honor of Father Vincent Capodanno, a lieutenant in the
Navy Chaplain Corps.

Amendment No. 70 Offered by Mr. Tonko of New York

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 79, after line 6, insert the following:

SEC. 244. SENSE OF CONGRESS AFFIRMING THE IMPORTANCE OF
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PARTICIPATION IN
DEVELOPMENT OF NEXT GENERATION SEMICONDUCTOR
TECHNOLOGIES.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The next generation of weapons systems, battlefield
sensors, and intelligence platforms will need to be lighter,
more agile, consume less power, and have greater
computational power, which can only be achieved by decreasing
the feature size of integrated circuits to the nanometer
scale.
(2) There is a growing concern in the Department of Defense
and the United States intelligence community over the
offshore shift in development and production of high capacity
semiconductors. Reliance on providers of semiconductors in
the United States high tech industry will mitigate the
security risks of such an offshore shift.
(3) The use of extreme-ultraviolet lithography (EUVL) is
recognized in the semiconductor industry as critical to the
development of the next generation of integrated circuits.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the United States should establish research and
development facilities to take the lead in producing the next
generation of integrated circuits;
(2) the Department of Defense should support the
establishment of a public-private partnership of defense
laboratory scientists and engineers, university researchers,
integrated circuit designers and fabricators, tool
manufacturers, material and chemical suppliers, and metrology
and inspection tool fabricators to develop extreme-
ultraviolet lithography (EUVL) technologies on 300 micrometer
and 450 micrometer wafers; and
(3) the targeted feature size of integrated circuits for
EUVL development in the United States should be the 15
nanometer node.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the
amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the
majority and the minority.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. First I would like to take the opportunity
to salute my dear friend, Chairman Skelton, for being the kind of
leader on a committee as challenging as providing for the men and women
of the United States military, to ensure the listening ear to those of
us who represent soldiers and their families across America. I think
our State of Texas can count itself as having the highest population,
one of the highest populations of current and active duty military as
well as veterans. I thank the ranking member for his leadership.
In saying that, before we honor them on Memorial Day, I believe that
this legislation is a tough initiative on providing for the families
and the men and women of the United States military. I also think it's
important to note that the Defense Department can be a job creator,
create opportunities for Americans across this Nation. And my amendment
simply asks that a report be provided to the Congressional Black Caucus
towards establishing a report on the numbers of small, medium, minority
and women-owned businesses that are doing business with the Defense
Department. There are 57.4 million Americans employed by small
businesses.
This amendment will be beneficial to small businesses by providing
cohesive information in this sector and by encouraging and
strengthening competition between businesses. More importantly, with
this report I would like to encourage the Department of Defense to get
out beyond the Beltway and to establish outreach centers or outreach
programs that would explain to these small businesses, whether in
Appalachia or whether in the Delta, whether in Houston, whether in
urban centers, how to do business effectively, efficiently, and with
integrity with the Department of Defense. This amendment creates jobs.
And as I look for greater opportunities, Mr. Chairman, I would like
to add that I believe that we are moving in the right direction to
eliminate Don't Ask, Don't Tell. To my dismay, it has been
characterized as breaking a trust, a breach of our responsibility to
our military. It is not. It is giving everyone a chance to be an
American, to swear to the oath of service. I believe it's an important
step for liberty in our Nation.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment,
although I will not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 10 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions).
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate and respect the debate
that's going on today, and I want to thank the Rules Committee for
making in order an amendment to this bill.
Mr. Chairman, currently private health care providers are treating
brain injury patients with new and innovative treatments with
remarkable results. And I am disappointed, however, to report that many
of these treatments are currently not available within the military and
veterans medical facilities across this country for our heroes who are
suffering from traumatic brain injuries.
I have engaged the military now at the senior military leadership for
quite some time, and I am not satisfied with the military's response to
TBI, traumatic brain injuries. With that said, in an effort to further
aid our military members and to fix this delinquency, I introduced the
TBI, Traumatic Brain Injury, Treatment Act, H.R. 4568, in February of
this year. I am offering it as an amendment today.
The TBI Treatment Act establishes a 5-year pay for performance pilot
program. Essentially, what would happen is that any member of the
military or who is being treated today by the Veterans' Administration
would be able to ask for being able to go outside the military system
to a private or free enterprise market system and to be able to have
the latest innovative procedures applied to them.
Private health care providers would be authorized and reimbursed to
provide proven treatments to active duty soldiers and veterans at no
cost to the patient. I believe, and I believe the Members of this body
believe, that it is important to work with the military leadership
however they need help in getting to the correct answer.

{time} 1500

I am asking for each of us today as Members to look very carefully at
this issue and to join me in supporting this amendment. This amendment
helps to expedite these groundbreaking treatments to make sure that,
effective immediately and quickly, our Nation's veterans, who are
suffering from TBI and the myriad of problems that come with that, will
receive the most leading-edge answers available in medicine today.
So I ask my colleagues to please join with me in this bipartisan
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I also note as I stand that I am opposed to the
provisions known as Don't Ask, Don't Tell changes. Yesterday at the
Rules Committee we had a rather vigorous debate, and at the end of that
debate when I had an opportunity to talk with members of the committee
who were there, I said, Please tell me about the

[[Page 9631]]

debate that took place in the committee. There was none. It should have
been in the committee.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McKEON. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I believe that this issue really demanded
an opportunity for the members of the Armed Services Committee to fully
debate and vet and lead the way on this issue rather than it being part
of a political issue that is dominated by the Democratic Party.
I believe that the members of the military, honored heroes of this
great Nation, should not be a part of a political agenda but rather be
a part of good policy for this Nation. I think it's a slap in the face
to the members of the military to be driven down a road that is driven
by a political agenda from the left in this country rather than wise
policy. I am disappointed. I related that to the committee and its
leadership yesterday, and I will say it on the floor of the House
today, that I believe that when we go forth in dealing with the
military, we should go forth altogether and not as a political agenda.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. McMahon).
Mr. McMAHON. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the minute. I have a
longer statement which I will submit to the Record.
I rise today to urge my colleagues to adopt the sense of Congress in
this amendment which would recognize Father Vincent Robert Capodanno, a
decorated hometown hero from my district in Staten Island, in Brooklyn,
New York, for his military accomplishments and his commitment to faith.
We would like the Department of the Navy to commission a Navy destroyer
in his name.
Father Capodanno, to put it in summation, received a Congressional
Medal of Honor for his heroism in the line of fire in Vietnam. He was
sent there as a chaplain, but he quickly became much more than a
chaplain as he became the friend and accompanier of every soldier on
the battlefield.
He could have come home after a year's service, but instead he stayed
and earned the name of ``the grunt padre,'' because with his fellow
Marines, he raced into battle and was at their side all the way.
On the morning of September 4, 1967, during Operation Swift in the
Thang Binh district of the Que Son Valley, the 1st Battalion, 5th
Marines encountered a large North Vietnamese unit of approximately
2,500 men.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
Mr. McMAHON. On that day, Father Capodanno lost his life. He could
have come home. But as a great priest, as a great man of faith, he
stayed by his fellow soldiers and gave his life that day. He won the
Congressional Medal of Honor. We are asking the Navy to name a ship
after him. I thank the chairman.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to adopt a sense of Congress
recognizing Father Vincent Robert Capodanno, a decorated hometown hero
from my district for his military accomplishments and commitment to his
faith. We would like the Department of Navy to commission a Navy
Destroyer in his name.
On June 7, 1957, Father Capodanno was ordained by the late Cardinal
Spellman and shortly after, fervently devoted eight years of Catholic
Missionary service to the needy peoples of Taiwan and Hong Kong.
Volunteering his services as Navy Chaplain on December 28, 1965,
Father Capodanno received his commission as a Lieutenant in the
Chaplain Corps of the United States Naval Reserve.
After completing orientation at the Naval Chaplain's School, Newport,
Rhode Island, Lieutenant Capodanno requested duty with the Marines in
Vietnam.
His first assignment was the First Marine Division in 1966, where he
immediately began making his presence in the combat operation of Chu
Lai a regular part of his duties as Battalion Chaplain.
To stay with his men, Chaplain Capodanno relinquished thirty days of
Christmas holiday leave and after serving one year, he extended his
tour of duty for six months as the condition that he be allowed to
remain with the infantry.
Father Capodanno's greatest desire was just that--to remain with his
troops and to give them moral support.
Then on the morning of September 4, 1967, the decision was no longer
his to make. During Operation Swift in the Thang Binh District of the
Que Son Valley the 1st battalion, fifth Marines encountered a large
North Vietnamese unit of approximately 2500 men.
Father Capodanno went among the wounded and dying, giving last rites
and taking care of his Marines. Wounded once in the face and having his
hand almost severed, he went to help a wounded corpsman only yards from
an enemy machinegun and was killed.
For his selfless acts and bravery beyond the call of duty, a man
fellow marines referred to on the battlefield as the ``the `grunt'
padre,'' Father Vincent R. Capodanno was awarded the Medal of Honor
posthumously.
In 1973, Father Capodanno had a ship commissioned in his honor. The
USS Capodanno's lifespan was just as decorated as her namesake's, being
the only naval vessel to be blessed by the Pope and saving
approximately 22 lives in her first deployment as a search and rescue
vessel in the Mediterranean. Unfortunately, this ship was
decommissioned and then sold to Turkey in 2005:
Today, Father Capodanno's legacy in the Navy goes untold. The people
of New York's 13th District and I would be incredibly honored if the
Department of Navy the recognize these amazing accomplishments by
commissioning the next Navy Destroyer in the memory of Father
Capodanno, an American Hero.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Burton).
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank Mr. McKeon and Chairman Skelton for
allowing our amendment to be a part of this en bloc amendment.
Congresswoman Napolitano and I introduced this amendment, and we have,
I think, 57 or 58 cosponsors. And I'd like to tell the Members why this
is such an important amendment.
Last summer, a 25-year-old Hoosier Army specialist on his second tour
of duty in Iraq named Chancellor Keesling died by suicide in Baghdad.
His mother and father went to Dover Air Force base, and they received
their son. He got a full military honor burial and a 21-gun salute. The
family received all kinds of letters of condolence from the Secretary
of the Department of Veterans Affairs and a three-star general, but
they did not receive any kind of a comment or letter of condolence from
the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief. And I think
it's very important that this policy be changed.
It's been the policy for a long time that if a person dies by suicide
in the military, the Commander in Chief does not send a letter of
condolence to the family. But the family's the one that's really
suffering. And right now with members of the military serving one, two,
and maybe even three tours of duty in Afghanistan or Iraq or around the
world, there's tremendous pressure on them. Tremendous pressure. And a
lot of them succumb to the pressures and commit suicide.
Now this is not an isolated case. In 2008, there were 260 suicides,
140 in the Army; 41 in the Navy, 38 in the Air Force and 41 in the
Marines. In 2009, it was 160 in the Army, 47 in the Navy, 34 in the Air
Force and 42 in the Marines. And so far this year, 71 young men and
women have committed suicide in the military.
And I think it's only fitting and proper that the Commander in Chief,
the President of the United States, who sends these young people into
combat for extraordinarily long periods of time, ought to understand
that the grieving families, like the Keeslings, deserve a letter from
the Commander in Chief saying we understand the pressure that your son
or daughter was under. We understand that they served their country
well, and we want to express condolence to you for your loss and for
the service they gave their country. After all, they voluntarily joined
the service. They voluntarily served in combat and in combat areas. And
because they couldn't handle the pressure, over months and months and
sometimes years, they succumbed to that pressure. They should still
receive condolence from the Commander in Chief.
And I want to thank once again the ranking member and the chairman of
the committee for supporting this, and I hope that the President, after
this

[[Page 9632]]

resolution is passed en bloc with the other amendments, will see fit to
send letters of condolence to every young man and woman's family who
died in the service of their country, whether they died in combat or by
their own hand.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1 minute to my friend, the gentleman from Rhode
Island (Mr. Kennedy).
Mr. KENNEDY. I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Burton,
for his work on this, acknowledging the families of those who have died
really in combat, because these suicides are a result of combat.
And the greatest signature wound in this war on terrorism in Iraq and
Afghanistan is a wound that involves both the psyche with traumatic
brain injury, with the concussions they are serving as a result of
these IEDs--improvised explosive devices--and the stress and strain of
constantly worrying about your life being in jeopardy, which is
posttraumatic stress.
And there's nothing that is abnormal about having the stress of
worrying about your life being taken, and these people have to live
with it constantly nonstop because this country keeps asking them to go
back and back and back and back again.
This is something that's long overdue. I thank the gentleman from
Indiana. Let's study, let's serve, let's make the commitment not to
forget the families left behind as a result of these terrible
tragedies.
Mr. McKEON. May I inquire as to how much time we have left.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 3 minutes remaining; the
gentleman from Missouri has 5\3/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko).
Mr. TONKO. My amendment, to which I would like to speak, encourages
the Department of Defense to help develop the next generation of
semiconductors. It allows us to embrace the American intellect and put
it into an investment towards better outcomes in our military.
These new technologies will focus on scaling. Scaling of processors
to the point that the next generation of weapons systems would be
lighter, more agile, consume less power, and at the same time be more
powerful.
As important as our future weapons systems are, so, too, is it
essential for us to maintain our global competitiveness in
nanotechnology to achieve both of these goals for the military, and for
business creation and innovation. We need to achieve these goals
through the Department of Defense and having them critically involved.
This amendment asks the Department of Defense to support the creation
of a public-private partnership of defense laboratory scientists and
engineers, university researchers, integrated circuit designers and
fabricators, tool manufacturers, material and chemical suppliers, and
metrology and inspection tool fabricators to develop extreme
ultraviolet lithography technologies on 300- and 450-micrometer wafers.
A partnership of such would bring all the stakeholders and financial
resources to one location and would be vital to our Nation if we're
going to compete in the global race for the next generation of
semiconductors.
I ask my colleagues to support this very key amendment.
Mr. McKEON. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
Mr. LANGEVIN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in strong support of the Watson-Langevin amendment. I am happy
to be working with Chairwoman Watson to join strong cybersecurity
authorities with important updates to our federal information security
policies, otherwise known as the FISMA Act, which is long outdated and
needs this updating provision.
But a portion of our amendment is drawn from my Executive Cyberspace
Authorities Act and focuses on coordination of efforts to secure
Federal networks, develop smarter cyberpolicies, and lead the world in
standards and practices for responsible actions in cyberspace.
Clearly, cybersecurity and our cybervulnerabilities is one of the
biggest threats facing the country today. We're so interconnected by
use of the Internet, but it also provides real vulnerabilities because
of cyberpenetrations.
The provisions in this act follow recommendations by the CSI's
Commission on Cyber Security, which I cochaired. By establishing a
national office for cyberspace and the executive office of the
President, this office will include strong authorities over agency
information security policies, and responsibility for coordinating the
defense of our Federal networks and establishing a national strategy
for international engagement.
Again, this will provide the right authorities for the
cybercoordinator, who now would become the cyberdirector and do
incredible work in making sure that we have the right authorities in
place to make sure that all of our departments and agencies are secure
as possible in cyberspace.
So I want to thank the committee for including my amendment in the en
bloc package, and I urge Members to support this passage. I, again,
want to thank Chairman Watson for her work on this amendment. We joined
forces, and it's going to take us in the right direction in securing
the Nation's cyberspace.

{time} 1515

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
Again, because we weren't given the opportunity to have more than 5
minutes to debate Don't Ask, Don't Tell, I would like to continue on
with my diatribe.
I have a letter from General Casey, Chairman of the Army. He says:
``My views on the repeal of section 654 of title 10''--which is the
Murphy amendment--``United States Code, have not changed since my
testimony.''
He was opposed to that when he testified before our committee.
``I continue to support the review and timeline offered by Secretary
Gates.
``I remain convinced that it is critically important to get a better
understanding of where our soldiers and families are on this issue and
what the impacts on readiness and unit cohesion might be, so that I can
provide informed military advice to the President and the Congress.
``I also believe that repealing the law before the completion of the
review will be seen by the men and women of the Army as a reversal of
our commitment to hear their views before moving forward.''
Mr. SKELTON. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Missouri has 2 minutes
remaining.
Mr. SKELTON. The gentleman from Indiana spoke about the challenge of
those returning from the Gulf and facing the depression that often ends
in suicide. The gentleman from Rhode Island did the same.
The tragedy of a serviceman or woman and suicide came home to many of
us in the State of Missouri not long ago when a young marine from
Sedalia, Missouri, suffered that tragedy. It breaks the heart of not
just the family but of all who knew him.
I think it's up to us to do our very best to continue to study this
issue and make preparation for those who come home so that these
tragedies can be put behind us that they can come back to a grateful
Nation and warm and loving home and fit in and continue to perform
their duties in uniform and duties at home. So those of us who knew
this young marine from Sedalia understand fully the comments of the
gentleman from Rhode Island and the comments of the gentleman from
Indiana.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 2 minutes
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I yield 1 minute at this time to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

[[Page 9633]]

Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I just find it so appalling that the defense committee, which has
always had a strong bipartisan relationship and a problem-solving
ability, has only been given 10 minutes to uproot a long-standing
policy on Don't Ask, Don't Tell, 5 minutes per side, to make a major
social change in America, a change that will change the dynamic in the
barracks, in the field, the morale, the tension.
What will you do about spousal benefits in the face of DOMA, Don't
Ask, Don't Tell? It would certainly be unfair to have somebody in
combat and not cover his husband. So you are going to have spousal
benefits.
And when you do that, what do you do about the Defense of Marriage
Act, DOMA? That's the law of the land. You will have to change the
State laws to allow same-sex marriages. That's how profound this change
is today that we will be voting on after a 10-minute debate.
What about the issue of religious freedom? We have already seen the
military uninvite people like Tony Perkins and Franklin Graham for
speaking at prayer breakfasts.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McKEON. I yield the gentleman 15 additional seconds.
Mr. KINGSTON. If you just cut out everything else on the repeal of
Don't Ask, Don't Tell and say what do you do about the spouse benefits
and what do you do about the religious freedom that's so important to
all soldiers, how do you deal with that, you need more than 10 minutes.
I appeal to all Members of Congress, wherever you are on this, to
realize we need more than 10 minutes and reject the amendment so we can
get it.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has again expired.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to, again,
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentleman.
I wanted to say, we have an issue with military chaplains who
actually work for their denomination. They do not necessarily answer
straight to the military. They are supposed to have their loyalty to
their denomination.
If their denomination believes a certain thing that is not in
alignment with a potential new policy of the defense, then they are
going to be censored. How do you deal with that censorship matter and
that freedom of religion issue? Again, Tony Perkins, a marine, a
chaplain, the president of Family Research Council, and Franklin
Graham, son of Billy Graham, have both been uninvited already because
of their views. They are politically incorrect.
So the military invited them to speak at prayer breakfasts and they
were uninvited. It would not have happened without this debate. That's
why we need more than 10 minutes.
Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this amendment to
H.R. 5136. This is a good addition to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 and one that will go a long way
toward improving our federal information security posture.
This language is nearly identical to H.R. 4900, the Federal
Information Security Amendments Act of 2010, which was introduced by
Ms. Watson on March 22, 2010. That bill was just ordered favorably
reported by tile Committee on Oversight & Government Reform last week
by a voice vote.
The Federal Information Security Management Act was enacted in 2002
as part of the E-Government Act. FISMA requires federal agencies to
assess the state of their information security management each year by
conducting periodic risk assessments, categorizing risk, maintaining a
detailed inventory of all information systems, and training employees
in security awareness. While FISMA has been an effective tool in
improving information security, GAO continues to report persistent
weaknesses that this legislation is intended to address.
Cyber threats and attacks against information systems have continued
to grow in both volume and intensity in recent years. In 2009 the U.S.
electrical grid was reportedly infiltrated by hackers and denial of
service attacks brought down the websites of a number of federal
agencies including the Department of State, the Secret Service and the
Federal Trade Commission. Cyber attacks are escalating quickly and we
must do more to defend the Federal government against them.
This amendment represents an important step toward remedying the
problem. It codifies multiple policy recommendations made by the Obama
administration, public-private sector working groups and GAO for fixing
information security deficiencies throughout the federal government.
Among other things, it would permanently elevate the significance of
cyber security to the executive level by establishing a National Office
for Cyberspace, with a director to be appointed by the President and
confirmed by the Senate. This amendment also requires agencies to begin
automated and continuous monitoring of their information technology
systems, a requirement that the Obama administration issued guidance on
in April. It also includes provisions codifying the position of chief
technology officer and establishing a national strategy to engage with
the international community on information security.
In closing, I want to take the time to acknowledge two of my
colleagues from California. First, I want to thank Ms. Watson, for
introducing H.R. 4900 and offering this amendment. Second, I thank Mr.
Issa for working with us in a bipartisan manner to improve this
amendment and move it forward in the legislative process. This is a
good amendment and I strongly urge the rest of my colleagues to join me
in supporting it.
Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chair, since 9/11, we have put an increased focus
on tearing down boundaries to intel sharing and building networks that
ensure critical information reaches decision makers. Information
sharing on the battlefield saves lives and intelligence sharing along
our border promotes national security.
The longstanding barriers that built roadblocks between local law
enforcement, Federal agencies and the Department of Defense are slowly
crumbling. Critical information is beginning to flow but stovepipes
remain.
Each day in places all along the border, illegal immigrants are
smuggling guns, drugs and people into the United States. And each day,
the Border Patrol apprehends people here illegally from places like
North Korea, Iran, and Syria.
All along the border at military outposts charged with training our
best and our brightest, ground forces and UAV pilots learn to identify
targets, track movements and pass actionable intelligence.
But stovepipes within the system continue to prevent some sharing of
potentially crucial data.
My amendment is focused on alleviating some of that urgent need for
effective and efficient intelligence sharing. This need is recognized
by our military leaders, program managers, intel analysts, and law
enforcement officials.
As our military trains for battle and conducts field exercises in
preparation for deployments, they collect data points that can be
crucial to locating and stopping smuggling lanes into our country.
If only they were permitted to share that information with the people
who can target these smuggling trails and shut traffickers down.
That is the goal of this amendment.
Whether it is soldiers from Fort Huachuca who uncover tunnel networks
while learning to fly UAVs, or A-10 pilots from Davis-Monthan
transiting out to the Goldwater Range, or Navy exercises on the Pacific
or Gulf coasts that locate and intercept submersibles, this information
must be shared and fused with the ground and airborne intelligence
already flowing into se ors along the border.
My amendment will permit exactly that by authorizing those who
routinely conduct training operations to share with Joint Task Force
North any of the critical data they collect.
We know that more information, more intelligence and more resources
will help stop smugglers, guns, drugs and human cargo from crossing the
border and lead to captures and convictions that make our country more
secure.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment.
Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Chair, I am proud to have joined with my friend from
Texas, Mr. Sessions, in introducing this amendment which will provide
our servicemembers that are affected by Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
with access to cutting-edge treatments. As we all know, TBIs have
become the ``signature wound'' of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Record numbers of troops return to American soil in need of treatment
and rehabilitation. While the Department of Defense has been a leader
in providing treatment to our wounded warriors, it has been slow to
embrace innovative treatments, such as Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy.

[[Page 9634]]

This amendment would establish a five-year ``pay for performance''
innovative treatment pilot program. The pilot program would allow
healthcare providers outside of the Department of Defense to treat
active duty military personnel and veterans with cutting-edge TBI
treatments not offered at military medical facilities. The private
healthcare providers would only receive reimbursement from the
Department of Defense if the treatment was proven to be successful.
Servicemembers and veterans who voluntarily opt into this program would
do so at no cost.
I see this amendment as a win-win. Not only will our troops receive
access to innovative therapies, but it encourages the private sector to
invest in new and inventive treatments for TBI. The amendment also
requires the Department of Defense to maintain a database to track the
effectiveness of such treatments. It is my hope that after the
conclusion of this five-year pilot, the Department of Defense will
begin providing proven therapies at military medical facilities.
Our men and women in uniform deserve the best treatments available.
This common-sense amendment would help to expand access to new
therapies in a fiscally responsible way. I encourage all of my
colleagues to join with me to support this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. McGovern

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. McGOVERN. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. McGovern:
Add at the end of subtitle F of title X, the following:

SEC. 1065. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS ON OBESITY AND
FEDERAL CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS.

(a) Findings.--Congress find the following:
(1) According to the April 2010 report, ``Too Fat to
Fight'', more than 100 retired generals and admirals wrote
that, ``[o]besity among children and young adults have
increased so dramatically that they threaten not only the
overall health of America but the future strength of our
military.''
(2) Twenty-seven percent, over 9,000,000, 17-24-year-olds
in the United States are too fat to serve in the military.
(3) Between 1995 and 2008, the military had 140,000
individuals who showed up at the centers for processing but
failed their entrance physicals because they were too heavy.
(4) Being overweight is now the leading medical reason for
rejection from military service.
(5) Between 1995 and 2008, the proportion of potential
recruits who failed their physicals each year because they
were overweight rose nearly 70 percent.
(6) The military annually discharges over 1,200 first-term
enlistees before their contracts are up because of weight
problems.
(7) The military must then recruit and train their
replacements at a cost of $50,000 for each man or woman.
(8) Training replacements for those discharged because of
weight problems adds up to more than $60,000,000 annually.
(10) Overweight adolescents are more likely to become
overweight adults.
(11) Overweight adolescents and overweight adults are at
risk of developing obesity-related, life-threatening diseases
including cancer, type 2 diabetes, stroke, heart disease,
arthritis, and breathing problems.
(12) According to the American Public Health Association,
``left unchecked, obesity will add nearly $344 billion to the
nations annual health care costs by 2018 and account for more
than 21 percent of health care spending''.
(13) Overweight and undernourished adolescents face
academic challenges due to poor health behaviors, resulting
in even greater risk to their future health and earing and
the Nation's economic growth and worldwide competition.
(14) For decades military leaders have championed efforts
to improve the nutrition of young people in America.
(15) During World War II, 40 percent of rejected recruits
were turned away because of poor or under nutrition.
(16) The preamble to the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751) states ``It is hereby declared to
be the policy of Congress, as a measure of national security,
to safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation's
children and to encourage the domestic consumption of
nutritious agricultural commodities and other food, by
assisting the States, through grants in aid and other means,
in providing an adequate supply of food and other facilities
for the establishment, maintenance, operation and expansion
of nonprofit school lunch programs''.
(17) Over 17 million children were food insecure, or
hungry, in 2008, according to data collected by the
Department of Agriculture.
(18) The Federal Child Nutrition Programs under the Richard
B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.)
and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.)
are proven to be effective in combating both hunger and
obesity.
(19) President Obama has called for a historic investment
in the Federal Child Nutrition Programs in order to respond
to 2 of the greatest child health challenges of our time,
hunger and poor nutrition.
(20) Two hundred twenty-one Members of Congress signed a
letter to Speaker Pelosi in support of President Obama's
budget request for the Federal Child Nutrition Programs.
(21) This same letter requested identification of possible
offsets for the new investments in these important anti-
hunger and nutrition programs.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) reducing domestic childhood obesity and hunger is a
matter of national security;
(2) obesity and hunger will continue to negatively impact
recruitment for Armed Forces without access to physical
activity, healthy food, and proper nutrition;
(3) Congress should act to reduce childhood obesity and
hunger;
(4) the Federal Child Nutrition Programs under the Richard
B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.)
and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.)
should be funded at the President's request; and
(5) the increases in funding for such programs should be
properly offset.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. Chairman, hunger and obesity are serious problems in this
country. Over 49 million Americans go hungry every year, 17 million of
which are children. Now we have a new problem--obesity. Most people
think obesity is a simple problem of eating the wrong food, and this is
mostly correct. But there are many cases where obese people are also
hungry, that they are feeding themselves and their families with empty
calories simply because they are inexpensive.
We must address hunger and obesity, and I am pleased that the First
Lady is working on these issues. But now obesity is a national security
issue. Twenty-seven percent of young adults are too fat to serve in the
military and being overweight is now the leading cause for rejection
from military service.
Our amendment is simple. It says that hunger and obesity are national
security problems and must be addressed, and it says that we should do
so in part with the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act. The
school lunch program was created in World War II because 40 percent of
the rejected recruits were underweight. In fact, the preamble to the
School Lunch Act states that the school lunch program was created ``as
a measure of national security.''
Healthy school meals, along with more exercise and better access to
food at home, will help combat the national security crisis of obesity.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I
will not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman
from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson).
Mrs. EMERSON. Thank you, Ranking Member McKeon.
My colleague, Jim McGovern, made a couple of remarks with regard to
the challenges the military is facing with regard to potential
enlistees.
I could go down and continue talking about some of these, but one of
the most interesting facts is that every year the military annually
discharges over 1,200 first-term enlistees before their contracts are
up because of weight problems. Then the military must recruit and train
their replacements at a cost of $50,000 for each man or woman.

[[Page 9635]]

This begs the question, and which is why this amendment from my
colleague is so very important, and that is because 16 million children
or 22.5 percent of all children in the United States live in a home
where access to food is an uncertainty. In these homes, child nutrition
programs literally serve as a lifeline to proper nutrition and a better
future.
We know that hungry children are sick more often. They suffer growth
impairment and even developmental impairment. They do poorer in school,
they are less prepared to join the workforce, and for purposes of this
debate, they are less prepared to serve their country in the Armed
Forces.
The facts of life for too many of our children are hard to hear but
they are, in fact, true.
The first step in achieving greater success must be to ensure
adequate funds are dedicated to this challenge.
I support the sense of Congress language in this amendment calling
for a $1 billion increase in funding for the child nutrition programs,
and I share its belief that we need to pay for it.
I would like to thank my colleagues, Jim McGovern of Massachusetts
and Sanford Bishop of Georgia, for their leadership on this issue.
To support the goals of this important program, I would ask
colleagues to support the sense of Congress language and continue
working to make this message a reality.
The reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act must be a tool for
reducing the number of hungry and obese children in the United States.
GAO recently analyzed domestic food assistance and found: (quote)
``participation in 7 of the programs we reviewed--including WIC, the
National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, and SNAP--
is associated with positive health and nutrition outcomes consistent
with programs' goals, such as raising the level of nutrition among low-
income households, safeguarding the health and wellbeing of the
nation's children, and strengthening the agricultural economy.'' These
are goals I believe we can all support.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlelady from
Missouri for her leadership and her cosponsorship of this amendment.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join Representatives McGovern and
Emerson as an original cosponsor of this bipartisan amendment, which
affirms the intention of Congress to combat domestic childhood obesity
and hunger in the interest of our national security.
According to the July 2009 Trust for America's Health Report, the
percentage of obese and overweight children ages 10 to 17 is at or
above 30 percent in 30 States. Seven of the top 10 States are in the
South, with my State of Georgia ranked third, with 37.3 percent of
obese and overweight youngsters.
Obesity is especially prevalent in the African American and Latino
communities. Overweight and obese teens are at risk of developing
diabetes, heart disease, cancer, stroke, arthritis and breathing
problems and American children are disproportionately impacted.
In a recent report, Too Fat to Fight, over 100 retired generals and
admirals wrote that obesity among children and young adults has
increased so dramatically that it threatens not only our Nation's
health but the future of our military. Between 1995 and 2008, the
military had 140,000 individuals, a 70 percent increase, who showed up
at the centers for processing but failed their entrance physicals
because they were too heavy, and 1,200 enlistees were discharged before
their contracts were up. And now being overweight is the leading
medical cause for rejection from military service.
Mr. Chairman, proper nutrition, healthy food, ending hunger and
access to physical activity for our youth are vital to ensuring that
our Nation's military remains strong into the future.
I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment and the
strong effort to support and maintain a strong national defense by
assuring strong and healthy servicemembers.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes), a member of the committee.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 3 minutes.
Mr. FORBES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank the ranking member for yielding that time.
Mr. Chairman, I was excited, as I was reading some articles in my
office before I came over here, the leadership of the House has finally
moved us up to where we now have an 18 percent approval rating across
the country.
That means that only 82 percent of the Americans feel that this body
doesn't have a clue about where we need to go or why. The reason is
because, as hard as they try to find it, there is one thing they can't
find in any of these walls and under any these chairs, and that is just
simple common sense.

{time} 1530

Because, Mr. Chairman, when they go to buy something, they know the
first thing they need to do is ask how much does it cost? And yet we
pass a health care bill, and we don't even really look at all the
facts. We just want to get out of here. And later we find out it costs
a whole lot more than what we thought it would, and we just come back
up and say, well, that's just too bad. And we're getting ready to do
the same thing, because when they take any action in their business,
one of the first things they want to do is say, What's the effect going
to be on that particular action?
Mr. Chairman, as we look at this provision on trying to remove the
Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy that is currently the policy for DOD, we
hear our Chiefs of Staff in one voice: Admiral Roughead saying, just
wait and get the facts before you make a decision. Just some common
sense. We hear General Schwartz, the Chief of Staff of the Department
of Air Force saying, just wait and get the facts. Let us do the study
before you make a decision. Just some common sense. We have General
Conway who says, just wait and get the facts before you make a
decision. Just some common sense. And we have General Casey from the
Army saying, just get the facts before you make a decision. Let us
complete the study. Just some common sense.
But what some individuals want to do on this House floor is--same
thing we do with so many other things--bury the common sense: let's
just push forward, we'll get the facts later, let's just pass the
provision now. And that's why, Mr. Chairman, I hope that this body will
protect this authorization bill and not pass the amendment to remove
Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, if we want to do something that is common
sense, we should pass this amendment before us.
Hunger and obesity are critical issues to our military and to the
health and well-being of our Nation. Sixty-nine years ago, military
recruits were turned away because they were undernourished. Today they
are rejected because they are fat. The school lunch program allows our
children to eat during the school day. We must improve it so that more
nutritious meals are served at schools and so that every child has
access to school meals.
We talk a lot about health care in this Chamber. I should point out
to my colleagues that according to the American Public Health
Association: ``Left unchecked, obesity will add nearly $344 billion to
the Nation's annual health care costs by 2018 and account for more than
21 percent of health care spending.''
This is a health issue. This is a commonsense issue. This is a
national security issue. This amendment expresses the House's support
for this effort to end hunger and to make sure our young people have
nutritious meals. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the McGovern-
Emerson-Bishop amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I support this amendment; I think it's a good thing. I think that our

[[Page 9636]]

whole country could use a little help in this area.
Now, back to Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Again, I think it's very
important that we do as Mr. Forbes said, a little common sense. When we
tell the military we're going to get their viewpoint and then we say,
never mind, we're going to move ahead, your viewpoint really doesn't
matter, I think that that's a big mistake.
I think this amendment is a good one, but I think only giving us 10
minutes to debate Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a mistake.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. 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
Massachusetts will be postponed.

Amendments En Bloc No. 2 Offered by Mr. Skelton.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, I offer
amendments en bloc No. 2.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 2 offered by Mr. Skelton consisting of
amendments numbered 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, and 45 printed in House Report
111-498:

Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Burton of Indiana

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 452, after line 10, insert the following:

SEC. 1065. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING PRESIDENTIAL LETTERS
OF CONDOLENCE TO THE FAMILIES OF MEMBERS OF THE
ARMED FORCES WHO HAVE DIED BY SUICIDE.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) suicide is a growing problem in the Armed Forces that
cannot be ignored;
(2) a record number of military suicides was reported in
2008, with 128 active-duty Army and 48 Marine deaths
reported;
(3) the number of military suicides during 2009 is expected
to equal or exceed the 2008 total;
(4) long-standing policy prevents President Obama from
sending a condolence letter to the family of a member of the
Armed Forces who has died by suicide;
(5) members of the Armed Forces sacrifice their physical,
mental, and emotional well-being for the freedoms Americans
hold dear;
(6) the military family also bears the cost of defending
the United States, with military spouses and children
sacrificing much and standing ready to provide unending
support to their spouse or parent who is a member of the
Armed Forces;
(7) the loss of a member of the Armed Forces to suicide
directly and tragically affects military spouses and
children, as well as the United States;
(8) much more needs to be done to protect and address the
mental health needs of members of the Armed Forces, just as
they serve to protect and defend the freedoms of the United
States;
(9) a presidential letter of condolence is not only about
the deceased because it also serves as a sign of respect for
the grieving family and an acknowledgment of the family for
their personal loss; and
(10) a lack of acknowledgment and condolence from the
President only leaves these families with an emotional vacuum
and a feeling that somehow their sacrifices have been less
than the sacrifices of others.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the current policy that prohibits sending a
presidential letter of condolence to the family of a member
of the Armed Forces who has died by suicide only serves to
perpetuate the stigma of mental illness that pervades the
Armed Forces; and
(2) the President, as Commander-in-Chief, should overturn
the policy and treat all military families equally.

Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mr. Holden of Pennsylvania

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 5__. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMBAT MEDEVAC BADGE.

(a) Army.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 357 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 3757. Combat Medevac Badge

``(a) Issuance.--The Secretary of the Army shall issue a
badge of appropriate design, to be known as the Combat
Medevac Badge, to each person who while a member of the Army
served in combat on or after June 25, 1950, as a pilot or
crew member of a helicopter medical evacuation ambulance and
who meets the requirements for the award of that badge.
``(b) Eligibility Requirements.--The Secretary of the Army
shall prescribe requirements for eligibility for the Combat
Medevac Badge.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``3757. Combat Medevac Badge''.

(b) Navy and Marine Corps.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 567 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 6259. Combat Medevac Badge

``(a) Issuance.--The Secretary of the Navy shall issue a
badge of appropriate design, to be known as the Combat
Medevac Badge, to each person who while a member of the Navy
or Marine Corps served in combat on or after June 25, 1950,
as a pilot or crew member of a helicopter medical evacuation
ambulance and who meets the requirements for the award of
that badge.
``(b) Eligibility Requirements.--The Secretary of the Navy
shall prescribe requirements for eligibility for the Combat
Medevac Badge.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``6259. Combat Medevac Badge''.

(c) Air Force.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 857 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 8757. Combat Medevac Badge

``(a) Issuance.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall issue
a badge of appropriate design, to be known as the Combat
Medevac Badge, to each person who while a member of the Air
Force served in combat on or after June 25, 1950, as a pilot
or crew member of a helicopter medical evacuation ambulance
and who meets the requirements for the award of that badge.
``(b) Eligibility Requirements.--The Secretary of the Air
Force shall prescribe requirements for eligibility for the
Combat Medevac Badge.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``8757. Combat Medevac Badge''.

(d) Award for Service Before Date of Enactment.--In the
case of persons who, while a member of the Armed Forces,
served in combat as a pilot or crew member of a helicopter
medical evacuation ambulance during the period beginning on
June 25, 1950, and ending on the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of the military department concerned shall
issue the Combat Medevac Badge--
(1) to each such person who is known to the Secretary
before the date of enactment of this Act; and
(2) to each such person with respect to whom an application
for the issuance of the badge is made to the Secretary after
such date in such manner, and within such time period, as the
Secretary may require.

Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Pomeroy of North Dakota

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 5__. CODIFICATION AND CONTINUATION OF JOINT FAMILY
SUPPORT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

(a) Codification and Continuation.--Chapter 88, of title
10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
1788 the following new section:

``Sec. 1788a. Joint Family Support Assistance Program

``(a) Program Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
continue to carry out the program known as the `Joint Family
Support Assistance Program' for the purpose of providing to
families of members of the armed forces the following types
of assistance:
``(1) Financial and material assistance.
``(2) Mobile support services.
``(3) Sponsorship of volunteers and family support
professionals for the delivery of support services.
``(4) Coordination of family assistance programs and
activities provided by Military OneSource, Military Family
Life Consultants, counselors, the Department of Defense,
other Federal agencies, State and local agencies, and non-
profit entities.
``(5) Facilitation of discussion on military family
assistance programs, activities, and initiatives between and
among the organizations, agencies, and entities referred to
in paragraph (4).
``(6) Non-medical counseling.
``(7) Such other assistance that the Secretary considers
appropriate.
``(b) Locations.--The Secretary of Defense shall carry out
the program in at least six

[[Page 9637]]

areas of the United States selected by the Secretary. Up to
three of the areas selected for the program shall be areas
that are geographically isolated from military installations.
``(c) Resources and Volunteers.--The Secretary of Defense
shall provide personnel and other resources of the Department
of Defense necessary for the implementation and operation of
the program and may accept and utilize the services of non-
Government volunteers and non-profit entities under the
program.
``(d) Procedures.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish
procedures for the operation of the program and for the
provision of assistance to families of members of the Armed
Forces under the program.
``(e) Relation to Family Support Centers.--The program is
not intended to operate in lieu of other family support
centers, but is instead intended to augment the activities of
the family support centers.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of subchapter I of such chapter is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 1788a the
following new item:

``1788a. Joint Family Support Assistance Program.''.
(c) Repeal of Superceded Provision.--Section 675 of the
John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364; 119 Stat. 2273; 10 U.S.C. 1781
note) is repealed.

Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mr. Latham of Iowa

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 6__. SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING AGE AND SERVICE
REQUIREMENTS FOR RETIRED PAY FOR NON-REGULAR
SERVICE.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the amendments made to section 12731 of title 10,
United States Code, by section 647 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181;
122 Stat. 160) were intended to reduce the minimum age at
which members of a reserve component of the Armed Forces
would begin receiving retired pay according to time spent
deployed, by three months for every 90-day period spent on
active duty over the course of a career, rather than limiting
qualifying time to such periods wholly served within the same
fiscal year, as interpreted by the Department of Defense; and
(2) steps should be taken to correct this erroneous
interpretation by the Department of Defense in order to
ensure reserve component members receive the full retirement
benefits intended to be provided by such section 12731.

Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Kennedy of Rhode Island

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 274, after line 13, insert the following:
(E) neurology;
Page 274, line 14, strike ``(E)'' and insert ``(F)''.
Page 274, line 15, strike ``(F)'' and insert ``(G)''.
Page 274, line 16, strike ``(G)'' and insert ``(H)''.
Page 274, line 17, strike ``(II)'' and insert ``(I)''.

Amendment No. 45 Offered by Mr. Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 6_. REPORT ON PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES FOR
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF HEALTH CARE
PROFESSIONALS FOR RESERVE COMPONENTS.

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Surgeons General of the Army, Navy, and Air
Force shall submit to Congress a report on their staffing
needs for health care professionals in the active and reserve
components of the Armed Forces. The report shall specifically
identify the positions in most critical need for additional
health care professionals, including the number of physicians
needed and whether additional behavioral health
professionals, such as psychologists and psychiatrists, are
needed to treat members of the Armed Forces for the growing
concerns of post traumatic stress disorder and traumatic
brain injury. The report shall include recommendations for
providing incentives for health care professionals with more
than 20 years of clinical experience to join the active or
reserve components, including whether changes in age or
length of service requirements to qualify for partial retired
pay for non-regular service could be used as a recruitment or
retention incentives.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the
amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the
majority and the minority.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Harman).
Ms. HARMAN. I thank the esteemed Chairman Skelton, my dear friend,
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, over eight terms in Congress I have served on every
security committee, including three terms on the Armed Services
Committee whose bill I am once again proud to support.
As a rookie Member of Congress in 1993, I sat in the most junior
chair on the HASC, just a few feet away from the witness table. Then-
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Colin Powell, testified in favor of the
Clinton administration's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. I drew a deep
breath and told the general that I thought Don't Ask, Don't Tell was
unconstitutional. I opposed it then, and I oppose it now.
No good has ever come of that policy. And I applaud the personal
courage of current Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen who told
Congress, ``No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being
troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young
men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow
citizens.''
The en bloc amendment which we are now debating includes language I
coauthored with Rules Committee Chair Slaughter to give victims of
military sexual trauma the ability to seek a base transfer. MST is an
epidemic which subjects a growing number of servicemembers to serious
assault and rape. It is horrifying that women in our military are more
likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in
Iraq or Afghanistan. MST must end, and this bill makes a very good
start.
Let me make some general comments about our national security. We
can't wish away the threats facing our Nation. We, like generations of
Americans before us, must rise to meet them. We must be realistic about
our vulnerabilities, about the capabilities of our adversaries, and of
our allies to help us. We must be wise enough to recognize that we will
not prevail through military might alone.
Our military, diplomatic, and development efforts are tools to an
end--security, and eventually peace. These are dangerous times, and
they require a tough response. We have the strategy in this bill, we
have the strength in men and women who serve courageously in our
military and intelligence services, and we have our values. We will not
fail.
Support this bill. Support the Murphy amendment. Support the en bloc
amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I
am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 10 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Tim Murphy), sponsor of one of the amendments.
Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the ranking member for
yielding.
One of the amendments in there I'd like to talk about here.
According to a RAND study, there are more than several hundred
thousand potential cases of post-traumatic stress disorder in our
veterans from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and suicide rates
among them are also higher than that of the general population. The
Department of Defense has rightly doubled its budget for treatment and
research of PTSD and traumatic brain injury and set higher goals for
the number of behavior health providers. And although care has also
been supplemented through TRICARE and contract providers, the military
remains understaffed to meet the needs.
Combat veterans should not be placed on a waiting list, especially
dealing with mental health problems and suicide. And servicemembers who
need care can only get care if they are near care. Now, a huge
investment has been made into many of the great clinicians in medical
services at the dawn

[[Page 9638]]

of their careers. Stipends, bonuses, educational expenses are paid in
hopes we can recruit and retain them for 20 or 30 years, although many
do not remain that long. Sometimes we discourage those from signing up
later in their careers who, because of their age, they can't remain for
20 years or so. Yet there are those who are at the peak of their career
who we could look to not only to fill the immediate needs with highly
skilled and ready-trained experiences, but to provide mentorship and
training to those starting out in their medical and behavioral medicine
careers.
This amendment simply calls upon the Surgeons General of the Army,
Navy, and Air Force to report on other incentives that can be offered
to recruit and retain those with 20 or more years of nonmilitary
clinical experience to serve in active or reserve duty. This might
include, but is not limited to, offering a 10-year retirement instead
of the traditional 20- or 30-year retirement.
I might add that we are very proud of our servicemen and -women and
want to make it very clear that all of us in Congress--and I know all
the military--are absolutely dedicated to making sure that we take care
of all of their wounds, whether they are visible or invisible wounds of
war. We are proud of their service, and we will continue to support
them. And along those lines, I hope my colleagues will also support
this amendment.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the
gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy).
Mr. POMEROY. I thank my friend, the chairman, for yielding.
I rise in support of amendment No. 23, which reauthorizes the Joint
Family Support Assistance Program. This program has been providing
critical support to the unsung heroes of the global war on terror, the
families left behind of deploying Guard and Reserve soldiers.
As the Department of Defense stated in its report to Congress on the
implementation of this program: ``The Guard and Reserve are
experiencing significantly increased mobilizations as a result of the
global war on terrorism, and families who have previously had limited
exposure to the demands resulting from separations due to military
deployments must now deal with the likelihood of longer and often
multiple deployments to the servicemember.''
Issues like single parenting, keeping a house running through all
kinds of weather conditions, traumatized children missing a parent, all
of these issues have been dealt with through the scopes of these joint
family support systems programs. They work by compiling a Military
OneSource program, one location coordinating the many resources
available within our local community in support of these families, a
one-stop shop able to make certain there is coordination for military,
Federal, State and local resources.
For families on military bases who are deployed, it's very clear the
support systems are there and what they are. For families of Guard and
Reserve soldiers, especially spread across rural areas like North
Dakota, it's less clear sometimes where the support can come from.
I am so proud of the North Dakota National Guard and Reserve families
that have stood in support of their deploying soldiers, and we've had a
bunch of them--3,500 soldiers, 1,800 airmen on multiple deployments. We
need to support their families, and I urge permanent authorization of
this program.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the Pomeroy Amendment to
permanently reauthorize the Joint Family Support Assistance Program,
JFSAP.
This program has been providing critical support to the unsung heroes
of Global War on Terror families of deployed soldiers.
Since its inception three years ago, the JFSAP program has been
providing critical support to Guard and Reserve families, especially
those families who do not live near military installations. Since the
beginning of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan the Guard and Reserve
have seen a significant increase in deployments. Many of these service
members and their families do not live near military installations and
therefore do not have access to many of the family support functions
available on those bases.
As the Department of Defense stated in its initial report to Congress
on the implementation of this program, ``The Guard and Reserve are
experiencing significantly increased mobilization as a result of the
Global War on Terrorism, and families who have previously had limited
exposure to the demands resulting from separations due to military
deployments, must now deal with the likelihood of longer and often
multiple deployments of the service member.'' These families are now
coping with the stress of separation from a loved one for up to a year,
which can lead to many difficult issues. A spouse may now be faced with
single parenting for the first time, children being separated from one
or both of their parents may have a difficult time coping with that
separation and when the service member returns home they sometimes have
a difficult time readjusting to civilian life. Families located on or
near a military installation have access to a wide range of programs to
deal with these issues, which may not necessarily be the case for Guard
and Reserve families spread across the country, especially in rural
States like North Dakota.
The Joint Family Support Assistance Program, JFSAP program works by
compiling Military One Source programs into one location and
coordinating those programs with resources that maybe available in the
local community. By having a one stop shop that is able to help
coordinate military, Federal, State, and local resources this program
is able to provide families with comprehensive support for many of the
issues that regularly arise due to the deployment of a loved one.
Without a coordinated program families are faced with the requirement
to seek this assistance out through a patchwork of entities increasing
the possibility that they do not receive aid when they need it most.
Once fully implemented the JFSAP in North Dakota will offer a
Military OneSource Specialist to coordinate programs, a Financial
Military Life Consultant, MFLC, to help families with financial issues,
a Youth MFLC to help coordinate services for children, an Adult MFLC to
assist with the needs of service members, spouses and other family
members and an Operation Military Kids consultant to help set up
programs and activities for the children of service members. The North
Dakota National Guard has seen significant deployments since September
11, 2001 deploying more than 3,500 soldiers and over 1,800 Airmen, many
of those individuals have been deployed multiple times. This program's
continuation is vital to providing the services and support that those
families deserve.
The N.D. Nat'l Guard Families know there will be more deployments on
the future which means the work of this program has that begun.
This critical program was originally authorized in the 2007 National
Defense Authorization Act for three years and it must now be
reauthorized. My amendment would make this program permanent so that it
can be allowed to continue to provide critical support for Guard and
Reserve families. I believe that this amendment will have broad
bipartisan support and I urge its passage.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter), a member of the committee.
Mr. HUNTER. I thank the ranking member for yielding.
America right now is locked in combat against a dangerous enemy in
Afghanistan, facing the constant threat of ambush and roadside bombs.
The last thing our soldiers and marines need is any unnecessary or
harmful distractions.
As a marine who has served downrange in both Iraq and Afghanistan, I
have personally witnessed that the current policy of Don't Ask, Don't
Tell works and the repeal of current law does not work. I have lived
with, eaten with, dived for cover with, and fought with my fellow
marines overseas three times. Some military lawyers may think that this
amendment looks good on paper, but in effect it will destroy the combat
readiness of our fighting force. Our focus right now should be on
achieving victory and returning our military home safely.
While America possesses the best military equipment in the entire
world and the most technologically advanced weaponry on Earth, the true
strength of our might is derived from the core set of values and
principles that is shared by our frontline combat troops. It is these
shared beliefs that lead to the comradery and the instinct of our
troops to risk their lives to protect one another every single day.

[[Page 9639]]

The commandant of the Marine Corps stands opposed to repealing
current law, and each of the other service chiefs have expressed
concerns with taking any action on Don't Ask, Don't Tell until the
year-long study under way at the Pentagon is completed. With all due
respect, Secretary of Defense Gates and the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, have and are performing a great
service to our Nation, but they work for this administration and as
such are required to follow President Obama's lead and not necessarily
speak for the men and women who have volunteered to fight for our
Nation and put themselves in harm's way.
Evidently, the White House and congressional Democrats think they are
doing our military a favor by rewarding them for victory in Iraq and
continued hard fighting in Afghanistan by forcing a liberal social
agenda on them and furthermore ignoring our military's input on this
matter by not having this vote after the Pentagon study is completed so
that at least this would be an informed vote. Our time would be better
spent on evaluating the real threats facing our military in
Afghanistan, starting with the roadside bomb threat and ensuring our
troops have the resources that they need.
The debate on Don't Ask, Don't Tell is just another distraction on
these and other priorities, and I urge my colleagues here in the House
to vote ``no'' on this amendment. We need to listen to our military
leaders, listen to the commandant of the Marine Corps and the actual
generals and admirals in charge of our military fighting for us, not
people who work for this administration and are going to tow the line
for this administration. We've got to do what's right. Support the
military. We need victory, not social change, in the military.

{time} 1545

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair will note that the gentleman from
Missouri has 6 minutes remaining and the gentleman from California has
5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), the sponsor of one of the amendments
en bloc.
Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentleman from California, my good friend.
Mr. Chairman, the amendment I offered to my colleagues, along with
the gentleman from Oklahoma, is included in the block of amendments we
are considering.
I thank the Rules Committee, the chairman--Mr. Skelton--and the
ranking member for considering this amendment, which addresses an issue
brought to my attention by members of the Iowa National Guard.
The 2008 Defense Authorization Act included a provision narrowing the
gap between active duty and reserve retirement benefits by allowing
Guard and Reserve members to begin receiving retired pay earlier than
the age of 60 if they had spent significant periods of time in
deployments. This provision was based on legislation that I introduced,
the National Guard and Reserve Retirement Modernization Act.
The intent of the original legislation was to reduce the retirement
age for time spent deployed, by 3 months for every 90 days spent on
active duty over the course of a career, as an incentive to retain our
best and brightest men and women. However, an erroneous legal
interpretation has limited the qualifying time to 90-day periods wholly
served within the same fiscal year, which causes many members of the
Guard and Reserve to lose credit for some of the months that they've
served.
My amendment states that it is the sense of Congress that steps
should be taken to correct this interpretation in order to ensure
Reserve component members receive the full retirement benefits that
they have earned. The committee has indicated in its report that it
believes the current interpretation of the law to be inaccurate. I look
forward to working with the committee and the Department of Defense to
address and to correct this issue of fairness to our guardsmen and
reservists who are being asked to meet increasing demands.
I urge my colleagues to support this effort.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
ranking member on the Veterans' Affairs Committee, the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
Mr. BUYER. I want to congratulate both of you on a job well done on
your bill.
To my friend Ike Skelton, Ike, I support the policy that you came up
with years ago when I first came to Congress 18 years ago--the DOD's
Don't Ask, Don't Tell--and we should not be repealing it.
In a unified voice, all of the service chiefs have asked us to give
them time to properly seek out the right answers on how to move forward
regarding a major policy shift that will affect every soldier, sailor,
airman, and marine.
Mr. Chairman, our heroes are performing valiantly in a two-front war.
Now is not the time for Congress to be voting on an amendment to repeal
Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Now is the time to strengthen our resolve to
support our servicemen and -women and to help them fight and defeat
terrorism around the world.
Now, the Constitution permits Congress to discriminate. We actually
are designated with the power to raise and support armies, to provide
and maintain a Navy, and to make the rules for government regulation
for land and naval forces. There is nothing in the Constitution that
guarantees a citizen the right to serve in the Armed Forces. As a
matter of fact, pursuant to the powers conferred by section 8 of
Article I of the Constitution, it lies within the discretion of
Congress to establish qualifications for and conditions for service in
the Armed Forces. You can't be too tall. You can't be too short. You
can't be overweight. I mean, we make these decisions. Why?
The purpose of the military is to kill and break things. Unit
cohesion is pretty important. The conduct of military operations
requires the members of the Armed Forces to make extraordinary
sacrifices, including the ultimate sacrifice, in order to provide for
the common defense of this Nation. Success in combat requires military
units that are characterized by high morale, good order and discipline
and unit cohesion.
One of the most critical elements in combat capability is unit
cohesion defined at the small unit level, which is the bonds of trust
among individual servicemembers that make the combat effectiveness of
our military unit greater than the sum of the combat effectiveness of
the individual unit members, themselves.
Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life in that
the extraordinary responsibilities of the Armed Forces, the unique
conditions of military service, and the critical role of unit cohesion
require that the military community, while subject to civilian control,
exist in a specialized society. The military society is characterized
by its own laws, rules, customs, and traditions, including numerous
restrictions on personal behavior that would not be acceptable in
civilian society.
The standards of conduct for members of the Armed Forces regulate a
member's life for 24 hours each day, beginning at the moment the member
enters military status and not ending until that person is discharged
or otherwise separated from the Armed Forces. Those standards of
conduct, including the Uniform Code of Military Justice, apply to a
member of the Armed Forces at all times if the member has military
status, whether or not the individual is on base or not or in uniform
or not.
The pervasive application of the standards of conduct is necessary
because members of the Armed Forces must be ready at all times for
worldwide deployment to a combat environment. The worldwide deployment
of the United States military forces, the international
responsibilities of the United States and the potential for involvement
of the Armed Forces in actual combat routinely make it necessary for
members of the Armed

[[Page 9640]]

Forces involuntarily to accept living conditions and work conditions
that are often spartan, primitive and that are characterized by forced
intimacy with little or no privacy.
The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a longstanding element
of military law that continues to be necessary in unique circumstances
of the military service. Tolerance does not require a moral
equivalency.
Do not repeal this.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Missouri?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Missouri has 6 minutes
remaining.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California
(Mrs. Davis).
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Thank you, Mr. Skelton, for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I would just like to correct a couple of issues that
Mr. McKeon and others have brought up.
The committee has held hearings on Don't Ask, Don't Tell. In fact, my
subcommittee has held two hearings on this very topic. Every Member of
the House and even those not on the committee were welcomed to attend.
Unfortunately, most of the Republicans who have criticized this process
failed to show up to either hearing.
The Members who did attend the second hearing, held on March 3 of
this year, heard one of the cochairs of the DOD working group say,
``The issue is not whether but how best'' to implement repeal.
All along, the purpose of the study has been ``how'' to implement
repeal, not ``if'' to end this policy. That is the purpose of the
working group's meetings, and that is why it is so important for our
servicemembers and their families to participate in whatever activities
they choose which are related to this.
I just wanted to make that correction, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island
(Mr. Kennedy).
Mr. KENNEDY. I want to thank Chairman Skelton and Mr. McKeon for
their good work on this legislation, helping to provide for our
soldiers, sailors, airmen, coastguardsmen, and for all of those who
serve our country in this war on terrorism.
Mr. Chairman, as we approach Memorial Day, I want to thank our
servicemen and -women for their service to our great country.
When they come home, the war that they fought on our behalf sometimes
just begins. It begins for them personally. That is the war to try to
cope, to cope with the many challenges health-wise that they have been
encumbered with because of their service to our country, and they
shouldn't have to worry one bit that they don't have us to back them up
100 percent. They need to know that we are there for them just as they
have been for us.
That is why, in this legislation, we have the best and the latest in
medicine for brain research and for neuroscience technology in order to
make sure that the signature wounds in this war, traumatic brain injury
and posttraumatic stress disorder, are researched properly and that
they are researched at the evidence-based level by the Department of
Defense.
Our soldiers deserve no less than the best when it comes to making
sure that their challenges and their wounds are addressed. The
Department of Defense needs to do that.
We make it a priority in this authorization bill. When we do that in
this bill, we also do that for this country because, just as they did
overseas, they are not only going to kick down the doors over there;
they are going to kick down the doors here at home when it comes to
advancing mental health and neuroscience for all Americans.
What we are learning is thanks to these great soldiers who are
serving this country so proudly. God bless all of our men and women.
Let them know that we stand behind them over there and when they get
back here at home as well.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Missouri has 3 minutes
remaining.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1 minute to a friend, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
Mr. ANDREWS. I thank the chairman for yielding.
Certainly, the debate the minority keeps bringing up about Don't Ask,
Don't Tell is very important, and we will have that vigorous debate.
Mr. Chairman, I think many Americans don't really place whether gays
and lesbians can serve in the military as the number one thing they
worry about in national security. I think they're probably more worried
about something like a nuclear IED going off in Times Square.
It is important to look at the work that the two parties have done
together that is reflected in this bill to prevent that day from
happening. There is a program which identifies, gathers up, secures,
and eventually disposes of the material that could make a nuclear bomb
which would make that horror story happen.
In 2008, we devoted $199 million to that program. Frankly, it was
lagging behind. We weren't identifying, securing, or disposing of
enough of it. This year, we are putting $559 million into that, which
means more nuclear material will be identified, locked down, disposed
of, and the risk that we will have a terrible situation like I just
described will be diminished.
This is the real work of the defense committee, and it deserves
everyone's support.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Driehaus).
Mr. DRIEHAUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, we will soon be considering an amendment, the Pingree
amendment, which would strip away competition in the F-35, the Joint
Strike Fighter, with the competitive engine program.
This Congress, on nine different occasions, has stood up for
competition, and as recently as this Congress with the Weapon Systems
Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, where the House passed the conference
report 411-0. In section 202, we talk about the acquisition strategies
to ensure competition throughout the life cycle of major defense
acquisition programs.
It is estimated, Mr. Chairman, that 5,000 engines will be ordered for
the Joint Strike Fighter--5,000 engines. The proponents of this
amendment would have us do away with the competition despite the fact
that this Congress has invested almost $3 billion in this competition
today. Now that we are up and ready, now that the competitive engine is
ready to move forward, they want to say, Stop. Stop the race before it
even starts.
We know better than that, Mr. Chairman. We know better because we
learned on the F-15 and on the F-16. We know that this will reduce
costs in the long term. As my grandmother would say, this is a penny
wise and a pound foolish.
Also, just this year, in March of 2010, the GAO report suggests that
this goes beyond financial speculation. We know that this is going to
save money. Beyond the finances, there are nonfinancial benefits--
better performance, increased reliability, and improved contractor
responsiveness.
This is critically important. If for the next couple of decades we
are going to rely upon this knowledge for our men and women in uniform,
we need to make sure that it is reliable. We need to make sure that
there is competition.
I urge my colleagues to reject the Pingree amendment.

{time} 1600

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.

Amendment No. 80 Offered by Ms. Pingree of Maine

The Acting CHAIR. (Mr. Blumenauer). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 80 printed in House Report 111-498.

[[Page 9641]]

Ms. PINGREE of Maine. 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:

Amendment No. 80 offered by Ms. Pingree of Maine:
Page 35, strike line 9 and all that follows through page
37, line 13, and insert the following:
(b) Certifications.--Not later than January 15, 2011--
(1) the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics shall certify in writing to the
congressional defense committees that--
(A) each of the 11 scheduled system development and
demonstration aircraft planned in the schedule for delivery
during 2010 has been delivered to the designated test
location;
(B) the initial service release has been granted for the
F135 engine designated for the short take-off and vertical
landing variant;
(C) facility configuration and industrial tooling
capability and capacity is sufficient to support production
of at least 42 F-35 aircraft for fiscal year 2011;
(D) block 1.0 software has been released and is in flight
test; and
(E) the Secretary of Defense has--
(i) determined that two F-35 aircraft from low-rate initial
production 1 have met established criteria for acceptance;
and
(ii) accepted such aircraft for delivery; and
(2) the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall
certify in writing to the congressional defense committees
that--
(A) the F-35C aircraft designated as CF-1 has effectively
accomplished its first flight;
(B) the 394 F-35 aircraft test flights planned in the
schedule to occur during 2010 have been completed with
sufficient results;
(C) 95 percent of the 3,772 flight test points planned for
completion in 2010 were accomplished; and
(D) the conventional take-off and land variant low
observable signature flight test has been conducted and the
results of such test have met or exceeded threshold key
performance parameters.
Page 49, strike line 7 and all that follows through page
52, line 3, and insert the following (and redesignate section
214 as section 213):

SEC. 212. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR AN ALTERNATIVE
PROPULSION SYSTEM FOR THE F-35 JOINT STRIKE
FIGHTER PROGRAM.

(a) Limitation on Use of Funds for an Alternative
Propulsion System for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
Program.--None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act may be obligated or
expended for the development or procurement of an alternate
propulsion system for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program
until the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional
defense committees a certification in writing that the
development and procurement of the alternate propulsion
system--
(1) will--
(A) reduce the total life-cycle costs of the F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter program; and
(B) improve the operational readiness of the fleet of F-35
Joint Strike Fighter aircraft; and
(2) will not--
(A) disrupt the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program during
the research, development, and procurement phases of the
program; and
(B) result in the procurement of fewer F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter aircraft during the life-cycle of the program.
(d) Offsets.--
(1) Navy joint strike fighter f136 development.--The amount
authorized to be appropriated by section 201(2) for research,
development, test, and evaluation for the Navy is hereby
decreased by $242,500,000, with the amount of the decrease to
be derived from the amounts available for the Joint Strike
Fighter (PE #0604800N) for F136 development.
(2) Air force joint strike fighter f136 development.--The
amount authorized to be appropriated by section 201(3) for
research, development, test, and evaluation for the Air Force
is hereby decreased by $242,500,000, with the amount of the
decrease to be derived from the amounts available for the
Joint Strike Fighter (PE #0604800F) for F136 development.
Page 286, strike line 17 and all that follows through page
288, line 23, and insert the following:

SEC. 802. DESIGNATION OF F135 ENGINE DEVELOPMENT AND
PROCUREMENT PROGRAM AS MAJOR SUBPROGRAM.

(a) Designation as Major Subprograms.--Not later than 30
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall designate the engine development
and procurement program described in subsection (b) as a
major subprogram of the F-35 Lightning II aircraft major
defense acquisition program, in accordance with section 2430a
of title 10, United States Code.
(b) Description.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
engine development and procurement program is the F135 engine
development and procurement program.
(c) Original Baseline.--For purposes of reporting
requirements referred to in section 2430a(b) of title 10,
United States Code, for the major subprogram designated under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall use the Milestone B
decision for the subprogram as the original baseline for the
subprogram.
(d) Actions Following Critical Cost Growth.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), to the extent
that the Secretary elects to restructure the F-35 Lightning
II aircraft major defense acquisition program subsequent to a
reassessment and actions required by subsections (a) and (c)
of section 2433a of title 10, United States Code, during
fiscal year 2010, and also conducts such reassessment and
actions with respect to the F135 engine development and
procurement program (including related reporting based on the
original baseline as defined in subsection (c)), the
requirements of section 2433a of such title with respect to
the major subprogram designated under subsection (a) shall be
considered to be met with respect to the major subprogram.
(2) Limitation.--Actions taken in accordance with paragraph
(1) shall be considered to meet the requirements of section
2433a of title 10, United States Code, with respect to the
major subprogram designated under subsection (a) only to the
extent that designation as a major subprogram would require
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a reassessment and take
actions pursuant to such section 2433a for such a subprogram
upon enactment of this Act. The requirements of such section
2433a shall not be considered to be met with respect to such
a subprogram in the event that additional programmatic
changes, following the date of the enactment of this Act,
cause the program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit
cost of such a subprogram to increase by a percentage equal
to or greater than the critical cost growth threshold (as
defined in section 2433(a)(5) of such title) for the
subprogram.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentlewoman
from Maine (Ms. Pingree) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Maine.
Ms. PINGREE of Maine. Mr. Chairman, this amendment prohibits any
further funding for the alternate F-35 engine.
In 2001, Pratt & Whitney won the award for the primary engine for the
Joint Strike Fighter through a competitive bidding process. This
process was set up to save millions in taxpayer dollars. Since then,
Congress has authorized an astonishing $1.3 billion of unrequested
funds for the development of this extra unnecessary engine. The Bush
administration opposed this program. The Obama administration opposes
this program. And yet if this amendment fails today, we will continue
to fund a defense program that is a complete waste of money.
I could not put it any better than the Secretary of Defense put it
himself: Given the many pressing needs facing our military and the
fiscal challenges facing our country, we cannot afford a ``business as
usual'' approach to the defense budget. Tough choices must be made by
both the Department and Congress to ensure that current and future
military capabilities can be sustained over time. This means programs
and initiatives of marginal or no benefit, like the F136 engine, are
unaffordable luxuries.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' and finally end this wasteful,
unnecessary program.
Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Larson) and thank him for his leadership on this
incredibly important issue.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Connecticut
will control the balance of the time.
There was no objection.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I would inquire of the Chair how much time
we have on each side.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Connecticut has 3\1/2\ minutes
remaining. There will be 5 minutes for an opponent.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds.
I strongly believe that a $110 billion noncompetitive sole source 25-
40 year contract should not be permitted. Therefore, I strongly support
the inclusion of funding to complete the development of the F-136
competitive engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.

[[Page 9642]]

I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. At this time I yield 45 seconds to the
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).
Mr. CARDOZA. I thank my friend for yielding.
I rise today in support of the Pingree amendment to the National
Defense Authorization Act. I understand and respect the passions
expressed by my friends on both sides of this issue, but I believe
today we must stand firmly on the side of fiscal responsibility and
refuse to fund a redundant engine that our military leaders and our
Commander in Chief all said is unnecessary and unwarranted.
When I am back home in my district, I often hear my constituents say
that we never cut anything, and we never can say no. Today I am saying
no, and I think this House should as well. I don't think we need two
engines on this plane.
I believe that we need to save $3 billion every time we get a chance.
Today we can make a difference for this deficit. Our country cannot
afford to waste precious tax dollars funding this program the military
says they don't need.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Air and Land Forces
Subcommittee of the committee.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, the second engine is all about
fiscal responsibility and saving the taxpayers money. The Pentagon
themselves funded this program for 10 years, and they funded it because
they knew that competition mattered.
One thing has already been said in this debate that simply isn't
true: The first engine was not competitively bid. It was the engine
that Lockheed had when they won the bid. There was no competition. They
didn't win that. That is why the Pentagon originally created the second
engine program, to make sure that over the 30- to 40-year lifecycle of
a $100 billion program, they had options.
A GAO study on the competitive engine program for the F-16 from the
early 1980s showed savings of almost 20 percent over the lifetime of
that program. Those of us who for years have supported this second
engine program, have support it precisely because we want to save the
taxpayers money.
The simple argument is competition works, and being penny-wise and
pound-foolish doesn't. We have already spent $3 billion. To save $2
billion on the front end, we risk a $100 billion program. Please oppose
this amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the distinguished chairman of the Armed
Services Committee.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I speak in favor of the committee
position, which is to have an alternate engine for the F-35. If one
looks at the graph of the F-16 alternate engine program, one will
clearly notice that from the mid-1980s, the cost of the engines went
down because of the competition. Competition is important. Single
source often causes a steep increase in price.
Last year, this House passed the Weapons System Acquisition Reform
Act, which requires more competition in Department of Defense programs,
not less. What this position of the Armed Services Committee does is
live up to that reform act, requiring more competition. It is as simple
as that.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much
time we have remaining.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Serrano). Both sides have 2\3/4\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I yield 45 seconds to the distinguished
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, let me say that there has been some
competition in the engine for the F-35, and that competition is when
the bids were due. That bid was perfectly legal and honest and upfront,
and the bid was awarded.
Now we have got somebody that actually has a contract for 14 of the
28 military aircraft engines, sole source, complaining about
competition. They lost the competition.
Mr. Chairman, if they lost the competition in an open and honest bid,
having the sole source of 14 of the 28 military aircraft engines, what
can be the argument?
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Conaway), a member of committee.
Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
I want to speak in favor of competition. Competition works. Our work
on the IMPROVE Act shows that. I am against this amendment. There was
no competition. Under Secretary Ashton Carter, on the record in front
of the committee, said there was no competition between these two
engines. Competition works. It drives down the costs, and we need those
cost savings over the term of a 40-year program.
I rise in opposition to amendment #80 offered by Representative
Pingree and others. The Pingree amendment would result in a sole source
contract to a single engine manufacturer for the Joint Strike Fighter.
But few can argue with the premise that competition is good for the
taxpayer.
In fact, the Department of Defense has training materials for its
acquisition workforce to teach them the benefits of competition and how
to cultivate it. For example, here are a few highlights from DoD's
required training on competition, dated May 5, 2010. These training
materials capture the benefits of competition: Drives cost savings;
Improves quality of product/service; Enhances solutions and the
industrial base; Promotes fairness and openness leading to public
trust; Prevents waste, fraud, and abuse, because contractors know they
must perform at a high level or else be replaced; Healthy competition
is the lifeblood of commerce--it increases the likelihood of
efficiencies and innovations.
It also notes what the key drivers of competition are. Principally,
it's the law! The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 requires
competition in contracting. Competition isn't an alternative, it's
required!
The emphasis on competition comes from the top. On March 4, 2009 in a
memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies,
President Barak Obama stated, ``It is the policy of the Federal
Government that executive agencies shall not engage in noncompetitive
contracts except in those circumstances where their use can be fully
justified and where appropriate safeguards have been put in place to
protect the taxpayer.'' Yet, we have yet to see such a justification,
nor have we seen any evidence of additional safeguards being put into
place.
In fact, in DoD's training materials, they note what circumstances
lead to barriers to competition. In this instance, none of these
circumstances apply:
Unique/critical mission or technical requirements (We have 2
contractors capable of meeting technical requirements.)
Industry move toward consolidation (We still have 2 viable engine
manufacturers.)
Urgent requirements in support of war operations (The JSF is not
being procured to support today's operations.)
Congressional adds or earmarks (Unless this amendment passes,
Congress will not have directed funding for the engine to go to a
particular manufacturer.)
Proprietary data rights developed at private expense (Does not apply.
These are new engines.)
Insufficient technical data packages (Does not apply.)
Contracting personnel shortages and increased workload (The
competitive engine was funded by DoD until 2006 and continues to be
funded by Congress. There is no increase in work load.) Time Restraints
(The competitive engine is already under development and there is time.
At best, the F-25 will not reach initial operational capability for 2-4
years.)
But the emphasis on competition comes not only from the President.
This Congress, just one year ago, unanimously passed the Weapon Systems
Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. The bill states that:
Major Defense Acquisition Programs shall adopt acquisition strategies
that ensure competition . . . At prime & subcontract level throughout
program life-cycle
When a decision is made to award maintenance & sustainment contract
for major weapon system, DoD will ensure to maximum extent possible &
consistent with law that the sustainment contract be competitively
awarded.
Likewise, less than one month ago, this Congress passed the IMPROVE
Acquisition Act of 2010, by a vote of 417-3. This bill also

[[Page 9643]]

focused on the need to expand the industrial base, provide training on
competition, and to ensure competition is maintained in services
contracts.
What's more, since DoD stopped funding the competitive engine in
2006, Congress has provided funding for the competitive engine in 2007,
2008, 2009, and 2010. Nothing has changed. A vote to oppose the Pingree
amendment is a vote to support the policy Congress has clearly
articulated--competition is good, it's the law, and it's required for
the F-35 engine.
It's also interesting to note that of the 33 members who co-sponsored
this amendment, 24 of them have voted for every single piece of
legislation I just cited (when they cast a vote). None voted against
the Weapon System Acquisition Reform Act. In fact, Ms. Pingree, voted
for each of these bills while she's been in Congress, and was also co-
sponsor of the Weapon System Acquisition Reform Act in the House.
We cannot send a mixed message. Competition is possible here. We
should not direct funding to a single source. I urge my colleagues to
oppose the amendment.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
All across America, families are tightening their belts, making do
with less. They expect the same from Congress. Imagine their utter
frustration when they hear Congress is pushing forward an unwanted and
unnecessary $3 billion program. Only in Washington, D.C., could a
company that lost the competition in the private sector and already
controls 88 percent of the military engine market come seeking a
government-directed subsidy and call that competition. I guess
competition in this town means buying two of everything with the
taxpayers' money.
The Marines, the Navy, and the Air Force have all said they don't
want it. They don't need it. The President has called this program an
example of unnecessary defense programs that do nothing to keep us
safe.
Why are we moving ahead with it? If we can't cut spending here, where
can we cut it? If we don't make the tough choices to rein in wasteful
spending now, when will we make them?
This is about whose side you are on. Are you on the side of excessive
spending, or are you on the side of saving the taxpayers money and
supporting our troops?
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
Mr. BUYER. I have heard it all. To say that competition causes
wasteful use of taxpayers' money is a perfidious argument. Are you
kidding me?
I defended Connecticut when it came to Electric Boat. You came to the
floor and you argued about competition, competition against Newport
News. I am glad we did, now that we have got welding problems with
those submarines.
Now you think sole source and competition is bad? Are you kidding me,
Mr. Chairman? Do not be dishonest. Let's be honest about the debate,
all right? Let's defend our industrial base. That is what is extremely
important. Let's also protect the Transatlantic Alliance.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 30 seconds to the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Scott), the vice chair of the Terrorism,
Nonproliferation and Trade Subcommittee of the Committee on Foreign
Affairs.
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to speak on something that
we have not touched upon, and that is what we need to touch upon the
most, and that is what is in the best interests of our national
security.
Here we are debating this issue: Do we want to put the future of an
engine production in the hands of one monopoly company for 30 years and
put $100 billion in it?
Ladies and gentlemen, by the year 2035, the F-35 will account for 95
percent of our entire aircraft fleet for our fighter squadrons. It is
very important that we have this balanced in the hands of more than one
manufacturer. We need to vote down this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Connecticut has 30 seconds
remaining.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rooney).
Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
Ladies and gentlemen, we were sent here in a Republic to represent
you as trustees with issues like this. I am new to Congress, but this
is a wasteful spending earmark.
We have 27 planes that use one engine that had a competitive bid, and
now we are talking about adding a second engine to our F-35 for $2.9
billion. Why? Because we slipped in an earmark in 1996, and nobody in
Congress, the Congress with the great approval rating, has ever decided
to take it out.
The time to change Washington is now, and this is a perfect example
of why. Vote yes on the amendment.
I rise today in strong support of the Pingree/Rooney/Larsen
amendment. With a $1.6 trillion dollar deficit the ``extra'' engine is
a luxury we cannot afford.
I would like to point out a few things very briefly:
(1) this is a $2.9 billion dollar program the DOD does not want or
need.
(2) We can build 53 jets for the cost of the ``extra'' engine
(3) There are 27 aircraft that operate with a sole source engine.
(4) Sole sourced engines are the norm.
(5) The F-16 is the only other aircraft in the history of U.S.
military aviation with two simultaneous engine manufacturers.
(5a) There was fair competition for the bid; the incumbent engine won
but here we are also funding the second place engine too. The
``everybody gets a trophy philosophy has to end. Everyone doesn't get
an ``A.'' We can't afford it.
(6) The Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps service chiefs do not want
this extra engine.
(7) There has been support from both Bush and Obama administrations
to end this wasteful program.
(8) Independent agencies including the GAO and OMB have found that
there is no evidence to support the extra engine will produce any
significant cost savings, despite earlier projections.
This extra engine is a luxury we simply cannot afford and I urge my
colleagues to vote Yes on the Amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1\1/4\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Pence).
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the efforts to
eliminate the engine competition for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. In
the interest of full disclosure, let me say how proud I am of the more
than 4,000 Hoosier employees of Rolls Royce who worked to develop this
engine. But that is not why I am here.
I am here because I really do believe, as the Heritage Foundation has
cited, that the essential choice between us today is competition or
sole-source contracting. Either we can require two companies to engage
in head-to-head competition each year for the next 30 years, or we can
give one company a sole-source contract worth $100 billion for the next
30 years. Which do you think is more in the interests of the taxpayers?
Oppose this amendment.
I rise in opposition to efforts to eliminate the engine competition
for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
In the interests of full disclosure, let me say first how proud I am
of the more than 4,000 Hoosier employees of Rolls Royce, which teamed
with General Electric to develop the F136 engine for the F-35.
But let's look at the facts regarding this competitive engine
program, which began 15 years ago and today is 70 percent complete,.
History tells us that competition serves the taxpayer well and this
is no less the case when it comes to fighter engines.
In its study, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office found
that the F-16 engine competition yielded savings of 21 percent in
overall lifecycle costs. Using that as a model, we might anticipate a
20 percent benefit from the JSF engine competition, but it would only
need to generate 1 percent to 2 percent cost benefit to recoup the
remaining investment needed to complete the F136 program.
In addition to the outstanding opportunity for cost savings,
competition also improves operational readiness and contractor
responsiveness.
Building the F-35 using two interchangeable engines from two separate
manufacturers provides insurance against fleet-wide engine

[[Page 9644]]

problems down the road. As the Heritage Foundation noted recently,
without the F136, it is estimated that by 2035 nearly 90 percent of our
fighters will use a single engine, the F135 baseline engine.
A competing engine program also hedges against the risks posed by
testing failures, required redesigns, cost growth and delays in the
primary engine program. And because it is a follow-on program, the F136
provides growth paths for propulsion systems and technological
innovation that can address problems that arise such as potential
aircraft weight growth.
The essential choice before us is between competition and sole source
contracting. Either we can require two companies to engage in head-to-
head competition each year for the next 30 years--or give one company a
sole source contract worth $100 billion for the next 30 years. Which do
you think is most likely to control costs and deliver the best engine
to the American taxpayer?
The answer is clear: competition provides an important cost-control
mechanism in defense procurement, it encourages innovation, and
mitigates risk.
I urge my colleagues to support competition and military flexibility,
and oppose the Pingree Amendment.

{time} 1615

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, Members should ask themselves these
questions in deciding this issue: When it comes to saving money, would
you rather have two people competing or one for your business?
When it comes to protecting the fleet, the ability to fly, would you
rather rely upon one company or two to keep the fleet flying?
When it comes to competition, should you presume that competition
works or presume that it shouldn't?
To save money, to protect the fleet, to promote competition, we
should oppose this amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McIntyre ), a member of the
committee.
Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would add $20 billion to
the deficit by eliminating the savings that GAO says will occur with
competition. Congress is not required to give a rubber stamp to the
Department of Defense, which is opposed to other programs like the
formation of the U.S. Special Operations Command and funding for the V-
22 Osprey.
If this amendment passes, our national security will be put at grave
risk as 90 percent of our fighter jet fleets will be dependent on just
one engine. That's not wise and it's not fair.
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chair, I support the provisions in this bill that
support a second engine for the F-35.
The Air Force will soon shift its air-to-ground, air-to-air, and air-
supremacy roles to the F-35, and the F-35 will eventually number more
than a thousand jet fighters, or 95 percent of the fighter force
structure.
To power these aircraft, the Air Force will require some 2500-3000
engines at a cost of more than $100 billion.
We are fortunate to have two excellent engine manufacturers, Pratt
Whitney and GE. Both started out as candidates for the F-35 engine.
The question now comes: Do we need and want a second engine, produced
by GE?
More specifically--
Do we want to sole source, run this program out 25 years or more,
without price competition?
In addition to price competition, do we want competition on
innovation, reliability, and durability?
Do we want to run the operational risk of having no back-up if
problems show up in one engine?
Do we want to keep competition in the defense production base?
A second engine for the F-35 makes sense and saves money.
I urge the House to leave intact the second engine provisions in the
defense authorization bill before us today.
Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. Chair, as a member of the House Armed Services
Committee and a strong supporter of the Joint Strike Fighter
alternative engine program, I rise today in opposition to the Pingree/
Larson Amendment.
This amendment, which would redirect funding for the program, is
about terminating jobs, killing competition and giving a $100 billion
monopoly to one contractor who is already $2.5 billion (50 percent)
over budget.
This amendment would add $20 billion to the deficit by eliminating
the savings GAO says will occur with competition.
Supporting this amendment means making the choice to give one company
a sole source contract for the next 30 years versus having two
companies compete head-to-head every year, resulting in the best price
and best engine.
There was no competition for this program. The engines for every
major weapons program in history have been competed--except for the
Joint Strike Fighter, the largest defense program ever.
Congress is not required to give a rubber stamp to the Defense
Department, which has been proven wrong in its opposition to several
key programs, including development of the Predator, creation of the
U.S. Special Operations Command and funding for the V-22 Osprey.
If this amendment passes, our national security will be put at grave
risk, as the U.S. and Allied forces will depend entirely on one engine
for 90 percent of their fighter jet fleets.
And, there will be job loss. We must maintain our support of the
competitive engine program to sustain the thousands of jobs in the
United States that are a result of this program.
I am pleased to join both the Armed Services Committee Chairman and
Ranking Member, and the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Air & Land
Forces, the Sea Power & Expeditionary Forces Subcommittees, and the
Acquisition Reform Panel in opposing this amendment.
My colleagues on the House Armed Services Committee and I approved
funding for the alternative engine program to continue, and the
Department of Defense's own analysis states that ``the estimated costs
of a competitive engine acquisition strategy are projected to be
approximately equivalent to a sole-source scenario.'' If that is the
case, I am confident the benefits of a competitive engine strategy
warrant continued support.
Therefore, I strongly oppose the Pingree/Larson amendment and I rise
in support of keeping jobs, sustaining competition, and our country's
national security.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. Pingree).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. PINGREE of Maine. Mr. Chair, 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 Maine will
be postponed.

Amendment No. 82 Offered by Mr. Inslee

The Acting CHAIR. (Mr. Blumenauer). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 82 printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. INSLEE. 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:

Amendment No. 82 offered by Mr. Inslee:
At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:

SEC. 839. CONSIDERATION OF UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN
EVALUATION OF OFFERS FOR KC-X AERIAL REFUELING
AIRCRAFT PROGRAM.

(a) Requirement To Consider Unfair Competitive Advantage.--
In awarding a contract for the KC-X aerial refueling aircraft
program (or any successor to that program), the Secretary of
Defense shall, in evaluating any offers submitted to the
Department of Defense in response to a solicitation for
offers for such program, consider any unfair competitive
advantage that an offeror may possess.
(b) Report.--Not later than 60 days after submission of
offers in response to any such solicitation, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees
a report on any unfair competitive advantage that any offeror
may possess.
(c) Requirement to Take Findings Into Account in Award of
Contract.--In awarding a contract for the KC-X aerial
refueling aircraft program (or any successor to that
program), the Secretary of Defense shall take into account
the findings of the report submitted under subsection (b).
(d) Unfair Competitive Advantage.--In this section, the
term ``unfair competitive advantage'', with respect to an
offer for a contract, means a situation in which the cost of
development, production, or manufacturing is not fully borne
by the offeror for such contract.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Inslee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.

[[Page 9645]]

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Chairman, we, all Americans, believe in a strong national
defense; and all Americans believe in a fair, level playing field in
economic competition.
And in the competition for the procurement contract for the Air Force
tanker to preserve national defense infrastructure, to preserve
fairness, we need to amend this bill to ensure that unfair competitive
advantage, illegal subsidies, in fact, are taken into consideration in
this bidding process.
We have prepared an amendment that will do that, that will insist
that in this bidding process that it be conducted fairly; that when any
bidder, domestic or foreign, has an unfair competitive advantage, that
is taken into consideration.
Now, why do we need to do this?
Well, there's 50,000 American jobs at stake, and nothing in
international law compels us to provide a stimulus program for France.
We are required to do this because we know American aerospace workers
can compete if they have a level playing field with workers in Europe.
Our bill is, number one, fair. It applies to both domestic and
foreign bidders. Number two, it's WTO compliant.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Kansas
(Mr. Tiahrt).
Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, every day it becomes more and more
difficult to create and keep jobs here in America. We've got the best
aerospace workers in the world. But over the last few years, 65,000
aerospace jobs have left America and migrated to France.
The European Government has subsidized building jets, and finally the
World Trade Organization ruled that those start-up subsidies are
illegal.
And now our own Pentagon is buying a new air refueling tanker a new
jet, and they have decided to turn their backs on the American
aerospace workers by ignoring these illegal start-up subsidies and
putting another 65,000 jobs at risk.
This amendment is about fairness to the American aerospace workers.
It simply says, in spite of all the lobbying efforts that have occurred
by the French, Mr. Secretary, if you insist on receiving a bid from the
French, then you have to take into consideration the dollar impact of
the illegal subsidies. Support this amendment, and it's a matter of
fairness to the American aerospace workers.
Mr. Chairman, for the purposes of a colloquy, I yield to the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).
Mr. Inslee, is it your intention and your understanding that the
language in the amendment regarding the unfair competitive advantage
describes illegal subsidies such as illegal launch aid provided by EADS
and Airbus by the European governments as ruled by the World Trade
Organization?
Mr. INSLEE. Yes. And it is our intent, with this amendment, to ensure
that illegal and unfair competitive advantages, such as the launch aid
provided to EADS/Airbus by the European governments, are factored into
the bid price of recipients of those illegal subsidies.
Mr. TIAHRT. Thank you. That's also my intent and understanding of
this language.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BONNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to this
amendment, although I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Alabama is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. BONNER. It's interesting listening to both sides of this debate.
We actually, I think, see this amendment in two different ways, and yet
we are going to end up being on the same side.
This amendment, as it has been revised, is far superior to the form
in which it existed less than 24 hours ago. The amendment now applies
in an evenhanded way to both competitors in the tanker competition and,
for that reason, I think we have made the amendment better.
However, allow me to offer a word of caution to my colleagues that
merits our consideration. As my colleagues know, this ongoing
procurement process that, in fact, was mandated by Congress, is just
weeks away, July 9, in fact, from where both companies are going to
turn in their final bid. And unless we muddy this process up, we are
only a few months away from selecting a winner and finally moving
forward to building the replacement for the Air Force's 50-plus-year-
old fleet of tankers.
The word of caution to my friends is this: Congress needs to be very
careful that we do not inadvertently build obstacles or additional
delay into this program. After all, our warfighters have waited long
enough.
And we must be extremely careful that we maintain a level playing
field that is essential for vigorous competition. We all know that
competition will dramatically increase the odds of a better tanker at a
better price, and there are only two companies in the world that are
qualified to build these tankers.
To that point, on Tuesday of this week, the Department of Defense
reiterated that ``we would not have welcomed EADS North America's
participation into this important competition unless they were a
company in good standing with the Department of Defense.''
Those of us who support EADS' bid have long argued for a level
playing field, one in which both sides can compete fairly. Some on one
side, however, appear to fear that fair competition is not possible
unless it is a sole-source contract, a blank check signed by the
American taxpayer.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Alabama (Mr. Bright), my friend and my distinguished colleague who
serves on this committee of jurisdiction.
Mr. BRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to thank the Armed Services,
Rules, and Ways and Means Committees for intervening on this amendment
to make it much less harmful than it was originally written.
The committees recognize, as do I, that the Fair Defense Competition
Act, on which this amendment is based, is deeply flawed and would have
significant international trade implications. Considering the fact that
the original bill has been deemed unworkable, I hope we can put this
issue to rest and proceed to get our warfighters the best tanker
available for the best value to the taxpayer.
For nearly a decade, the Defense Department has sought to replace its
aging fleet of aerial refueling tankers. There have been numerous
problems with that process, and a source selection effort that should
have ended years ago is only now getting close to final resolution.
If anything, Congress should avoid doing anything that would
complicate an already drawn out competition. The Department of Defense
should be able to award a contract based on the merits and the best
value, without political or parochial considerations.
That said, I do not believe this particular amendment will have a
significant impact on the process. The American warfighter and taxpayer
deserves the best possible aerial refueling tanker. Let's get out of
the way and let the Department of Defense make a decision based on the
facts, not distractions.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, we can give a $35 billion contract for the
next generation tanker to an American company, Boeing, creating an
estimated 62,000 to 70,000 U.S. jobs over the life of the contract. Or
we can give the contract to a European company, Airbus/EADS, thus
creating tens of thousands of jobs in Europe.
This should be an easy call, a no-brainer. In fact, the decision is
even clearer. We now know that Airbus has been provided almost $6
billion in illegal subsidies from European governments, subsidies which
have cost us an estimated 65,000 U.S. aerospace jobs.
The amendment before us directs the Department of Defense to take any
unfair competitive advantage into account in the Air Force tanker
competition. The Pentagon should not be rewarding bad behavior. U.S.
taxpayers

[[Page 9646]]

should not be asked to pay for an overseas jobs creation program for
the European aerospace industry.
I urge my colleagues, support this amendment, stand up for American
workers and basic fairness in tanker competition.
Mr. BONNER. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to respond briefly to the
gentlelady from Connecticut, our friend and distinguished colleague, to
set the record straight.
When EADS wins the competition this time, as they did the previous
time, they intend to create almost 48,000 jobs in the United States,
many of which, quite honestly, will be in my district in Alabama. But
they will be in all 50 States. So this is not a competition between
American jobs and European jobs. This is American jobs throughout the
country between two great competitors.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. INSLEE. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Carnahan).
Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Chairman, during this time of record unemployment,
granting a $35 billion contract to a company that has received over $5
billion in illegal subsidies, according to the WTO, makes no common
sense.
In the end, this is about what is fair for the American taxpayer,
fair for companies. Tens of thousands of Boeing employees and suppliers
throughout the U.S. have been affected by these continual subsidies
provided by European governments that have put American workers at a
disadvantage.
I call on every Member of this House to support full and fair
competition in the tanker program to support American workers.
Mr. BONNER. In response to my friend from Missouri, and in agreement
that we need to be assured of fair competition, that's why I do not
oppose this amendment. I believe this amendment was made better last
night.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. INSLEE. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Dicks).
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I want my friend from Alabama to recognize
that nobody would have objected to him getting additional time.
The biggest point here is that Airbus received $5.7 billion in
subsidy from the governments of Europe. This gives it an unfair
advantage in the bidding on this airplane, and that's why we want the
Secretary of Defense to at least take that into account.
The WTO has already determined that this was an illegal subsidy that
harmed the United States of America and has cost us thousands of jobs.
We must pass this amendment.

{time} 1630

Mr. BONNER. With that, I would like to respond to my distinguished
chairman and my friend from Washington State with this point. The WTO
has only had an interim ruling, and everyone knows that. And within
weeks, the WTO should be able to consider the complaint of the European
Union against Boeing.
To that point, $16.6 billion in R&D subsidies have been recorded for
Boeing versus $3.7 billion for Airbus, $2 billion in export-related tax
subsidies, $6 billion in local and State government subsidies, and $2
billion in foreign government subsidies for moving manufacturing jobs
out of your State, my friend, into Japan and into Italy.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. INSLEE. I just want my colleagues to realize there is a clear
difference between these two bidders. One has been adjudicated as
having received over $5 billion of illegal subsidies. That is the same
contractor that will take tens of thousands of jobs to Europe that
would otherwise be in the United States of America. It is untenable in
today's world for the Pentagon to not take that into consideration.
Here is one message to the people who are doing such a great job for
us in the Department of Defense. We realize the hour of this debate,
but we will not finish until this is taken into consideration.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Inslee).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. 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 Washington
will be postponed.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 111-498 on
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Skelton of Missouri.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Marshall of Georgia.
Amendment No. 13 by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts.
The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Skelton

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri
(Mr. Skelton) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 421,
noes 0, not voting 16, as follows:

[Roll No. 310]

AYES--421

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack

[[Page 9647]]

Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--16

Berkley
Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Deutch
Graves
Gutierrez
Herger
Lowey
Melancon
Nadler (NY)
Pierluisi
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Schiff

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1703

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 310, had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Marshall

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Marshall) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 423,
noes 0, not voting 14, as follows:

[Roll No. 311]

AYES--423

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--14

Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cardoza
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Deutch
Graves
Herger
Melancon
Olver
Pierluisi
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Shuster

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1711

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. McGovern

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr.

[[Page 9648]]

McGovern) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 312]

AYES--341

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Bonner
Bono Mack
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Butterfield
Buyer
Camp
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fortenberry
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)

NOES--85

Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Boozman
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Campbell
Carter
Cassidy
Chaffetz
Coble
Conaway
Culberson
Duncan
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Griffith
Hall (TX)
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Johnson, Sam
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McClintock
McCotter
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pence
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Royce
Scalise
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Stearns
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Westmoreland
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--11

Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Graves
Klein (FL)
Melancon
Pierluisi
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Schmidt

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 1720

Messrs. TIAHRT and HOEKSTRA changed their vote from ``aye'' to
``no.''
Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. Andrews

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, as the
designee of the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, I offer
amendments en bloc No. 3.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 3 offered by Mr. Andrews consisting of
amendments numbered 29, 34, 40, 46, 48, 52, and 54 printed in House
Report 111-498:

Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mr. Pascrell of New Jersey

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 279, after line 16, insert the following:
(e) Cognitive Impairment Screenings.--Until the
comprehensive policy under subsection (a) is implemented, the
Secretary shall use the same cognitive screening tool for
pre-deployment and post-deployment screening to compare new
data to previous baseline data for the purposes of detecting
cognitive impairment (as described in section 1618(e)(6) of
the Wounded Warrior Act (title XVI of Public Law 110-181; 10
U.S.C. 1071 note)) for each member of the Armed Forces--
(1) who returns from a deployment in support of a
contingency operation; and
(2) who completed a neurocognitive assessment prior to the
implementation of a new pre-deployment and post-deployment
screening tool.
(f) Conclusion of Studies on Cognitive Assessment Tools.--
Not later than September 30, 2011, the Secretary of Defense
shall complete any outstanding comparative studies on the
effectiveness of various cognitive screening tools, including
existing tools used for pre-deployment and post-deployment
screenings, for the implementation of the comprehensive
policy under subsection (a).

Amendment No. 34 Offered by Ms. Harman of California

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 1648. EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION AND PRIORITY FOR
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A PERMANENT
CHANGE OF STATION OR UNIT TRANSFER BASED ON
HUMANITARIAN CONDITIONS FOR VICTIM OF SEXUAL
ASSAULT.

(a) In General.--Chapter 39 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 672 the following
new section:

``Sec. 673. Consideration of application for permanent change
of station or unit transfer for members on active duty who
are the victim of a sexual assault

``(a) Expedited Consideration and Priority for Approval.--
To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary concerned
shall provide for the expedited consideration and approval of
an application for consideration of a permanent change of
station or unit transfer submitted by a member of the armed
forces serving on active duty who was a victim of a sexual
assault or other offense covered by section 920 of this title
(article 120) so as to reduce the possibility of retaliation
against the member for reporting the sexual assault.

[[Page 9649]]

``(b) Regulations.--The Secretaries of the military
departments shall issue regulations to carry out this
section, within guidelines provided by the Secretary of
Defense.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 672 the following new item:

``673. Consideration of application for permanent change of station or
unit transfer for members on active duty who are the
victim of a sexual assault''.

Amendment No. 40 Offered by Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 579. RETROACTIVE AWARD OF ARMY COMBAT ACTION BADGE.

(a) Authority To Award.--The Secretary of the Army may
award the Army Combat Action Badge (established by order of
the Secretary of the Army through Headquarters, Department of
the Army Letter 600-05-1, dated June 3, 2005) to a person
who, while a member of the Army, participated in combat
during which the person personally engaged, or was personally
engaged by, the enemy at any time during the period beginning
on December 7, 1941, and ending on September 18, 2001 (the
date of the otherwise applicable limitation on retroactivity
for the award of such decoration), if the Secretary
determines that the person has not been previously recognized
in an appropriate manner for such participation.
(b) Procurement of Badge.--The Secretary of the Army may
make arrangements with suppliers of the Army Combat Action
Badge so that eligible recipients of the Army Combat Action
Badge pursuant to subsection (a) may procure the badge
directly from suppliers, thereby eliminating or at least
substantially reducing administrative costs for the Army to
carry out this section.

Amendment No. 46 Offered by Mr. Space of Ohio

The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle C of title V (page 151, after line
12), add the following new section:

SEC. 523. SECURE ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF CERTIFICATE OF
RELEASE OR DISCHARGE FROM ACTIVE DUTY (DD FORM
214).

Section 596 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 1168 note) is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``(a) Election to Forward Certificate to
VA Offices--'' before ``The Secretary of Defense''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(b) Secure Method of Electronic Delivery.--
``(1) Development and implementation.--The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs, in consultation with the Secretary of
Defense, shall develop and implement a secure electronic
method of forwarding the DD Form 214 to the appropriate
office specified in subsection (a)(2). The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs shall ensure that the method permits such
offices to access the forms electronically using current
computer operating systems.
``(2) Authority to cease delivery.--In developing the
secure electronic method of forwarding DD Forms 214, the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall ensure that the
information provided is not disclosed or used for
unauthorized purposes and may cease forwarding the forms
electronically to an office specified in subsection (a)(2) if
demonstrated problems arise.''.

Amendment No. 48 Offered by Mr. Walz of Minnesota

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Strike subtitle F of title VI and insert the following new
subtitle:

Subtitle F--Alternative Career Track Pilot Program

SEC. 661. PILOT PROGRAM TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE CAREER TRACK
FOR COMMISSIONED OFFICERS TO FACILITATE AN
INCREASED COMMITMENT TO ACADEMIC AND
PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION AND CAREER-BROADENING
ASSIGNMENTS.

(a) Program Authorized.--Chapter 39 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by inserting after section 672 the
following new section:

``Sec. 673. Alternative career track for commissioned
officers pilot program

``(a) Program Authorized.--(1) Under regulations prescribed
pursuant to subsection (g) and approved by the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of a military department may establish
a pilot program for an armed force under the jurisdiction of
the Secretary under which an eligible commissioned officer,
while on active duty--
``(A) participates in a separate career track characterized
by expanded career opportunities extending over a longer
career;
``(B) agrees to an additional active duty service
obligation of at least five years to be served concurrently
with other active duty service obligations; and
``(C) would be required to accept further active duty
service obligations, as determined by the Secretary, to be
served concurrently with other active duty service
obligations, including the active duty service obligation
accepted under subparagraph (B), in connection with the
officer's entry into education programs, selection for career
broadening assignments, acceptance of additional special and
incentive pays, or selection for promotion.
``(2) The Secretary of the military department concerned
may waive an active duty service obligation accepted under
subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1) to facilitate the
separation or retirement of a participant in the program.
``(3) The program shall be known as the `Alternative Career
Track Pilot Program' (in this section referred to as the
`program').
``(b) Eligible Officers.--Commissioned officers with
between 13 and 18 years of service are eligible to volunteer
to participate in the program.
``(c) Number of Participants.--No more than 50 officers of
each armed force may be selected per year to participate in
the program.
``(d) Alternative Career Elements of Program.--(1) The
Secretaries of the military departments may establish
separate basic pay and special and incentive pay and
promotion systems unique to the officers participating in the
program, without regard to the requirements of this title,
title 37, or administrative year group cohort designation..
``(2) The Secretaries of the military departments may
establish separation and retirement policies for officers
participating in the program without regard to grade and
years of service requirements established under this title.
``(3) Participants serving in a grade below brigadier
general or rear admiral (lower half) may serve in the grade
without regard to the limits on the number of officers in the
grade established under this title.
``(e) Treatment of General and Flag Officer Participants.--
(1) A participant serving in a grade above colonel, or
captain in the Navy, but below lieutenant general or vice
admiral, shall be--
``(A) counted for purposes of general officer and flag
officer limits on grade and the total number serving as
general officers and flag officers, if the participant is
serving in a position requiring the assignment of a military
officer; but
``(B) excluded from limits on grade and the total number
serving as general officers and flag officers, if the
participant is serving in a position not typically occupied
by a military officer.
``(2) A participant serving in the grade of lieutenant
general, vice admiral, general, or admiral shall be counted
for purposes of general officer and flag officer limits on
grade and the total number serving as general officers and
flag officers.
``(f) Return to Standard Career Path; Effect.--(1) The
Secretaries of the military departments retain the authority
to involuntarily return an officer to the standard career
path.
``(2) The Secretary of the military department concerned
may return an officer to the standard career path at the
request of the officer.
``(3) If the program is terminated pursuant to paragraph
(4) or (5) of subsection (i), officers participating in the
program at the time of the termination shall be returned to
the standard career path with appropriate adjustments to
their administrative record to ensure they are not penalized
for participating in the pilot program.
``(4) An officer returned to the standard career path under
paragraph (1), (2), or (3) shall retain the grade, date-of-
rank, and basic pay level earned while a participant in the
program but shall revert to the special and incentive pay
authorities established in title 37 upon the expiration of
the agreement between the Secretary and the officer providing
any special and incentive pays under the program. Subsequent
increases in the officer's rate of monthly basic pay shall
conform to the annual percentage increases in basic pay rates
provided in the basic pay table.
``(5) Services will adjust the participating officer's
cohort year group to the appropriate year to ensure the
officer remains competitive for all promotions and command
opportunities in their standard career path.
``(g) Annual Report.--(1) The Secretaries of the military
departments, in cooperation with the Secretary of Defense,
shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and House of Representatives an annual report
containing the findings and recommendations of the Secretary
of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments
concerning the progress of the program for each armed force.
``(2) The Secretary of a military department, with the
consent of the Secretary of Defense, may include in the
report for a year a recommendation that the program be made
permanent for an armed force under the jurisdiction of that
Secretary.
``(h) Regulations.--The Secretary of each military
department shall prescribe regulations to carry out the
program. The regulations shall be subject to the approval of
the Secretary of Defense.

[[Page 9650]]

``(i) Commencement; Duration.--(1) Before authorizing the
commencement of the program for an armed force, the Secretary
of the military department concerned, with the consent of the
Secretary of Defense, shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report
containing the detailed program structure of the alternative
career track, associated personnel and compensation policies,
implementing instructions and regulations, and a summary of
the specific provisions of this title and title 37 to be
waived under the program. The authority to conduct the
program for that armed force commences 120 days after the
date of the submission of the report.
``(2) The Secretary of the military department concerned,
with the consent of the Secretary of Defense, may authorize
revision of the program structure, associated personnel and
compensation policies, implementing instructions and
regulations, or laws waived, as submitted by the Secretary
under paragraph (1). The Secretary of the military department
concerned, with the consent of the Secretary of Defense,
shall submit the proposed revisions to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives.
The revisions shall take effect 120 days after the date of
their submission.
``(3) If the program for an armed force has not commenced
before December 31, 2015, as provided in paragraph (1), the
authority to commence the program for that armed force
terminates.
``(4) No officer may be accepted to participate in the
program after December 31, 2026.
``(5) The Secretary of the military department concerned,
with the consent of the Secretary of Defense, may terminate
the pilot program for an armed force before the date
specified in paragraph (4). Not later than 90 days after
terminating the pilot program, the Secretary of the military
department concerned, in cooperation with the Secretary of
Defense, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and House of Representatives a report containing
the reasons for the termination.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 672 the following new item:

``673. Alternative career track for commissioned officers pilot
program.''.

Amendment No. 52 Offered by Mr. Carson of Indiana

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 5__. MATTERS COVERED BY PRESEPARATION COUNSELING FOR
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND THEIR SPOUSES.

Section 1142(b) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``job placement
counseling for the spouse'' and inserting ``inclusion of the
spouse when counseling regarding the matters covered by
paragraphs (9), (10), and (16) is provided, job placement
counseling for the spouse, and the provision of information
on survivor benefits available under the laws administered by
the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs'';
(2) in paragraph (9), by inserting before the period the
following: ``, including information on budgeting, saving,
credit, loans, and taxes'';
(3) in paragraph (10), by striking ``and employment'' and
inserting ``, employment, and financial'';
(4) by striking paragraph (16) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
``(16) Information on home loan services and housing
assistance benefits available under the laws administered by
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and counseling on
responsible borrowing practices.''; and
(5) in paragraph (17), by inserting before the period the
following: ``, and information regarding the means by which
the member can receive additional counseling regarding the
member's actual entitlement to such benefits and apply for
such benefits''.

Amendment No. 54 Offered by Mr. Hare of Illinois

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 219, after line 5, insert the following:

SEC. 599. REPORT ON EXPANSION OF NUMBER OF HEIRLOOM CHEST
AWARDED TO SURVIVING FAMILIES.

The Secretary of the Army shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the heirloom chest policy of
the Army, including--
(1) a detailed explanation of such policy;
(2) the plans of the Secretary to continue the heirloom
chest program; and
(3) an estimate of the procurement costs to expand the
number of such chests to additional family members.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, this en bloc amendment represents a
contribution by Members in both parties: very thoughtful, a lot of
excellent ideas the committee is pleased to support. So I would urge
the committee to adopt the amendments en bloc, each of which has been
examined by both the majority and the minority.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentleman from California for yielding.
I rise in support of the en bloc amendments, but I rise in opposition
to the Murphy amendment, which will repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, which
is the current law for the U.S. military.
Our Nation is at war, and after making the continuous sacrifice of
fighting two wars over the course of 8 years, the men and women of our
military deserve to be heard. This December, the Pentagon's Don't Ask,
Don't Tell Working Group will return a survey of over 300,000 of our
members of our military concerning that policy. We should listen to the
men and women in uniform first before we act in the Congress.
This decision should not be based on a campaign promise made to a
particular constituent base, but on thoughtful consideration of
readiness, morale, and cohesion. We owe that to the men and women who
serve us in harm's way.
In the committee, we have heard from all four of our service chiefs
expressing their concerns on this amendment, and it is unanimous. The
Chiefs and Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen recently sent a letter to
the chairman of the committee, Chairman Skelton, saying that they
believe in the strongest possible terms that the Department must, prior
to any legislative action, be allowed the opportunity to conduct a
thorough, objective, and systematic assessment of the impact of such a
policy change, develop an attentive comprehensive implementation plan,
and provide the President and the Congress with the results of this
effort in order to ensure that this step is taken in the most informed
and effective manner. That is Admiral Mullen and Secretary Gates.
Further, Admiral Roughead has sent a letter. It says he shares the
views of Secretary Gates that the best approach would be to complete
the Department of Defense review before there is any legislative change
made.
Further, General Schwartz has said that as a matter of keeping faith
with those currently serving in the Armed Forces, that the Secretary of
Defense commissioned review be completed before any legislative act is
done to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
General Casey has the same type of response. He goes further saying,
``Repealing the law before the completion of the review will be seen by
the men and women of the Army as a reversal of our commitment to hear
their views before moving forward.''
And, finally, General Conway stated that he believes the current
policy works, and at this point his best military advice to the House
committee and to the Secretary and to the President would be to keep
the law as it stands today.
In addition, Congress is giving up its powers, surrendering,
abdicating its constitutional authority to the executive branch in
order to appease a political agenda.

{time} 1730

This amendment, as drafted, puts a conditional future on an important
defense policy and law, which would then only be decided by the
administration.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McKEON. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
Mr. SHUSTER. I believe Congress should maintain its authority to
review and debate this policy implication of repealing Don't Ask, Don't
Tell before a final decision is made. We owe that to the men and women
of the Armed Forces.
To my colleagues, I urge them: Don't shoot before we aim. I urge a
``no'' vote on the Murphy amendment.

[[Page 9651]]

The Secretary of Defense,

Washington, DC, April 30, 2010.
Hon. Ike Skelton,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing in response to your letter
of April 28 requesting my views on the advisability of
legislative action to repeal the so-called ``Don't Ask Don't
Tell'' statute prior to the completion of the Department of
Defense review of this matter.
I believe in the strongest possible terms that the
Department must, prior to any legislative action, be allowed
the opportunity to conduct a thorough, objective, and
systematic assessment of the impact of such a policy change;
develop an attentive comprehensive implementation plan, and
provide the President and the Congress with the results of
this effort in order to ensure that this step is taken in the
most informed and effective manner. A critical element of
this effort is the need to systematically engage our forces,
their families, and the broader military community throughout
this process. Our military must be afforded the opportunity
to inform us of their concerns, insights, and suggestions if
we are to carry out this change successfully.
Therefore, I strongly oppose any legislation that seeks to
change this policy prior to the completion of this vital
assessment process. Further, I hope Congress will not do so,
as it would send a very damaging message to our men and women
in uniform that in essence their views, concerns, and
perspectives do not matter on an issue with such a direct
impact and consequence for them and their families.
Adm. Michael G. Mullen,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Robert M. Gates,
Secretary of Defense.
____

Chief of Naval Operations,

May 26, 2010.
Hon. Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. McKeon: As a follow-up to our phone call today,
the following represents my personal views about the proposed
amendment concerning section 654 of title 10, United States
Code.
I testified in February about the importance of the
comprehensive review that began in March and is now well
underway within the Department of Defense. We need this
review to fully assess our force and carefully examine
potential impacts of a change in the law. I have spoken with
Sailors and fellow flag officers alike about the importance
of conducting the review in a thoughtful and deliberate
manner. Our Sailors and their families need to clearly
understand that their voices will be heard as part of the
review process. and I need their input to develop and provide
my best military advice.
I share the view Secretary Gates that the best approach
would be to complete the DOD review before there is any
legislation to change the law. My concern is that legislative
changes at this point, regardless of the precise language
used, may cause confusion on the status of the law in the
Fleet and disrupt the review process itself by leading
Sailors to question whether their input matters. Obtaining
the views and opinions of the force and assessing them in
light of the issues involved will be complicated by a
shifting legislative backdrop and its associated debate.
Sincerely,
G. Roughead,
Admiral, U.S. Navy.
____

Department of the Air Force,

Office of the Chief of Staff,

Washington, DC, May 26, 2010.
Hon. Buck P. McKeon,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative McKeon: The President has clearly
articulated his intent for the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' (DA/
DT) law to be repealed, and should this law change, the Air
Force will implement statute and policy faithfully. However,
as I testified to you and the HASC at the AF Posture hearing
on 23 February 2010, my position remains that DOD should
conduct a review that carefully investigates and evaluates
the facts and circumstances, the potential implications, the
possible complications, and potential mitigations to
repealing this law.
Further I believe it is important, a matter of keeping
faith with those currently serving in the Armed Forces, that
the Secretary of Defense commissioned review be completed
before there is any legislation to repeal the DA/DT law. Such
action allows me to provide the best military advice to the
President, and sends an important signal to our Airmen and
their families that their opinion matters. To do otherwise,
in my view, would be presumptive and would reflect an intent
to act before all relevant factors are assessed, digested and
understood.
Sincerely
Norton A. Schwartz,
General, USAF Chief of Staff
____

U.S. Army,

The Chief of Staff,

May 26, 2010.
Hon. John McCain,
Ranking Member, Committee on Armed Service, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator McCain: My views on the repeal of section 654
of Title 10, United States Code, have not changed since my
testimony. I continue to support the review and timeline
offered by Secretary Gates.
I remain convinced that it is critically important to get a
better understanding of where our Soldiers and Families are
on this issue, and what the impacts on readiness and unit
cohesion might be, so that I can provide informed military
advice to the President and the Congress.
I also believe that repealing the law before the completion
of the review will be seen by the men and women of the Army
as a reversal of our commitment to hear their views before
moving forward.
Sincerely,
George W. Casey, Jr.,
General, United States Army.
____

May 26, 2010.
Hon. Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,
Ranking Member, Committee on Armed Services, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman McKeon: During testimony, I spoke of the
confidence I had as a Service Chief in the DoD Working Group
that Secretary Gates laid out in the wake of President
Obama's guidance on ``Don't Ask--Don't Tell.'' I felt that an
organized and systematic approach on such an important issue
was precisely the way to develop ``best military advice'' for
the Service Chiefs to offer the President.
Further, the value of surveying the thoughts of Marines and
their families is that it signals to my Marines that their
opinions matter.
I encourage the Congress to let the process the Secretary
of Defense created to run its course. Collectively, we must
make logical and pragmatic decisions about the long-term
policies of our Armed Forces--which so effectively defend
this great Nation.
Very Respectfully,

James T. Conway,

General, U.S. Marine Corps,
Commandant of the Marine Corps.

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield myself 2 minutes before I yield to my friend
from New Jersey.
Mr. Chairman, the minority, for understandable reasons, wants to
continue talking about the Murphy amendment, which is not on the floor.
Again, to set the record straight, the Murphy amendment has reflected
the views of the joint Chiefs of Staff and of the Secretary of Defense
for a very long time. The question has been not ``if'' we are going to
repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell but when and how.
The Murphy amendment says that the policy will not be repealed. It
will stay in effect until such time as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff and the Secretary of Defense certify that nothing about that
repeal will in any way undermine the security of the country, the
efficiency of the Armed Forces or their effectiveness.
Now, the minority wants to keep talking about this. I think the
American people, Mr. Chairman, are a lot more interested in some of the
terrorism threats this country is actually facing.
By the way, one of the reasons those terrorism threats are more
difficult is that we don't have enough Arabic speakers in the
intelligence units of our Armed Forces. At least several dozen, perhaps
several hundred, Arabic-speaking persons have been expelled from the
Armed Forces because of their sexual orientation. That doesn't strike
me as a particularly good way to protect national security.
Beyond that, though, a good way to protect national security, which
is in this bill, is to strengthen our special forces. This legislation
spends $9.8 billion on our Special Operations Command, the highest in
the history of the country.
So, when we call upon brave Americans to kick down that door or to do
a commando raid in any dark corner of the world, which is going to
prevent a terrorist attack in this country, this bill supports them.
Both parties support that and both bills fund it. That is the issue
that is actually before the American people.
At this time, I yield 2 minutes to someone who has done tremendous
work on dealing with brain injuries and other traumas associated with
brain injuries, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. I thank my friend from New Jersey for yielding.

[[Page 9652]]

Mr. Chairman, 7 years into war, we are still not properly screening
and treating our troops for traumatic brain injury, known as the
signature injury of those wars. This is unacceptable.
My amendment today builds on the requirements for the cognitive
screening outline in the 2008 defense authorization bill, which most of
us voted for, to identify soldiers for possible brain injury.
My amendment ensures the same tool is used for pre-and post-
deployment cognitive screenings. It requires the Department of Defense
to complete comparative studies in order to find the best cognitive
screening tool for our troops. The fiscal year 2008 defense
authorization bill required predeployment and postdeployment screenings
of soldiers' cognitive ability.
It is right in the law. Congress passed it. The President at that
time, President Bush, signed it. Two years later, the law has not been
fulfilled. The Department of Defense has implemented predeployment
screening using a computerized tool known as ANAM, the Automated
Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics.
The Army released a memo in November 2008, which just came to our
attention 2 months ago. It states, ``Routine postdeployment ANAM
testing is not authorized.'' We came upon this totally by accident.
This is not what Congress passed in bipartisan support.
As a result, less than 1 percent of the 550,000 members of the Armed
Forces have been given postdeployment cognitive screenings. This is in
violation of the intent of the 2008 defense authorization.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. ANDREWS. I yield 1 additional minute to the gentleman from New
Jersey.
Mr. PASCRELL. Instead of using the same test, the military uses a
simple questionnaire for postdeployment screenings--a written
questionnaire.
These assessments are not comparable. They do not detect changes to a
soldier's brain. Just like in sports, the key to pre- and postinjury
assessment is to use the same tool. When you have a baseline, you are
better able to compare.
As cochair of the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force, I recognize
the need to help both our military and civilian populations in
addressing brain injury. My amendment, which is endorsed by the Iraq
and Afghanistan Veterans of America, which has bipartisan support,
ensures our troops are given the proper cognitive screenings today and
in the future.
I ask my colleagues to support my amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Pence).
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Murphy
amendment.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. ANDREWS. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman may state his parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. ANDREWS. Is the Murphy amendment before the committee at this
point?
The Acting CHAIR. The Committee is debating en bloc amendments as
previously announced.
Mr. ANDREWS. The gentleman said he was rising in opposition to the
Murphy amendment. Would those remarks be in order at this time?
The Acting CHAIR. That is a hypothetical question at this stage of
the proceedings.
Mr. ANDREWS. I understand. Thank you.
Excuse me for interrupting, sir.
Mr. PENCE. I'm pleased to yield to the gentleman from New Jersey for
a parliamentary inquiry at any time.
I rise in opposition to the Murphy amendment.
Let me say I do so because I believe the American people don't want
to see the American military used to advance a liberal political
agenda, especially when the men and women who serve in the military
haven't had a say in the matter, and they have been promised to have a
say. We've received correspondence from leading voices in the American
military who have suggested, were the Congress today to enact this
legislation, it would break faith with our men and women in uniform.
Now, let me concede to the point. I was raised by a combat veteran. I
did not wear the uniform of the United States, but I have strong
objections to repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I believe that that
compromise of 17 years ago has been a successful compromise. It has
preserved unit cohesion. It has preserved morale. It has enabled us to
go forward with readiness and recruitment without interruption. It, of
course, itself, was a compromise that represented an historic change
from the policy of the American military.
Yet what is being advanced here today in repealing Don't Ask, Don't
Tell would represent a fundamental change in the nature and in the
culture of our military. It ought to be carefully and thoroughly
explored among the men and women who are doing the work in uniform, and
it is being explored today.
The Department of Defense has commissioned, as we all know here, a
confidential survey of some 350,000 servicemen and their families--
100,000 active duty, 70,000 duty spouses, 100,000 reserve component
military, 80,000 reserve component spouses--to determine their input on
the effects and concerns if Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed. Yet here
we are in Congress, even though this survey will not be completed until
August and the report, itself, will not be delivered to Congress until
December, and we are hurrying along what is, for all intents and
purposes, the legislation that will enable the full repeal of Don't
Ask, Don't Tell.
I urge my colleagues in Congress to take a breath, to stop,
particularly here, as we stand just a few days before that day in which
we, all of us, Republicans and Democrats, will set aside all politics,
and we will remember those who did not come home.
Why can't we today also show respect for the men and women who wear
the uniform today and listen to what they have to say?
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McKEON. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
Mr. PENCE. I urge my colleagues to oppose the Murphy amendment.
Let me say again: The American people don't want the American
military used as a vehicle to advance a liberal political agenda,
especially when the men and women who serve in our military haven't had
a say in the matter. That is what this Congress is poised to do today.
Make no mistake about it.
I urge my colleagues, regardless of what one thinks about social
issues and social values, to respect our military. Let's respect men
and women in uniform. Let's hear them out before we introduce such an
enormous change in the culture and in the practice of the American
military, one that would be represented by the repeal of Don't Ask,
Don't Tell.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, before I yield to my friend, I yield
myself 90 seconds.
The gentleman from Indiana's point about the servicemembers being
listened to is absolutely right, which is why Mr. Murphy's amendment
says--I will comment since he did--if after hearing the comments of the
servicemembers the Secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff believe that there would be an impairment of their
ability to defend the country, they would not certify to the change in
the policy.
There is an echo in this debate, which is a quote from prior debate:
The President's move would seriously impair the morale of the Army at a
time when our Armed Forces should be at their strongest and most
efficient. Such an action is most unfortunate, the Senator declared.
The quote is taken from Senator Lister Hill in 1948. The issue was
the racial integration of the Armed Forces in 1948. I think this is the
same issue.
Mr. PENCE. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. ANDREWS. Yes, I would yield.
Mr. PENCE. I thank the gentleman for the courtesy.
Mr. Chairman, I would simply pose a question to the gentleman: Did
not the

[[Page 9653]]

author of this amendment say that it is not whether we will repeal
Don't Ask, Don't Tell but how and when, from recent press reports?
Mr. ANDREWS. Reclaiming my time, I don't know precisely what the
author said--he will speak--but I do know that Secretary Gates and
Admiral Mullen have said that. Admiral Mullen has said he feels repeal
is the right policy. The issue is when and how, which is what Mr.
Murphy's amendment addresses.
I would at this time be happy to yield 2 minutes to my friend who is
focused on the issue of departing servicemembers, when they separate
from service, and their knowing their rights and opportunities, the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Carson).
Mr. CARSON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, thousands of active duty
servicemembers are returning home from Afghanistan and Iraq every year,
many of these individuals serving continuously, having enlisted right
out of high school or college.
For years, they have lived a structured military life on bases and
abroad. This structure makes for a well-disciplined and a well-trained
military force, but it can also make for a difficult transition back to
civilian life. Many returning servicemembers have no experience with
saving or budgeting or with credit, taxes, and/or mortgages. As a
result, many military families are falling into unmanageable debt,
bankruptcy, and foreclosure.
My amendment, which is part of this en bloc amendment, seeks to
alleviate these concerns. It simply expands the military's existing
preseparation counseling program to include a personal finances
component. When this takes effect, military families will reenter
civilian life with the information they need to build a stable, long-
term financial future.
I encourage all of my colleagues to support our military families by
supporting this amendment.
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, throughout both of our Democratic and
Republican administrations, the White House has maintained a policy
against providing letters of condolences to the families of suicide
victims. This is a major issue for my constituency, which I have been
working on for months.
I have had a number communications with the White House and with the
Department of Defense expressing these concerns. Fortunately, the
President was kind enough to send a personal letter of condolence to a
local family who was affected by suicide.
I would like to wholeheartedly thank President Obama for this
meaningful gesture, and I encourage him to continue on this path and to
finally overturn this misguided White House policy.
Our men and women in uniform sacrifice for our country both
physically and mentally, but despite the occasional exception, the
current policy ignores the sacrifice these men and women make, and it
disregards the suffering of their families.

{time} 1745

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Chairman, let me read again, in case I inadequately expressed it
before. This is the letter from Secretary Gates that he told Chairman
Skelton two days ago that he still stands by strongly:
Therefore, I strongly oppose any legislation that seeks to change
this policy prior to the completion of this vital assessment process.
This is a process that was set in place when the President made his
comments at the State of the Union that he wanted the Don't Ask, Don't
Tell policy repealed before the end of the year. The Secretary took him
at his word and set up a process. The process would go out to all of
the military and their spouses and give them a chance to respond. The
military would then have a chance to go over that and give their best
military advice to the President and to the Congress as to how we
should move forward at that time. That report is due by the first of
December.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield the balance of my
time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi), who has had some
important personal experience with the issue contained in the Murphy
amendment.
Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank my colleague from New Jersey for yielding.
I was elected in a special election last November. One of my
opponents was an extraordinary young man, an African American. Raised
in Fairfield, California, he went to West Point. Very successful, he
served in Iraq two tours and came out a captain. He took his team there
twice. On both those tours, all of them were in very dangerous
circumstances.
He came home. He came back to America and could no longer tolerate
the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. He came out of the closet. An
extraordinary loss. Fortunately, I had another idea about who might be
the next Congressman. But this man could have been a general leading
the entire Army, an extraordinary person.
We lost that talent because of this policy, and it is time for this
policy to end. If only the President had the power that Truman did when
he said, enough already, we are going to integrate the Army.
We need to complete that integration. The Murphy amendment is
absolutely essential.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I know we have differences of opinion on this, and we
all have stories, as we just heard from my good friend Mr. Garamendi
from my home State. We have stories on both sides of the issue. The
problem is, those are one person here, one person here. Maybe we talk
to 10. Maybe we talk to 20. But we have 2.5 million people serving, and
all of them should have a chance to have input. That is what they were
promised. That is what they were told. Now we are short-circuiting that
process.
So all I am saying is we should respect all of the people and their
families that are serving now in the armed services and follow through
with the things we said.
When I talked the other day to Admiral Roughead, the Chief of Naval
Operations, his concern was that if we take action now with the vote on
this Murphy amendment tonight which repeals Don't Ask, Don't Tell, he
said it is going to cause confusion in the force, because we just hired
this company to go out and do the survey, to follow through on this
process that has been started. They are going to be going out into the
field asking questions.
What he said is, this is going to cause confusion, because as one of
the other Chiefs said, the headline, once this passes, if it passes,
will be ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed.'' So when the survey goes
out into the field, when they put together focus groups and the surveys
and all the things they are doing in response to this process that has
been started, it is moot.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman's time has expired.
The gentleman from New Jersey has 15 seconds remaining.
Mr. ANDREWS. I yield the balance of my time to my friend from
California (Mr. Garamendi).
Mr. GARAMENDI. I am sure the admiral is able to read the amendment
and would understand it doesn't go into effect until the command
structure, including the President of the United States, says it is
okay and the review has been completed.
Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this important amendment
and I thank my friend from New Jersey, Bill Pascrell, for allowing me
to work with him on this issue. The Department of Defense and the RAND
Corporation have recently estimated that 20 percent of our military
personnel who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan have suffered a
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI).
Because symptoms of TBI often go unnoticed, at least initially, it is
difficult to know exactly how many troops are living with this
disability. If not diagnosed early on, TBIs can lead to memory loss,
severe headache disorders, and alcohol and drug abuse.
Neurocognitive assessment has been proven to be an effective tool in
detecting and measuring the severity of TBI. This is why the fiscal
year 2008 National Defense Authorization required the Department of
Defense to screen ALL military personnel for TBI both before and after
deployment. Post-deployment

[[Page 9654]]

screenings are to be compared with pre-deployment (or baseline)
assessments to determine whether or not the servicemember is suffering
from a TBI.
Unfortunately, too many of our men and women returning from the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan are still not being screened for TBI.
Servicemembers that have been screened post-deployment are currently
given a self-assessment checklist, in which the results are not even
comparable to their pre-deployment neurocognitive screenings. Not to
mention that because the checklist is self-administered, the results
are typically inaccurate since these troops either do not realize or do
not want to admit that they are living with a TBI.
I am pleased that this year's Defense Authorization includes language
requiring the Department of Defense to implement a comprehensive
screening and assessment policy by the end of 2011. However, until this
policy is fully implemented, thousands of our men and women in uniform
are returning from combat without the necessary screenings to ensure
that they receive proper treatment.
This amendment, which I am proud to have introduced with Congressmen
Pascrell, Andrews, Cole, Ortiz, Coffman and Joe Wilson, will ensure
that until the Department of Defense has put in place a comprehensive
screening policy, all of our military personnel will receive
neurocognitive assessments both before and after deployment. The
amendment requires that the same neurocognitive tool used for pre-
deployment assessment also be used for post-deployment evaluation.
Using the same test allows physicians to compare the baseline screening
with the post-deployment results to determine whether a TBI does in
fact exist. The current system of using different tools for pre- and
post-deployment screenings is like comparing apples to oranges. It is
essential that our men and women who put themselves in harm's way to
protect us every day receive immediate and appropriate care.
There are currently a number of neurocognitive tools available for
the Department of Defense to use for screenings. Several of the
branches have initiated comparative studies assessing the effectiveness
of the various tools, however, most have yet to be completed. The
amendment also requires the Department of Defense to oversee the
completion of all outstanding studies and conduct an analysis of the
options available.
Though TBIs are difficult to detect because no one symptom exists, it
is imperative that the Department of Defense take every possible
measure to diagnose and treat our troops effected by TBI. This is why I
strongly support this amendment and I encourage all of my colleagues to
do the same.
Mr. HARE. Mr. Chair, I'd like to begin by thanking my friend Chairman
Skelton, for his unwavering commitment to our Nation's defense and the
warfighter.
Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of my amendment included in En
Bloc package 3.
Mr. Chair, my amendment simply asks the Army Secretary to report to
Congress with the details of the Heirloom Chest policy, plans to
continue the program and a cost estimate of expanding it.
The Heirloom Chest is presented by the Army to families in memory of
soldiers who have fallen in the defense of our Nation. Under the Army's
policy, in the case of separated, divorced, or unmarried parents, the
chest is given to only one surviving parent.
While I applaud the Army's efforts to support surviving families, I
believe this policy ignores the loss that both parents share and has
also unintentionally put added strain on bereaving parents.
Mr. Chair, the intent of my amendment is to ensure the sacrifice of
both surviving parents is properly recognized. Families of the fallen
have made the ultimate sacrifice, and it is our duty to honor the
sacrifice of all survivors.
I urge my colleagues to support this en bloc amendment and the
underlying bill.
The Acting CHAIR. All time has expired.
The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 4 Offered by Mr. Skelton

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, I offer
amendments en bloc No. 4, including modifications to amendment No. 18.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 4 offered by Mr. Skelton consisting of
amendments numbered 12; 17; 18, as modified; 25; 28; 35; 37; and 44
printed in House Report 111-498:

Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Owens of New York

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 27, line 3, strike ``and''.
Page 27, line 8, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
Page 27, after line 8, insert the following:
(5) for each item included in the list of equipment
described in paragraph (3)--
(A) an updated average procurement unit cost for each year
of the covered five-year period; and
(B) the updated total Army acquisition objective.

Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Polis of Colorado

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 3_. EXCEPTION TO ALTERNATIVE FUEL PROCUREMENT
REQUIREMENT.

Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (Public Law 110-140; 42 U.S.C. 17142) is amended--
(1) by striking ``No Federal agency'' and inserting ``(a)
Requirement.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no
Federal agency''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) does not prohibit a
Federal agency from entering into a contract to purchase a
generally available fuel that is not an alternative or
synthetic fuel or predominantly produced from a
nonconventional petroleum source, if--
``(1) the contract does not specifically require the
contractor to provide an alternative or synthetic fuel or
fuel from a nonconventional petroleum source;
``(2) the purpose of the contract is not to obtain an
alternative or synthetic fuel or fuel from a nonconventional
petroleum source; and
``(3) the contract does not provide incentives for a
refinery upgrade or expansion to allow a refinery to use or
increase its use of fuel from a nonconventional petroleum
source.''.

Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Dingell of Michigan

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 84, after line 24, insert the following:

SEC. 315. INFORMATION SHARING RELATING TO INVESTIGATION OF
EXPOSURE TO DRINKING WATER CONTAMINATION AT
CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The Secretary of the Navy and Commandant of the Marine
Corps are responsible for the identification and timely
sharing of all relevant records relating to the Camp Lejeune
base-wide drinking-water systems, including all records of
which the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``ATSDR'')
may not be aware and all records that are in the possession
of the Department of Defense, and all contractors, sub-
contractors, and consultants of the Department but may no
longer be located at the Camp Lejeune base.
(2) On April 28, 2009, during a Camp Lejeune Community
Assistance Panel (hereinafter in this section referred to as
``CAP'') meeting, it was stated by the ATSDR that it had
recently discovered electronic data on a ``hundred or more
underground storage and above-ground storage tanks'' housed
on a Naval Facilities Engineering Command Internet web
portal.
(3) This revelation occurred after the ATSDR requested in
2005 that all relevant data for its health studies be turned
over from the Department of Defense to the agency, and the
response by the Department's CAP representative was that the
information was ``not new, just newly found.''
(4) On March 22, 2010, the ATSDR stated in a letter to the
Navy and Marine Corps that the ATSDR was informed for the
first time of an electronic database containing approximately
700,000 records of analytical data.
(5) In a response letter, dated March 26, 2010, the Navy
stated that ``the Marine Corps is neither in a position to
determine the relevance of information nor does it have the
subject matter expertise to determine the relevance of
documents in all cases.''.
(6) It is necessary that the Secretary of the Navy be
required to add or assign personnel with the relevant
expertise to complete the transfer of all documents and
materials pertaining to the contaminated drinking water at
Camp Lejeune.
(7) Discovery of such records must not rely on specific
requests from the ATSDR but on a shared goal of ensuring the
scientific accuracy of the current health study and the
responsibility of the Secretary of Defense to provide such
information.
(b) Requirement.--By not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
provide ATSDR with an electronic inventory of all existing
documents, records, and electronic data pertaining to the
CERCLA listed and RCRA listed contamination sites at Camp
Lejeune and all existing documents, records, and electronic
data pertaining to the contaminated drinking water at Camp
Lejeune. If after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense generates new documents, records and
electronic data, or comes

[[Page 9655]]

into possession of existing documents, records or electronic
data not previously included in the electronic inventory, the
Secretary of the Navy shall provide ATSDR with an updated
electronic inventory incorporating the newly located or
generated documents, records and electronic data. The
Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that Department of Defense
personnel with appropriate experience and expertise,
including in the area of environmental engineering and the
conduct of water modeling, working in conjunction with ATSDR,
are utilized to identify, compile, and submit existing and
new documents, records, and electronic data in Navy and
Marine Corps records and electronic libraries that would
assist the ATSDR in gathering data relating to the
contamination and remediation of Camp Lejeune base-wide
drinking-water systems.

Amendment No. 25 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 284, after line 22, insert the following:

SEC. 727. POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER COUNSELING FOR
CIVILIAN VICTIMS OF THE FORT HOOD SHOOTING AND
OTHER SIMILAR INCIDENTS.

The Secretary of Defense shall make available to each
civilian victim of a shooting on a military installation in
the United States, including the shooting at Fort Hood on
November 5, 2009, extensive counseling for post-traumatic
stress disorder.

Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mr. Etheridge of North Carolina

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 633, after line 10, add the following:

SEC. 2815. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY TO ASSIST
WITH DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IN
CONNECTION WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION
OF A MILITARY INSTALLATION.

Section 2391(b) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following:

``If the proposed or actual establishment or expansion of a
military installation would otherwise qualify a State or
local government for assistance under this paragraph and is
the result of base realignment and closure activities
authorized by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of
1990 (10 U.S.C. 2687 note), the Secretary may make grants,
conclude cooperative agreements, and supplement funds
available under Federal programs administered by agencies
other than the Department of Defense in order to assist the
State or local government with development of the public
infrastructure (including construction) required by the
proposed or actual establishment or expansion.''; and
(2) in paragraph (5)(A), by striking ``in planning
community adjustments and economic diversification'' and
inserting ``as provided in paragraph (1)''.

Amendment No. 35 Offered by Mr. Putnam of Florida

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 1065. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING RECREATIONAL HUNTING
AND FISHING ON MILITARY INSTALLATIONS.

It is the sense of the Congress that--
(a) military installations that permit public access for
recreational hunting and fishing should continue to permit
such hunting and fishing where appropriate;
(b) permitting the public to access military installations
for recreational hunting and fishing benefits local
communities by conserving and promoting the outdoors and
establishing positive relations between the civilian and
defense sectors;
(c) any military installations that make recreational
hunting and fishing permits available for purchase should
provide a discounted rate for active and retired members of
the Armed Forces and veterans with disabilities; and
(d) the Department of Defense, all of the service branches,
and military installations that permit public access for
recreational hunting and fishing should promote access to
such installations by making the appropriate accommodations
for members of the Armed Forces and veterans with
disabilities.

Amendment No. 37 Offered by Mr. Chandler of Kentucky

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 599, strike lines 8 through 13.

Amendment No. 44 Offered by Ms. Richardson of California

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 99, after line 23, insert the following:

SEC. 336. REQUIREMENT TO UPDATE STUDY ON STRATEGIC SEAPORTS.

The Commander of the United States Transportation Command
shall update the study entitled ``PORT LOOK 2008 Strategic
Seaports Study''. In updating the study under this section,
the commander shall consider the infrastructure in the
vicinity of a strategic port, including bridges, roads, and
rail, and any issues relating to the capacity and condition
of such infrastructure

Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Dingell of Michigan, as Modified

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification to amendment
No. 18.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 84, after line 24, insert the following:

SEC. 315. INFORMATION SHARING RELATING TO INVESTIGATION OF
EXPOSURE TO DRINKING WATER CONTAMINATION AT
CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA.

By not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry with an
electronic inventory of all existing documents, records, and
electronic data pertaining to the CERCLA listed and RCRA
listed contamination sites at Camp Lejeune and all existing
documents, records, and electronic data pertaining to the
contaminated drinking water at Camp Lejeune. If after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
generates new documents, records and electronic data, or
comes into possession of existing documents, records or
electronic data not previously included in the electronic
inventory, the Secretary of the Navy shall provide the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry with an updated
electronic inventory incorporating the newly located or
generated documents, records and electronic data. The
Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that Department of Defense
personnel with appropriate experience and expertise,
including in the area of environmental engineering and the
conduct of water modeling, working in conjunction with the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, are
utilized to identify, compile, and submit existing and new
documents, records, and electronic data in Navy and Marine
Corps records and electronic libraries that would assist the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry in gathering
data relating to the contamination and remediation of Camp
Lejeune base-wide drinking-water systems.

Mr. McKEON (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent to dispense with the reading.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the
amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the
majority and the minority.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge).
Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the en bloc amendments to
the National Defense Authorization Act and in support of the underlying
bill.
We in North Carolina are rightly proud of our military, and we
understand that as they serve us, we must provide them with what they
need to get their job done. This bill does just that, authorizing funds
for troops, for our veterans, and for our military families.
My amendment, which I offered with my colleagues Mr. Kissell and Mr.
Bishop of Georgia, would enhance our support for the military and the
communities they live in. It would reinforce Congress' commitment to
the quality of life for America's soldiers, officers, civilians, and
their families.
Supporting our troops means supporting military families and the
communities they call home. Military facilities bring significant
benefits to our communities, but they also bring significant strain on
those communities. Our amendment clarifies that when the military plans
rapid growth in an area, the Department can join with the affected
community to prepare for that growth. It empowers our communities to
make strategic planned investments to respond to the strategic planned
transition for BRAC.
I thank the chairman for including it in the en bloc amendment, and I
urge my colleagues to support the amendment and the authorization bill.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Putnam), who is the author of one of the amendments.
Mr. PUTNAM. I thank the ranking member and the chairman from Missouri
for their support of this and their

[[Page 9656]]

inclusion of it in the en bloc amendment.
It is a small change in the big scheme of things, but one which I
believe will have a tremendous impact, not only on our active duty
personnel, but on our men and women who are returning.
It is rooted in an experience in watching the success of these
wounded warrior projects, where we have special opportunity hunts for
men and women who are returning back to the States and getting
reacquainted with the sport that they love so much.
There are over 400 military installations across the country that
allow for recreational hunting and fishing on their property. They are
managed individually by the local commanders. They allow the public to
access these areas by providing a tremendous benefit to those
neighboring communities by allowing them to share in the natural
resources. By allowing the public to access these areas and enjoy these
lands, the Department of Defense helps to establish positive
relationships between the Department and the civilian population.
Last month, the President launched his great outdoors conservation
initiative, where recreational hunters and fishermen are recognized for
having led the charge in the area of conservation, and the benefit of
these military installations should be considered in that initiative.
The greater access we have to enjoy the outdoors and promote these
activities will help to promote conservation for future generations and
healthier lifestyles.
I want to point out that in addition to the access, you have the
accessibility issues. Hydraulic lifts, wheelchair-accessible duck
blinds, docks, hunting stands, are minor improvements that mean a great
deal to those men and women who are coming home. Only 20 of those 400
sites though are currently accessible for our disabled, and I believe
we cannot underestimate the value of making those improvements to give
them the opportunity to share in those outdoor experiences.
Mr. Chairman, we should support the military installations which
provide these opportunities for the public and for our veterans and
encourage them to continue to do so, where appropriate, and urge the
Department of Defense to make more of these facilities accessible for
our veterans.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I rise in support of the bill for the purpose of engaging in a
colloquy with the chairman. I would like to discuss the important role
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration plays in our national
security. In fact, I had legislation that established NASA as a
national security asset.
Chairman Skelton, would you agree that our national security space
programs are closely linked to NASA and that termination of the human
spaceflight program could result in serious consequences for our space
launch?
Further, do you agree that NASA's space programs have made important
contributions to our national and homeland security, economic security,
international standing, and technological competitiveness?
Finally, it is my hope that the Department of Defense will carefully
assess the national security assets that may be possessed by NASA.
Mr. SKELTON. I certainly thank the gentlelady from Texas for her
observations.
Yes, of course, I agree that NASA space programs have made important
contributions to our national security. In specific response to your
concern, the industrial base required for reliable space launch could
be placed at risk by the proposed changes in the human spaceflight
program. Further, I understand the department is carefully evaluating
the impact of those changes.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
My colleagues and I who are working on this issue appreciate your
view. Transferring funds from the human spaceflight program to unproven
commercial space efforts designed to carry humans and cargo into space
is unreasonable and may be an unreasonable risk that this country
should not take at this time. I hope that we can work together on this
issue to ensure the continuation of human spaceflight programs.
Thank you, Mr. Skelton, for supporting NASA.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, we heard our colleague across the aisle
talking about the Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Obviously, this is supposed to
be about a block of amendments, and I don't have objection to those, so
I would like to use this time to address that issue.
This body, leaders in this body, the White House, from the President
to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Secretary of Defense, have
promised our men and women who wear the uniform that their opinion will
be considered.

{time} 1800

A survey and study are being done.
Now, we've heard about individual cases where this person ended up
getting out. As we heard, he couldn't keep his sexual urges private,
and so he had to make them overt and therefore he was out-processed.
The policy has been, as long as the sexuality is a private matter,
then it doesn't damage the mission of the military. But when it becomes
overt, whether it's an officer having a heterosexual affair, or whether
it's overt homosexuality, through the history of the military, it has
been a problem to the ongoing morale of the military and accomplishment
of the mission. Anything that detracts from the mission should be
eliminated.
So the message here is, the hundreds of people that have urged me,
please fight for us and what we believe in, because I've heard from so
many, if you push this through, we're out. We're done.
We hear some isolated cases, but please, let's don't do damage to the
military and break our promise to them, let's wait till the study is
completed.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 4 of House Resolution
1404, I hereby give notice that the amendments numbered 15 and 62 may
be offered out of order.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Pomeroy). The gentleman's request is noted.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen), my friend and colleague.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chairman, before I begin, I would like to Commend
Congressmen Polis and Langevin for their work on this important
amendment.
The amendment we've offered will play an important role in
safeguarding a healthy American environment and ensuring American
taxpayers are not forced to subsidize the production of highly
polluting energy resources.
Let me be clear. This amendment in no way restricts Federal agencies'
ability to procure readily available fuels. Instead, it clarifies that
under section 526 of the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act,
Federal agencies may purchase fuel that is not predominantly derived
from higher carbon content sources like tar sands and coal to liquid.
Turning coal into liquid fuel produces up to twice as much greenhouse
gas pollution per unit of energy as conventional petroleum fuel, and
fuel processed from tar sands generates 14-42 percent more greenhouse
gas pollution per unit of energy compared to production of conventional
petroleum fuels.
Further, the extraction or production of these fuels is also
incredibly destructive to an environment that is already suffering.
The Federal Government should not play an inappropriate role
subsidizing the production of these outdated, dirty energy sources,
especially as we work to move our Nation toward a clean energy future.
However, today most, if not all, publicly available fuel containing
tar sands oil contains only small amounts of that resource. Therefore,
this

[[Page 9657]]

amendment would not affect the ability of the Defense Department or
other Federal agencies to continue to process tar sands oil.
However, section 526 has successfully protected taxpayers from costly
and destructive subsidies of highly polluting fuel production and will
continue to encourage deployment of clean energy production from
domestic sources.
This amendment passed by unanimous recorded vote last year, and I,
along with my colleagues, Congressmen Polis and Langevin, urge a
``yes'' vote today.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Akin).
Mr. AKIN. Mr. Chairman, it's a treat to be able to rise and say the
en bloc amendment is fine, just as most of what is in the bill is fine.
Unfortunately, there is an amendment that's being offered which
threatens to poison the entire package and to do great damage to our
military, and that is an issue that you've heard from earlier this day,
the idea of repealing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell legislation.
Now, the way it works currently in the military is that if you happen
to be homosexual and you want to serve in the military, that's fine.
And as long as your particular sexual tastes don't get in the way of
performing the mission, there's no problem.
The point is that the military has a job to protect our citizens, and
we don't want things getting in the way of that. If you were to commit
adultery, you could be discharged because that gets in the way of our
performing our mission.
Now, we face an amendment here, which is opposed by all of our
military leadership, which says we're going to repeal Don't Ask, Don't
Tell.
What, then, does that look like?
I mean, currently the policy is you could be gay, and as long as it
doesn't get in the way of doing your job, everything is fine.
So now we're going to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. So what exactly
are we asking?
Are we asking the military then to protect or condone homosexual
behavior if it does get in the way of performing the mission?
What exactly are we talking about?
Are we talking about creating separate dormitories, for instance, if
we have sexual harassment?
What will this have to do with recruitment? People that have a 17-
year-old kid that may be wanting to sign up, what will this do to
recruitment?
What's it going to do to the morale of the troops?
What's it going to do to small-unit cohesion?
And, also, the other piece of the military is about these soldiers
that are giving their time and lives are confined to very tight areas
and pushed together in very difficult circumstances over long periods
of time. What is the effect of that?
And all of these questions are sitting out there, and the military
leadership is saying, yeah, we don't know the answer to those
questions. Give us some time to take a look at it. We don't want you to
pass this until we can see what's going on with this.
Now, I have three sons. They've graduated Naval Academy. All of them
went Marine Corps. One survived his experience in 2005 in Fallujah.
And when our sons and daughters are serving and laying their lives or
their bodies on the line so that we can live in peace and freedom, that
is a very sacred kind of sacrifice they're making for us. So why would
we belittle that by jumping into something?
We're being asked to pass something that we don't even know what
we're passing. We don't understand the implications or how it would
look. And yet we're going to jump into this for, what, some sort of
political deal to satisfy some vocal but small minority using the lives
of our own children?
I will not have any part of betraying the interest of our kids just
for political purposes.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Dingell), my friend and colleague.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend from Missouri for
his kindness to me, for his support of this amendment, and for the
yielding of this time.
This is an amendment which is to deal with a very important injustice
done to marines by the Department of the Navy, and you may read more
about it in my remarks as they are extended.
In a nutshell, people in the Marine Corps are being hurt, injured,
poisoned, given cancer and other things by the way the Department of
the Navy has run the posts and has provided contaminated water to the
members of the Marine Corps and to their families. This will at least
begin the process of getting information to these marines about what
has happened and why it is that they are suffering this way, and see to
it that we are taking a step forward to have the Marine Corps deliver
some of the information that they're supposed to deliver under
agreement.
I urge my colleagues to vote for the amendment, and I thank my friend
from Missouri.
Mr. Chair, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the
amendment I have offered with my colleagues, Congressmen Stupak and
Miller, pertaining to the historic water contamination at Marine Corps
Base Camp Lejeune.
I would like to thank Chairman Skelton for his willingness to work
with me on this important issue.
Mr. Chair, I am offering this amendment on behalf of the marines and
veterans that were exposed to the toxic drinking water at Camp Lejeune
between 1957 and 1987 and whose lives have been forever changed because
of it. There's Jerry Ensminger, whose daughter Janey was carried to
term at Camp Lejeune and died at age 9 after a long and heart-wrenching
battle with childhood leukemia. There's Jim Fontella and Mike Partain,
two among the dozens of former Lejeune residents battling breast
cancer, a disease rarely found among males. These are the poisoned
patriots who have lent their stories and their voices to the others who
have not spoken out. They want answers about the water contamination
and our amendment will help provide them.
Put simply, our amendment would require the Department of the Navy to
fulfill its obligation under an existing memorandum of understanding
with the Department of Health and Human Services' Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry--that is, to share all relevant
environmental information pertaining to historic water contamination at
Camp Lejeune. In addition, it requires the Navy to use its in-house
experts to help ATSDR gather this information.
This amendment constitutes a small piece of a larger quest to get
answers for our former marines and their families who were exposed to
the highly toxic chemicals, TCE, PCE, and benzene. The fact is, 23
years after the contaminated wells were shut down, there is still much
unknown. How much and to what extent were housing areas exposed to the
contaminants? When did the contamination take place? What is the extent
of the exposure to the specific chemicals? And finally, is there a link
between the exposure to the toxic water and illnesses experienced by
former Camp Lejeune residents? Our amendment will ensure that ATSDR--
mandated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act to assess human health effects of exposures to toxic
chemicals at Superfund sites--has the information it needs to complete
its studies and answer these questions.
Mr. Chair, it is unfortunate we must require something as simple this
by statute. But after 23 years, we have had enough delay from the
Defense Department. Ironically, I first came to know about this problem
when the Defense Department came before the Energy and Commerce
Committee seeking broad exemptions from the Clean Air Act, the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, and CERCLA, among others. The military wanted these
exemptions in the name of readiness, public health be damned. To say
the least, it is troubling to think about where ATSDR's studies would
be or what terrible tragedies would await our servicemembers in the
future if the Department of Defense were exempt from CERCLA.
In closing, I'd ask my colleagues to look at the bigger picture when
considering this amendment. With Memorial Day approaching this weekend,
what could be a more fitting tribute to our servicemembers and veterans
than to uphold the sacred trust they place in our Government when they
sign up to serve and potentially make the ultimate sacrifice for our
Nation?
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

[[Page 9658]]

I have another letter to read, and I'd like to insert it into the
Record.
This is from General Carl E. Mundy, Jr., United States Marine Corps,
Retired. He sent an identical letter, I believe, to the chairman.
He says: ``I write to convey my appreciation for your strong stance
relative to efforts to repeal the current law which exclude homosexuals
from serving openly in the armed services. You and I both know that
such action is not in the best interest of our Nation or its Armed
Forces. While each member of the HASC has many constituencies to serve,
some very vocal, it may be that your largest is the 2.8 million men and
women in uniform, together with the family members who support them and
who number at least that many. In sharp contrast to homosexual
activists, these volunteers in uniform serve silently and obediently
and rely on the reasoned judgment of their leaders and even more so,
perhaps, of those empowered to `raise armies, provide and maintain a
navy, and to make the rules for the governance thereof' to speak and to
represent them.
``Secretary Gates has put into motion an effort to at least give this
element of your constituents an opportunity to be heard relative to
their concerns about implementation. The very large majority of
servicemembers who are not homosexual, at least 97 percent or more,
deserve to be heard before any peremptory, uninformed action is taken
to impose the sexuality of a minority on them. I believe strongly that
a moratorium on discharges being advocated by some in the Senate and on
your committee as well could be tantamount to muzzling those most
affected by such peremptory action. I appreciate the stand you have
taken to prevent this.''
I would like to enter General Mundy's letter into the Record.
Mr. Chairman, there have been comments made that perhaps the Chiefs
support this action that will be taking place tonight on this vote,
tonight or tomorrow, whenever we get to that amendment. But I must
reiterate, I spoke to them on the phone and they followed up with a
letter and, to a person, they all oppose us taking action before the
recommended procedure that the Secretary has set in place.

General Carl E. Mundy, Jr.,

United States Marine Corp (Ret.),

May 19, 2010.
Hon. ``Buck'' McKeon,
Ranking Member, House Armed Services Committee, Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman McKeon: I write to convey my appreciation
for your strong stance relative to efforts to repeal the
current law which excludes homosexuals from serving openly in
the Armed Services. You and I both know that such action is
not in the best interests of our nation or its Armed Forces.
While each member of the HASC has many constituencies to
serve--some very vocal--it may be that your largest is the
2.8 million men and women in uniform together with the family
members who support them and who number at least that many.
In sharp contrast to homosexual activists, these volunteers
in uniform serve silently and obediently and rely on the
reasoned judgment of their leaders and even more so, perhaps,
of those empowered to ``. . . raise armies, provide and
maintain a navy, and to make the rules for the governance
thereof' to speak for and to represent them.
Secretary Gates has put into motion an effort to at least
give this element of your constituents an opportunity to be
heard relative to their concerns about implementation. The
very large majority of servicemembers who are not
homosexual--at least 97% or more--deserve to be heard before
any peremptory, uninformed action is taken to impose the
sexuality of a minority on them. I believe strongly that a
moratorium on discharges being advocated by some in the
Senate and on your Committee as well would be tantamount to
muzzling those most affected by such peremptory action. I
appreciate the stand you have taken to prevent this.
Last year, my Service, the Marine Corps, discharged
something over 32,400 men and women from active service.
Seventy-eight of those were discharged for matters related to
homosexuality--less than one-quarter of one percent. Within
that small number, more than half were still in Entry Level
Training with less than a year in service--young trainees
still in the reality-shock of Boot Camp or the immediate
months following--who can barely be considered qualified,
much less skilled or even of a maturity old enough to drink
alcohol. And within that small number, three were discharged
without any active service at all while still in the Delayed
Entry Program awaiting assignment to active duty. Claims of a
hemorrhage of skills due to the injustice of the law are
simply not supported by cases like these. And in my
experience, if not by admission of homosexuality--factual, or
not at their still emerging state of maturity--most of these
young people--homesick, disillusioned, or stunned by the
shock of Recruit Training--would seek another means of
gaining discharge.
As a final note, let me convey my concern that in counter-
balance to whatever number of homosexual advocate voices you
hear, the voices of the thousand retired military officers
who gave their advice professionally and with dignity and
respect to the President and members of Congress on this
subject last year--together with the 160 more who have lent
their names since--should not be ignored. This is the largest
number of officers to have collectively conveyed their views
and recommendations in the history of our nation. And in
spite of the efforts of activists to impugn the character and
legitimacy of these officers as out of touch, a number of
those offering their advice commanded Divisions in combat or
held other significant command or staff positions as recently
as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This body of
professional advice matters, since the signers base our
judgments on experience, and have no special interest agenda
other than the effectiveness of our Armed Forces.
I want to again offer my admiration for your courageous and
principled stand on behalf of the men and women of our armed
services on this issue. I hold the strongest hope that you
will continue to allow the voices of those in uniform to be
heard on this important subject, and will continue to oppose
efforts to impose a moratorium on discharges, which is
tantamount to de-facto repeal of a law that has, and does
serve the armed forces well.
Sincerely,
Carl E. Mundy, Jr.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 4 of House Resolution
1404, I hereby give notice that amendment Nos. 68 and 81 may be offered
out of order.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman's request is noted.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today, as we debate
the defense authorization bill, to discuss the concept of humanity
because I believe the men and women of the United States military have
a sense of compassion for humanity and courage, and the broadness of
their humanity causes them to sacrifice on behalf of the American
people. Today I stand here and thank them.
And then I want to acknowledge, as well, the vast civilian support
staff that are found on the Nation's military bases and bases around
the world. I got a good sense of that when I joined, sadly, my fellow
colleagues at Ft. Hood a few months ago, mourning the loss of a
civilian and soldiers at the hands of a terrorist. I was able to see
civilians and soldiers coming together expressing concern for each
other.
I saw the mourning of those families who had lost their fallen
heroes, their soldiers. And, yes, I saw the civilian staff mourn, as
well, over the losses that had occurred amongst their fellow workers
and colleagues, soldiers, and a civilian, and those who were also
injured.
As we mourned, it came to my attention that we must take care of all
of them. Sergeant Kimberly Munley, who was a sergeant, a Fort Hood
police sergeant to whom was attributed the success of bringing down
this particular dangerous person, despite being shot herself; or a 19-
year-old nutritionist who put a tourniquet on a wounded soldier and
carried them out for medical care, even though she was also wounded.
So I am grateful that the committee has accepted my amendment, and I
ask my colleagues to support the idea of more or continued post-
traumatic stress disorder counseling for the civilians on this base,
and to ensure that that happens, if ever such a tragedy occurs again,
to be able to provide Airborne staff on military bases with that kind
of support system. I have promised the Fort Hood community that I would
return, and I intend to do so to check on how they're doing.
But it is important that we stand here today as we look toward
Memorial Day, mourning those lost, to be able to say to those here that
we will counsel

[[Page 9659]]

or provide them with the services necessary to support those possibly
suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health
issues due to work-related violence on our military installations.
I started out quickly, Mr. Chairman, by talking about humanity, and I
finish by saying, I've heard all of the talk about Don't Ask, Don't
Tell. It is interesting to note that the Secretary of Defense, the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, as well as the President, recognize the
importance of acknowledging this necessary change in our military.
But I am reminded of the history of integrating the military when
President Truman said it was the right thing to do to provide the
opportunity for Americans who happened to be of African American
heritage to serve.
We know it is distinctive, but there is a reason for Don't Ask, Don't
Tell to be eliminated, and it is that every decent human being needs
the right to serve his or her country if they are willing to take the
Oath of Service.
This is the right thing to do. Repeal it. It's time. The Murphy
amendment is right and the process is in keeping with the respect of
the opinion of those active duty soldiers who will be surveyed for
their view. However now is the time to end this discrimination. My
constituent Ensign Provost might have lived if his sexual orientation
had not been misused to create an atmosphere that it was alright to
take his life because he lived in fear of reprimand and dismissal. He
was willing to serve his country but our country did not respect his
humanity or his service.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment (#25) to H.R. 5136--
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.''
My amendment would make available post-traumatic stress counseling
for civilian victims of a shooting on a military installation base in
the United States, including the shooting at Fort Hood.
Every branch of the United States Armed Forces has a civilian
workforce. The civilian workforce, also called ``civil service,''
provides stability in various types of jobs at a military installation.
That allows for the continuation of military operations in a peace or
wartime environment. Civil service personnel serve in roles that
provide an important support system allowing the Armed Services to
operate at the highest levels.
There are many ways to serve our country without actually enlisting
in the military. One of those ways is to work in a military civilian
job with the Armed Services. There are many, many thousands of
individuals serving in jobs in fields such as medicine, recreation,
education, engineering, food services, and many other important areas
in which civilians provide valuable support for our military
operations. The Army alone employs more that 250,000 civilians on its
bases and installations around the world.
Civilians, like soldiers, are sometimes placed in harm's way and many
work in challenging environments. One incident that recently presented
unimaginable challenges and consequences for both soldiers and
civilians was the shooting at Fort Hood. We understand that civilians
stand in the same vulnerable shoes as soldiers when events like the
Fort Hood event occur.
Enlisted personnel, National Guards, reservists and veterans with
PTSD have lived through traumatic events that caused them to fear for
their lives, bear witness to horrible things, and feel helpless and
hopeless. PTSD symptoms usually start soon after the traumatic event,
but they may not manifest until months or years later. If provided
proper medical care, about half, 40 percent to 60 percent, of people
who develop PTSD get better at some time.
Although veterans who served in combat are most frequently afflicted
by PTSD, events such as the Fort Hood shooting highlight the physical
and psychological dangers facing military personnel in all roles.
Consequently, it is vital to extend to our civilian personnel the same
benefits and support that we give to our active duty military.
Civilians and military members on Fort Hood have equal responsibility
to protect our Nation and, as such, it is morally imperative that we
honor these civilians by providing them with equal support in the
aftermath of such traumatic incidents.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this simple but
important amendment.
Mr. MILLER of North Carolina. Mr. Chair, for 30 years, the water that
our former Marines and their families drank, cooked with, and bathed in
at the Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune was contaminated with highly
toxic chemicals, including benzene, TCE, and PCE.
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, ATSDR, at the
Centers for Disease Control is currently working on several health
studies to determine just what effect this water had on the men and
women serving at Lejeune.
For years the discussion about Camp Lejeune centered on TCE and PCE
exposure, but recently the conversation turned to benzene. Benzene is a
known carcinogen. This new emphasis on benzene has come about because
new documents, recently discovered, show that marines' exposure to
benzene at Camp Lejeune was far greater than previously thought.
And these documents are not the only ``newly found'' documents.
ATSDR's health studies must rely on having accurate data about what
people were exposed to, as well as where and when these toxins were in
the water. If you don't get the water modeling right, you can't do the
rest of the studies. We are at a crucial point--we must get this right
now.
In every memorandum of understanding between the Navy and ATSDR, the
Navy was supposed to provide ATSDR with an inventory of all available
data related to water contamination at Camp Lejeune; that inventory has
never been provided.
Nobody disputes that the Navy has provided open access to their
library and records to ATSDR, but access is not enough. The Navy is the
expert on what documents they have and they must take responsibility
for ensuring that all relevant documents are provided to ATSDR.
This amendment will ensure that no crucial documents will surface
after these health studies have been completed.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chair, I urge Members to support the Dingell/Stupak/
Miller amendment to H.R. 5136, the Defense Authorization Act. I wish to
thank my colleagues Congressmen Dingell and Miller for their work to
bring this amendment to the floor.
As Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee's Oversight and
Investigations Subcommittee, I held a hearing in 2007 on the
contaminated water wells at Camp Lejeune and how the Department of
Defense did not appropriately respond to the discovery of volatile
organic compounds within the drinking water from 1957 to 1987.
During the hearing, we listened to soldiers formerly stationed at
Camp Lejeune who, along with members of their families who lived on the
base, have encountered significant health problems they believe is tied
to their exposure to TCE, PCE, benzene and other toxins.
These volatile organic compounds may be the cause of increased
incidences of cancer and birth defects among women, children,
employees, and soldiers stationed at Camp Lejeune.
Because Camp Lejeune is a Superfund site, the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry, ATSDR, is responsible for conducting
health studies to determine the connections between the contaminated
drinking water and incidences of cancer and birth defects.
Now, even after more than six years of data discovery efforts by
ATSDR, a complete record of available data necessary for ATSDR's health
studies appears to remain incomplete.
This situation is unacceptable and I hope my colleagues will support
our amendment to send a clear message that Congress expects this issue
to be resolved expeditiously.
Our amendment requires the Navy to provide ATSDR with a complete
inventory of all relevant data by putting in place additional personnel
with experience and expertise in water modeling and environmental
engineering who will work with ATSDR to bring this matter to a close.
This information sharing task is a shared goal between the agencies
because it will ensure the scientific accuracy of the health studies
ATSDR is tasked with completing.
I ask Members to support our amendment and send a clear signal on
what we expect from Federal agencies in responding to our service men
and women who have suffered from the Camp Lejeune legacy.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Polis/
Langevin/Cohen amendment that has been included in the En Bloc
amendment No. 4. Unfortunately--despite what proponents of this
amendment are saying--I do not believe that this amendment does
anything to alleviate the draconian problems of section 526 of the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
Even if this amendment passes, Americans will still not be able to
increase the supply of fuels from alternative sources derived from
resources available in the United States. Oil shale will remain trapped
in rock, and we will

[[Page 9660]]

not be able to use clean carbon captured coal-to-liquid for fuel.
The amendment intends to create an exception under section 526 for
generally available fuel not predominately produced from a
nonconventional petroleum source, and all federal agencies--including
DoD--will still be able to purchase Canadian fuels with traces of oil
sands that may create more of a carbon footprint than completely
conventional fuel. However, I am concerned that ``predominantly from a
nonconventional source'' is not defined in this amendment. This
stipulation could expose gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel produced from
crude oil--with significant components of oil sands--to the prohibition
in section 526.
Mr. Chair, even under the provisions of this amendment, DoD--as well
as every other federal agency--won't be able to utilize any of the
sources of fuel that may be totally derived from clean domestic
alternatives we have readily available.
This is precisely why I offered an amendment to the Rules committee
on this bill; to provide a waiver to the Secretary of Defense to be
freed from the handcuffs of section 526. I support a full repeal of
section 526 because the cost of refined product for DoD has increased
by over 500 percent in the last ten years when volume only increased by
30 percent. I offered my amendment--that was rejected by House
Democrats--as a middle ground to not stifle domestic energy innovation
and to save taxpayer dollars.
Mr. Chair, I fear that this amendment does nothing to rectify the
underlying problem with section 526 that prevents the Federal
Government from utilizing domestic resources to reduce fuel costs, so I
must oppose this amendment and ask all my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.

Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Gutierrez

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. GUTIERREZ. 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:

Amendment No. 21 offered by Mr. Gutierrez:
At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:

SEC. 839. DEBARMENT OF BP AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES.

(a) Contracts With BP and Its Subsidiaries.--If the
Secretary of Defense determines that BP or any of its
subsidiaries performing any contract with the Department of
Defense is no longer a responsible source (as defined in
section 2302 of title 10, United States Code), the Secretary
shall determine, not later than 90 days after making such
determination, whether BP or its subsidiaries should be
debarred from contracting with the Department of Defense.
(b) Debar.--In this section, the term ``debar'' has the
meaning given that term by section 2393(c) of title 10,
United States Code.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. GUTIERREZ. Mr. Chairman, in 2009 the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration fined BP $87 million for hundreds of safety
violations at a Texas City refinery, many of which were originally
identified after the 2005 explosion and then ignored there.
As recently as 2 months ago, BP was fined another $3 million for
violations at the Toledo, Ohio refinery similar to those identified in
the 2005 Texas City refinery explosion. Again, just like in 2005, no
steps were taken to correct the safety violations.
This blatant disregard for workers' lives shows that BP is a bad
partner for the U.S. Government.
I rise today to say that BP stands for too many broken promises, too
many broken lives and too many broken laws.
My amendment is a simple, commonsense amendment that would require
that the Secretary of Defense consider disbarring BP if it finds that
BP is not a responsible source.
As a Federal contractor, BP must meet Federal acquisition regulation
standards as a responsible source. What's the definition of a
responsible source? It includes the provision that a prospective
contractor must have ``a satisfactory record of integrity and business
ethics.'' As we've already defined, they do not uphold that standard.
As well, they must have a satisfactory performance record. To take
that definition from the Webster's dictionary, integrity is ``firm
adherence to a code or standard of values.'' BP clearly does not meet
the standard set by even the lowest code of values.
The history that I've talked about cannot be ignored. In March of
2005, before the recent explosion, at a BP Texas refinery, 15 people
lost their lives; 180 were injured. Investigators from the U.S.
Chemical Safety and Hazard Protection Board believed this explosion
could have been avoided had it not been for organizational and safety
deficiencies at all levels of BP Corporation.
And when they polluted in Alaska, the EPA and every government
official encouraged the U.S. Attorney to indict them criminally for
their abuse of safety standards.
Now, let me just say, this comes straight, straight from BP's code of
conduct. BP code of conduct. It's right here. I've got it right down
from the Internet, and here's what it says.

{time} 1815

Our code of conduct is the cornerstone of our commitment to
integrity. Integrity?
An important consideration is how BP addresses integrity. Quote--this
comes from right here. It says, ``code of conduct is the cornerstone of
our commitment to integrity.'' Moreover, within their code of conduct,
BP states that they are ``committed to providing all BP employees . . .
with a safe and secure work environment where no one is subject to
unnecessary risk.''
You know what it further says here right from their manual and code
of conduct? It says right here on page 72, it says right here, Make
sure you know what to do if an emergency occurs at your place of work.
Right from their BP manual and code of conduct. Clearly, they are not
meeting their code of conduct.
But it gets worse. This comes from this very manual, which I am going
to add to the Record. Quote, ``We aim for no accidents, no harm to
people, and no damage to the environment.''
Zero for three. I didn't make this up. It's in their code of conduct.
And if we are supposed to be responsible and make sure that
contractors--$2 billion we buy from BP every year. I say we buy not $1
more of their oil. They have been irresponsible, and they don't even
meet their own code of conduct that comes down from their own Web site.
Mr. Chair, I think we have an obligation, a responsibility to the
American taxpayers to respond. And what does my simple amendment say?
It says the Secretary of Defense should consider disbarring them if he
finds they don't meet the code of conduct which should be administered
to every provider of goods to the American people on which we spend the
American taxpayers' dollars.

Our Commitment to Integrity

Health, safety and security

BP is committed to providing all Bp employees--and those of
other companies working on our premises--with a safe and
secure work environment where no one is subject to
unnecessary risk.
We recognize that safe operations depend not only on
technically sound plant and equipment, but also on competent
people and an active HSSE culture. No activity is so
important that it cannot be done safely.
Simply obeying safety rules is not enough. BP's commitment
to safety means each of us needs to be alert to safety risks
as we go about our jobs.

Basic rules you must follow

Always

Comply with the requirements of the HSSE management system
at your work location--including the use of relevant
standards, instructions and processes--and with the golden
rules of safety.
Stop any work that becomes unsafe.
Only undertake work for which you are trained, competent,
medically fit and sufficiently rested and alert to carry out.

[[Page 9661]]

Make sure you know what to do if an emergency occurs at
your place of work.
Help ensure that those who work with you--employees,
contractors and other third parties--act consistently with
BP's HSSE commitments.
Promptly report to local BP management any accident,
injury, illness, unsafe or unhealthy condition, incident,
spill or release of material to the environment, so that
steps can be taken to correct, prevent or control those
conditions immediately. Never assume that someone else will
report a risk or concern.
Seek advice and help if: You are ever unclear about your
HSSE obligations; You have a concern about a potential or
actual breach of HSSE law or a BP HSSE requirement.

Never

Undertake work when your performance is impaired by alcohol
or other drugs, legal or illegal, prescribed or otherwise.
Possess, use or transfer illegal drugs or other substances
on company premises.
Use threats, intimidation or other violence at work, or
bring weapons--including those carried for sporting
purposes--onto company premises.

I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to seek the time in opposition
although I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. I would just like to make a couple of points.
The Secretary would first have to determine that BP was not a
responsible source. If the Secretary determines that BP was not a
responsible source, the Secretary would already be authorized to
consider debarment. The Secretary is not obligated to debar BP or any
of its subsidiaries in any circumstance.
Having said that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GUTIERREZ. Mr. 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 Illinois
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 42 Offered by Ms. Eshoo

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 42
printed in House Report 111-498.
Ms. ESHOO. 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:

Amendment No. 42 offered by Mr. Eshoo:
At the end of subtitle C of title IX, add the following new
section:

SEC. 923. AUDITS OF INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY BY GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE.

(a) Audits.--Title V of the National Security Act of 1947
(50 U.S.C. 413 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:

``audits of intelligence community by government accountability office

``Sec. 508. (a) In General.--Except as provided in
subsection (b), the Director of National Intelligence shall
ensure that personnel of the Government Accountability Office
designated by the Comptroller General are provided with
access to all information in the possession of an element of
the intelligence community that the Comptroller General
determines is necessary for such personnel to conduct an
analysis, evaluation, or investigation of a program or
activity of an element of the intelligence community that is
requested by one of the congressional intelligence
committees.
``(b) Audits of Programs Involving Sources and Methods.--
(1) If the Director of National Intelligence determines that
a portion of an analysis, evaluation, or investigation to be
conducted by the Comptroller General that is requested by a
committee of Congress with jurisdiction over the subject of
such analysis, evaluation, or investigation involves a matter
that is subject to the reporting requirements of section 503
or intelligence sources or methods, such portion may be
redacted from such analysis, evaluation, or investigation and
provided exclusively to the congressional intelligence
committees.
``(2) If the Director of National Intelligence redacts a
portion of an analysis, evaluation, or investigation under
paragraph (1), the Director shall inform the committee of
Congress that requested such analysis, evaluation, or
investigation of the redaction.
``(c) Notice of Analysis, Evaluation, or Investigation and
Procedures.--Not later than 15 days before initiating an
analysis, evaluation, or investigation of an element of the
intelligence community, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the congressional intelligence committees a notice that
includes--
``(1) a description of the analysis, evaluation, or
investigation to occur and the purposes of such analysis,
evaluation, or investigation;
``(2) the names of the personnel who will conduct such
analysis, evaluation, or investigation and the level of
security clearance possessed by such personnel; and
``(3) the procedures to be used in the course of such
analysis, evaluation, or investigation for examining
classified information, including a description of all
facilities and materials that will be used.
``(d) Discussion of Procedures.--(1) Prior to initiating an
analysis, evaluation, or investigation of an element of the
intelligence community, the Comptroller General, in
consultation with the congressional intelligence committees,
shall discuss with the Director of National Intelligence the
procedures for conducting such analysis, evaluation, or
investigation.
``(2) Not later than five days after the discussion
referred to in paragraph (1), the Director of National
Intelligence may submit to the Comptroller General a written
comment suggesting any changes or modifications to the
procedures referred to in paragraph (1).
``(e) Confidentiality.--The Comptroller General shall
maintain the same level of confidentiality for a record made
available during the course of an analysis, evaluation, or
investigation involving sources or methods as is required of
the head of the element of the intelligence community from
which such record is obtained. An officer or employee of the
Government Accountability Office shall be subject to the same
statutory penalties for unauthorized disclosure or use of a
record as an officer or employee of the element of the
intelligence community that provided the Comptroller General
or such officer or employee of the Government Accountability
Office with access to such record.
``(f) Workpapers.--All workpapers of the Comptroller
General and all records and property of any element of the
intelligence community that the Comptroller General uses
during the course of an analysis, evaluation, or
investigation involving sources or methods shall remain in
facilities provided by the element of the intelligence
community providing such records and property.
``(g) Provision of Supplies.--The head of each element of
the intelligence community that is a subject of an analysis,
evaluation, or investigation by the Comptroller General
involving sources or methods shall provide the Comptroller
General with suitable and secure offices and furniture,
telephones, and access to copying facilities, for purposes of
such analysis, evaluation, or investigation.
``(h) Procedures for Protection of Information.--The
Comptroller General, in consultation with the congressional
intelligence committees, shall establish procedures to
protect from unauthorized disclosure all classified and other
sensitive information furnished to the Comptroller General in
the course of conducting an analysis, evaluation, or
investigation involving sources and methods.
``(i) Submission of Names of Personnel Conducting Analysis,
Evaluation, or Investigation.--Prior to initiating an
analysis, evaluation, or investigation involving sources and
methods, the Comptroller General shall provide the Director
of National Intelligence and the head of each element of the
intelligence community that is a subject of such analysis,
evaluation, or investigation with the name of each officer
and employee of the Government Accountability Office who has
obtained appropriate security clearance and to whom, upon
proper identification, the head of such element shall make
available records and information during the course of such
analysis, evaluation, or investigation.
``(j) Cooperation.--The head of each element of the
intelligence community that is a subject of an analysis,
evaluation, or investigation shall cooperate fully with the
Comptroller General and provide timely responses to requests
by the Comptroller General for documentation and information
made pursuant to this section.
``(k) Rule of Construction.--Except as provided in
subsection (b), nothing in this section or any other
provision of law shall be construed to restrict or limit the
authority of the Comptroller General to audit, evaluate, or
obtain access to the records of an element of the
intelligence community absent specific statutory language
restricting or limiting such audits, evaluations, or access
to records.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Eshoo) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer my amendment No. 42 to this
National Defense Authorization Act.
Mr. Chairman, what brings me to the floor is something that I think
should

[[Page 9662]]

concern every single Member of the House. We all know that our number
one obligation as Members of Congress is to secure our country. And as
a member of the House Intelligence Committee, it matters not Republican
or Democrat, we stand shoulder to shoulder. We may debate different
things. We all know, and the full House knows, that this is our first
and top obligation. In order to carry that obligation out, that duty
done well, as a member of the House Intelligence Committee we must do
effective oversight. We have to do investigations. It is the way we do
our work.
The reason I offer this amendment is because, unlike all the rest of
the committees of the House who can use the GAO, dispatch the
Government Accountability Office into the executive branch to make the
kinds of determinations on financial issues, financial management,
personnel, acquisitions, information technology, whatever it might be,
the House Intelligence Committee is not allowed to do that. And in
attempting to do it, it has drawn the ire of the administration.
Now, I am a Democrat. We have a Democratic administration. I think
the administration is ill-advised in this. These are the prerogatives
of the Congress and the jurisdictions of our committees. I think that
we need to be able to have the tools that the GAO has, with all of the
safeguards in place relative to sources and methods and those things
that are the most sensitive in the intelligence community. But I don't
believe that the executive branch should be telling the legislative
branch what tools we should have and to make that decision for us. That
speaks to the separation of powers, and it also speaks to what we, as
Members of Congress, in terms of our duty have to carry out and to do.
So my amendment really corrects this flaw, and I think it's an
important provision that would restore the GAO's role in congressional
oversight. I don't think this is a question of whether the information
is too sensitive for the GAO. They have the security clearances. They
have dealt with things before, and nothing has ever happened.
So as I said, I believe this issue goes directly to the heart of one
of the most important functions of the Congress, and that is effective
oversight. That's what this amendment is about.
I want to thank, in particular, Chairman Howard Berman for his work
on this issue from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and also my
colleagues from the House Intelligence Committee who are sponsoring
this amendment: Congressman Holt, Congressman Tierney of Massachusetts,
Congressman Thompson of California, and Congresswoman Schakowsky of
Illinois.
I rise to offer my amendment #42, to the FY2011 National Defense
Authorization Act. This Amendment would require the Director of
National Intelligence to cooperate with GAO inquiries initiated by
committees of jurisdiction.
Oversight of matters in the intelligence community--including
financial management, personnel systems, acquisitions, and information
technology--is a fundamental prerogative of Congress. GAO plays a
critical role helping committees examine the functions of government
agencies in an objective, thorough manner.
But despite this expertise, the intelligence community refuses to
allow GAO in the door, even when the intelligence committees--the
committees that have jurisdiction over them--have asked them to
investigate. The Administration has even threatened to veto the
Intelligence Authorization Bill because it contained a provision that
would restore GAO's role in Congressional oversight.
The co-sponsors of this amendment have joined me in rejecting the
Administration's flawed legal analysis that would exempt the
intelligence community from GAO's review--even though they review every
other federal agency.
This is not a question of whether the information is too sensitive
for GAO. GAO has evaluated a number of national security programs,
including ones that have sensitive intelligence implications like
Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance programs which are known
as ISR platforms. GAO has issued classified reports on the Iraq war and
parts of the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative. Their
personnel have the appropriate security clearances and they know how to
safeguard sensitive information.
In an abundance of caution, the amendment lays out additional
safeguards that GAO must follow to be able to have access to our
nation's intelligence information.
I believe this issue is one that goes directly to the heart of one of
the most important functions of the Congress, and that is oversight.
This also goes to the very core of the principle of Separation of
Powers.
My amendment would make clear to the intelligence community that they
cannot bar the door to Congressional oversight, and it is Congress, not
the Executive branch that determines which tools we get to use.
In particular, I'd like to thank Chairman Berman of the House Foreign
Affairs Committee and HPSCI members Representatives Holt, Tierney,
Thompson of California, and Schakowsky for co-sponsoring this
amendment. I urge the adoption of the amendment.
At this point I would like to yield to Mr. Berman, my trusted and
distinguished colleague from California.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for the 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining in favor of the amendment.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, the Eshoo amendment cuts right to the heart
of our constitutional authority: Congressional oversight of matters, in
this case, within the intelligence community--basic functions,
financial management, acquisitions, information technology--a
fundamental prerogative of this body, a prerogative that should not be
limited to the intelligence committees.
Bottom line, GAO plays a critical role in helping the committees
examine day-to-day functions of government agencies within their
jurisdiction, and its expertise needs to be brought to bear on the
intelligence community. This is particularly true after the 2004
reforms that established the ODNI. There is no community that has
undergone more bureaucratic overhaul and tumult, any agency within the
Federal Government, than within the intelligence community.
The notion that committees of appropriate jurisdiction are blocked
from investigating areas within their domain for oversight purposes,
having nothing to do--we clearly exempt the sources and methods issues
from this oversight--makes no sense. It is an insult to the
prerogatives of the Congress. And to the extent that the administration
argues this should be solely within their prerogative, they don't fully
understand our institutional role in Congress.
I don't understand how anyone in this body who is interested in
dealing with waste, with fraud, with duplication would want to limit
the GAO's authority to go into appropriate areas within the
intelligence community.
I urge an ``aye'' vote.

{time} 1830

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I seek the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I think the first and probably most
important point to make on this amendment is that it does not belong on
this bill and it imperils the whole bill.
This issue about whether to expand GAO's authority to be able to
investigate the intelligence community, which has been an issue in the
fiscal year 2010 intelligence authorization bill, has been the subject
of veto threats from the administration and is one of, if not the
reason, here 4 months before the end of the fiscal year we still do not
have an intelligence authorization bill.
So it does not belong here. This is the DOD authorization bill. It is
being discussed in another forum where it should, the intelligence
authorization bill, and if it gets added to the DOD authorization bill,
it puts in danger this entire bill because just today, the
administration sent another email which confirmed the veto threat over
this provision.
So however Members feel about the particular issue one way or
another, I would suggest that you ought to be very careful about
endangering the whole bill over this provision.
Second point I'd make is this is not a change to be taken lightly. As
the gentlelady, my colleague on the Intelligence Committee mentioned,
the GAO has not had this power, authority

[[Page 9663]]

before since the modern intelligence community has existed. Congress
after Congress of both parties, President after President of both
parties have rejected this, I would suggest, for some very good
reasons.
So this is not a step to be taken lightly.
I think the only argument one can make is that the current
intelligence committees are incapable of performing their oversight
responsibilities and therefore they have to get this other entity, GAO,
in to help them do that. I don't agree with that position. I think the
intelligence committees in the House and the Senate are capable of
performing their job. Now, I get frustrated. I don't agree with
everything that the majority chooses to do, but I believe that the
committee is perfectly capable of oversight of the intelligence
community as we were tasked to do in the House rules and by statute.
These committees were created in the 1970s to fill a very unique
role, and to undermine them by saying they are incapable of performing
their job which, without bringing GAO and investigators and so forth, I
think is a mistake.
I also believe, Mr. Chairman, that this amendment may undermine the
role of the DNI at a time that is very sensitive for the role of the
DNI. Because if you look at the amendment itself, it says the
Comptroller General decides what he needs access to, has control over
how these investigations will be conducted. Now, the amendment says
that you can have discussions with the DNI, but the decision is with
the Comptroller General, further undermining the DNI's control over
classified material. I think that's a mistake.
There are other flaws, in my view, in this amendment. But the bottom
line is it undermines the bill. It does not belong here. And it is a
step that previous Congresses, previous Presidents have not chosen to
take because of the sensitivity of the material and the unique role
that the select committees on intelligence play.
Therefore, I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will
reject this amendment. I urge them to do so.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for debate on the amendment has expired.
Mr. ANDREWS. Is it in order to propound a unanimous consent request
at this point?
The Acting CHAIR. Any request to extend time must be congruent on
both sides.
Mr. ANDREWS. I would make a unanimous consent request to extend for
each side 1 minute.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
Mr. ANDREWS. I would yield 1 minute to the Speaker of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).
Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding and his leadership on
this important bill before us.
I commend Congresswoman Eshoo for her attention to this important
matter, her leadership in bringing this amendment to the floor.
Mr. Chairman, as you all know, protecting American people is our
first responsibility. Their security is what we take an oath to uphold,
protect, and defend. In order to do that, we recognize the importance
of intelligence gathering to preventing violence and to protecting the
American people, especially in this age when we're fighting terrorism
at home and abroad.
The issue before us is if the responsibilities of Congress can be
honored without the knowledge that we are entitled to. This is a very
important issue. We all recognize, as the gentleman said, the
importance of having information be kept secret when it's in our
national security interest to do so. Not to overdo that to the extent
of having Congress not have the information it needs to do its job of
proper oversight to protect the American people.
We are preventing harm. And if we're going to prevent harm, we have
to have information to do so. And the members of the Intelligence
Committee have a responsibility to hold that information close. This
doesn't apply to every piece of information of intelligence that comes
to the committee, but it does say that the GAO has a proven track
record of conducting thorough and professional investigations. Their
work has informed the Congress and led to significant changes that have
enhanced our government's effectiveness. GAO staff are professionals
who protect information held by the intelligence community. A vote for
this amendment is a vote for enhancing intelligence oversight. It is a
vote for Congress.
I urge our colleagues to support the Eshoo amendment.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I certainly agree with the
distinguished Speaker about the importance of our role in national
security and the importance of Congress' role in overseeing the
intelligence community. I agree that national security is the first job
of the Federal Government.
I also agree with both the gentleladies from California that
oversight can be improved from the Congress. As a matter of fact, I've
had legislation, which has not been allowed to be voted on the floor,
to make clear the notification requirements and statute about what any
administration must notify Congress about, the information it must give
us.
I'd also have to point out that the
9/11 Commission made a number of very important recommendations on how
we can improve oversight in this Congress. Unfortunately, that have not
been adopted. Now, they adopted a kind of a hybrid panel of the
Appropriations Committee, but that was not at all what the 9/11
Commission, the WMD Commission recommend we do to improve oversight.
I think we should focus on making our committees of oversight more
effective rather than bringing in this other entity, the General
Accounting Office, that has historically never had a role with the
intelligence community, and that the President says he will veto the
bill over if we allow it to happen.
Let's look at ourselves, improve ourselves first before we start
bringing in others.
Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chair, as Chairman of the Oversight and Government
Reform Committee, I support the amendment offered by Ms. Eshoo because
it will strengthen government accountability and enhance critical
oversight of the intelligence community. The amendment provides
necessary clarification regarding the authority of the General
Accountability Office, GAO, to receive information from the
intelligence community. Congress relies on the GAO as a force
multiplier in carrying out the investigative and oversight functions
vested in the Legislative Branch. The GAO helps inform the Congress and
all Executive agencies about areas and programs within the federal
government that are performing well, and those that need to be improved
or are vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse.
This amendment will allow GAO to carry out these vital functions
without unwarranted interference from intelligence community agencies.
As Acting Comptroller General Gene Dodaro previously noted, this
authority does not represent an overhaul of existing oversight
mechanisms for the intelligence community. Instead, ``The proposed
legislative provisions in essence reaffirm GAO's existing authority in
order to address the lack of cooperation GAO has received from certain
elements of the IC [intelligence community] in carrying out work at the
specific request of the intelligence committees, and other committees
of jurisdiction as defined by the rules of the Senate and House.'' The
intelligence community will function more effectively, and better
protect the security of this country if this amendment is adopted.
Despite my strong support for the amendment and its important goals,
I should note my concern with the way in which the amendment is
drafted. This provision should clearly identify the authority of any
committee of Congress with jurisdiction over the identified subject to
request evaluation or analysis of an intelligence community component,
not only the congressional intelligence committees, except in the case
of matters concerning intelligence sources and methods.
I thank Ms. Eshoo and the other sponsors of this important amendment
for bringing it before the House, and I urge all Members to support it.
Mr. THORNBERRY. I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page 9664]]

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, 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 California
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 47 Offered by Mr. Sarbanes

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 47
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. SARBANES. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 47 offered by Mr. Sarbanes:
At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:

SEC. 839. OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY ACT
AMENDMENTS.

(a) Service Contract Inventory Requirement.--
(1) In general.--The Office of Federal Procurement Policy
Act (41 U.S.C. 403 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following new section:

``SEC. 45. SERVICE CONTRACT INVENTORY REQUIREMENT.

``(a) Service Contract Inventory Requirement.--
``(1) Guidance.--The Director of the Office of Management
and Budget shall develop and disseminate guidance to aid
executive agencies in establishing systems for the collection
of information required to meet the requirements of this
section and to ensure consistency of inventories across
agencies.
``(2) Report.--The Director of the Office of Management and
Budget shall submit a report to Congress on the status of
efforts to enable executive agencies to prepare the
inventories required under paragraph (3), including the
development, as appropriate, of guidance, methodologies, and
technical tools.
``(3) Inventory contents.--Not later than December 31,
2010, and annually thereafter, the head of each executive
agency required to submit an inventory in accordance with the
Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law
105-270; 31 U.S.C. 501 note), other than the Department of
Defense, shall submit to the Office of Management and Budget
an annual inventory of service contracts awarded or extended
through the exercise of an option or a task order, for or on
behalf of such agency. For each service contract, the entry
for an inventory under this section shall include, for the
preceding fiscal year, the following:
``(A) A description of the services purchased by the
executive agency and the role the services played in
achieving agency objectives, regardless of whether such a
purchase was made through a contract or task order.
``(B) The organizational component of the executive agency
administering the contract, and the organizational component
of the agency whose requirements are being met through
contractor performance of the service.
``(C) The total dollar amount obligated for services under
the contract and the funding source for the contract.
``(D) The total dollar amount invoiced for services under
the contract.
``(E) The contract type and date of award.
``(F) The name of the contractor and place of performance.
``(G) The number and work location of contractor and
subcontractor employees, expressed as full-time equivalents
for direct labor, compensated under the contract, using
direct labor hours and associated cost data collected from
contractors.
``(H) Whether the contract is a personal services contract.
``(I) Whether the contract was awarded on a noncompetitive
basis, regardless of date of award.
``(b) Form.--Reports required under this section shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified
annex.
``(c) Publication.--Not later than 30 days after the date
on which the inventory under subsection (a)(3) is required to
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, the head
of each executive agency shall--
``(1) make the inventory available to the public; and
``(2) publish in the Federal Register a notice that the
inventory is available to the public.
``(d) Government-wide Inventory Report.--Not later than 90
days after the deadline for submitting inventories under
subsection (a)(3), and annually thereafter, the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget shall submit to Congress
and make publicly available on the Office of Management and
Budget website a report on the inventories submitted. The
report shall identify whether each agency required to submit
an inventory under subsection (a)(3) has met such requirement
and summarize the information submitted by each executive
agency required to have a Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
section 901 of title 31, United States Code.
``(e) Review and Planning Requirements.--Not later than 180
days after the deadline for submitting inventories under
subsection (a)(3) for an executive agency, the head of the
executive agency, or an official designated by the agency
head shall--
``(1) review the contracts and information in the
inventory;
``(2) ensure that--
``(A) each contract in the inventory that is a personal
services contract has been entered into, and is being
performed, in accordance with applicable laws and
regulations;
``(B) the contracts do not include to the maximum extent
practicable functions that are closely associated with
inherently governmental functions;
``(C) the agency is not using contractor employees to
perform inherently governmental functions;
``(D) the agency has specific safeguards and monitoring
systems in place to ensure that work being performed by
contractors has not changed or expanded during performance to
become an inherently governmental function;
``(E) the agency is not using contractor employees to
perform critical functions in such a way that could affect
the ability of the agency to maintain control of its mission
and operations; and
``(F) there are sufficient internal agency resources to
manage and oversee contracts effectively;
``(3) identify contracts that have been poorly performed,
as determined by a contracting officer, because of excessive
costs or inferior quality; and
``(4) identify contracts that should be considered for
conversion to--
``(A) performance by Federal employees of the executive
agency in accordance with agency insourcing guidelines
required under section 736 of the Financial Services and
General Government Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-
8, division D) and section 46 of this Act; or
``(B) an alternative acquisition approach that would better
enable the agency to efficiently utilize its assets and
achieve its public mission.
``(f) Report on Actions Taken in Response to Annual
Inventory.--Not later than one year after submitting an
annual inventory under subsection (a)(3), the head of each
executive agency submitting such an inventory shall submit to
the Office of Management and Budget a report summarizing the
actions taken pursuant to subsection (e), including any
actions taken to consider and convert functions from
contractor to Federal employee performance. The report shall
be included as an attachment to the next annual inventory and
made publicly available in accordance with subsection (c).
``(g) Submission of Service Contract Inventory Before
Public-private Competition.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, beginning in fiscal year 2011, if an
executive agency has not submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget the inventory required under subsection
(a)(3) for the prior fiscal year, the agency may not begin,
plan for, or announce a study or public-private competition
regarding the conversion to contractor performance of any
function performed by Federal employees pursuant to Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-76 or any other
administrative regulation or directive until such time as the
inventory is submitted for the prior fiscal year.
``(h) GAO Reports on Implementation.--
``(1) Report on guidance.--Not later than 120 days after
submission of the report by the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget required under subsection (a)(2), the
Comptroller General of the United States shall report on the
guidance issued and actions taken by the Director. The report
shall be submitted to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of
the Senate and the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.
``(2) Reports on inventories.--
``(A) Initial inventory.--Not later than September 30,
2011, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
submit a report to the Committees named in the preceding
paragraph on the initial implementation by executive agencies
of the inventory requirement in subsection (a)(3) with
respect to inventories required to be submitted by December
31, 2010.
``(B) Second inventory.--Not later than September 30, 2012,
the Comptroller General shall submit a report to the same
Committees on annual inventories required to be submitted by
December 31, 2011.
``(3) Periodic briefings.--The Comptroller General shall
provide periodic briefings, as may be requested by the
Committees, on matters related to implementation of this
section.
``(i) Executive Agency Defined.--In this section, the term
`executive agency' has the meaning given the term in section
4 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C.
403).''.

[[Page 9665]]

(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections in section 1
of such Act is amended by adding at the end the following new
item:

``Sec. 45. Service contract inventory requirement.''.

(3) Repeal of superseded law.--Section 743(c) of the
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act,
2010 (Public Law 111-117; 123 Stat. 3216) is amended by
striking ``and annually thereafter,''.
(b) Prohibition Against Direct Conversions.--
(1) In general.--Section 43(a)(1) of the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 439) is amended by striking
``10 or more''.
(2) Guidance.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget shall issue guidance to all Federal
agencies other than the Department of Defense to ensure that
no function last performed by Federal employees is converted
to contractor performance without complying with the
requirements of section 43 of such Act, as amended by this
section.
(c) Guidelines on Insourcing New and Contracted Out
Functions.--
(1) In general.--The Office of Federal Procurement Policy
Act (41 U.S.C. 403 et seq.), as amended by subsection (a), is
further amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``SEC. 46. GUIDELINES ON INSOURCING NEW AND CONTRACTED OUT
FUNCTIONS.

``(a) Guidelines Required.--(1) The heads of executive
agencies subject to the Federal Activities Inventory Reform
Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-270; 31 U.S.C. 501 note) shall
devise and implement guidelines and procedures to ensure that
consideration is given to using, on a regular basis, Federal
employees to perform new functions and functions that are
performed by contractors and could be performed by Federal
employees.
``(2) The guidelines and procedures required under
subparagraph (A) may not include any specific limitation or
restriction on the number of functions or activities that may
be converted to performance by Federal employees.
``(b) Special Consideration for Certain Functions.--The
guidelines and procedures required under paragraph (1) shall
provide for special consideration to be given to using
Federal employees to perform any function that--
``(1) is performed by a contractor and--
``(A) has been performed by Federal employees at any time
during the previous 10 years;
``(B) is a function closely associated with the performance
of an inherently governmental function;
``(C) has been performed pursuant to a contract awarded on
a non-competitive basis; or
``(D) has been performed poorly, as determined by a
contracting officer during the 5-year period preceding the
date of such determination, because of excessive costs or
inferior quality; or
``(2) is a new requirement, with particular emphasis given
to a new requirement that is similar to a function previously
performed by Federal employees or is a function closely
associated with the performance of an inherently governmental
function.
``(c) Exclusion of Certain Functions From Competitions.--
The head of an executive agency may not conduct a public-
private competition under Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-76 or any other provision of law or regulation
before--
``(1) in the case of a new agency function, assigning the
performance of the function to Federal employees;
``(2) in the case of any agency function described in
paragraph (2), converting the function to performance by
Federal employees; or
``(3) in the case of an agency function performed by
Federal employees, expanding the scope of the function.
``(d) Deadline.--(1) The head of each executive agency
shall implement the guidelines and procedures required under
this subsection by not later than 120 days after the date of
the enactment of this subsection.
``(2) Not later than 210 days after the date of the
enactment of this subsection, the Government Accountability
Office shall submit a report on the implementation of this
subsection to the Committees on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives and the Senate, the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and
the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
of the Senate.
``(e) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(1) The term `inherently governmental functions' has the
meaning given such term in subpart 7.5 of part 7 of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation.
``(2) The term `functions closely associated with
inherently governmental functions' means the functions
described in section 7.503(d) of the Federal Acquisition
Regulation.
``(f) Applicability.--This subsection shall not apply to
the Department of Defense.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections in section 1
of such Act, as amended by subsection (a), is further amended
by adding at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 46. Guidelines on insourcing new and contracted out
functions.''.

(3) Repeal of superseded law.--Subsection (b) of section
739 of division D of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2008 (Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2030) is repealed.
(d) Conversion of Functions to Performance by Federal
Employees.--
(1) Decision to insource.--The Office of Management and
Budget shall not establish any numerical goal, target, or
quota for the conversion to performance by Federal employees
of functions previously performed by contractors unless such
goal, target, or quota is based on considered research and
analysis.
(2) Reports.--
(A) Report to congress.--The Office of Management and
Budget shall submit to Congress a report on the aggregate
results of the efforts of each Federal agency to convert
functions from contractor performance to performance by
Federal agency employees made during fiscal year 2010. Such
report shall include--
(i) agency decisions for converting such functions to
Federal employee performance;
(ii) the basis and rationale for the agency decisions;
(iii) the number of contractor employees whose functions
were converted to performance by Federal employees.
(B) Comptroller general report.-- Not later than 120 days
after the submittal of the report under paragraph (1), the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate an assessment of the
report.
(3) Department of defense.--Nothing in this subsection
shall apply to the Department of Defense.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. SARBANES. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This amendment, amendment number 47, I believe, in the queue, would
bring standards of good government and good government practice to
procurement across the Federal agencies. What it does, in fact, is it
takes a set of standards that has been put in place already with
respect to the Department of Defense as a result of the DOD
authorization bill of 2008, as well as standards that were built into
appropriations bills applying to other agencies over the last couple of
years, and it makes it clear that those are going to be authorized
standards going forward to apply to non-DOD agencies as well now as to
DOD agencies.
As many people know, over the last few years, the impulse to contract
services out on the part of the Federal Government went too far. And in
fact, studies have demonstrated that, for example, the Department of
Defense's service contractor workforce grew from 732,000 in 2000 to 1.3
million in 2006, a huge increase. And this kind of phenomenon was not
limited to the Department of Defense. We saw it in other agencies--the
Department of Homeland Security and other places across the Federal
workforce.
Secretary Gates, recognizing that things have gone too far in this
direction, is looking for a better balance and has already declared
that DOD will examine this reliance on contractors and begin to bring
more of a balance back into the equation. So what this amendment would
do is take that same approach, those same standards and apply them
across the board to non-DOD agencies.
It includes a number of provisions. Very briefly, I will go over
those.
The first is it would close a loophole that allowed certain work
performed by Federal employees to be contracted out without determining
whether in fact that would result in any savings. Well, that's the kind
of analysis that needs to be done. And so we would close that loophole.
It would create a contractor inventory. Right now we don't really
have a sense of which contracts are out there, what kind of outsourcing
has been done. We need to get a handle on that, have an inventory, so
we can make better decisions and informed judgements going forward.
It would also seek to bring some analysis as to when it's appropriate
to bring back in-house some of these functions and operations that have
been outsourced according to very reasonable and rational standards.

[[Page 9666]]

And the last thing it would do is improve oversight and transparency.
It would prevent any agency from establishing arbitrary quotas or
targets or numerical goals with respect to what should be outsourced or
not. In other words, what this seeks to do is bring a rational analysis
back to whether something should be outsourced or not outsourced. It
doesn't try to tilt the presumption in one direction or another. It
just says let's look at this on a careful basis and determine when it
makes sense, when it can generate savings, when it's a good thing for
the Federal Government to do, and when it may not be such a good thing
to do.
So I urge support of this amendment because I do believe it will
bring commonsense good government provisions back into the mix and will
make those permanent for all government agencies across the board.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chair, I seek time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. LAMBORN. At this time I'd like to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Sarbanes, I am sure, is well-intended with this
amendment. But I hope the Chair will take note that this amendment is
wholly outside the jurisdiction of this committee. And for that reason,
it would be subject to a rule, if the rule allowed it.
More importantly, it is very clear that although well-intended, it
falls short of its intended mark. Mr. Sarbanes in his comments,
rightfully so, said he wanted to establish standards. But I am sure the
gentleman wants to establish a standard.

{time} 1845

This amendment would establish every agency having a different
standard. We already have the Office of Management and Budget and other
agencies working to define inherently governmental in a uniform way,
and that is critical. We do not want to bring in anything which is less
expensive to do out-of-house and is not necessary to bring in-house.
I share with the gentleman the desire to make sure that which must be
done by the government, that which is so special that we definitely do
not want profit fitting into the equation, we want it done by the
government.
I never again want to consider anything being outsourced simply
because we don't have the will to build the resources in-house,
particularly when it often can cost more, not less, to outsource.
So I would hope that the gentleman would withdraw his amendment, one,
because it's outside the jurisdiction of this committee; and, two,
because there is a time and a place to get a standard. We already have
an effort under way by this administration to establish a single
standard, one that could be uniformly executed that would save money
and save confusion.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time is remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. SARBANES. I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from Massachusetts
(Mr. Lynch).
Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in support of
the amendment offered by my friend and colleague, Mr. Sarbanes of
Maryland.
This amendment ensures due diligence on the part of Federal agencies
by requiring cost comparisons before any work can be awarded to
contractors at non-Department of Defense agencies.
I just want to point out that this is what DOD is doing now, and
those of us on the Oversight Committee, who saw the problems that were
created by recklessly contracting out core government responsibilities
in the Iraq reconstruction era, think this is a great idea. We think
that this is an idea that will make sure that we do effective cost
analysis and also measure the appropriateness of whether or not a core
government's function should be contracted out to begin with.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The trouble is, this is not working so great for the Department of
Defense, and to take it to all the other departments of government is
not a good idea.
We were promised that we would have a cost analysis that the validity
of analysis and cost models would be provided, and that really hasn't
been provided. So we have these glowing claims that this is going to
save money, but we haven't seen the analysis backing that up.
What we do know is that there will be people in the private sector
losing their jobs. Now, sure, it will get transferred to the government
service, but are we comparing apples to apples or apples to oranges?
The claims that this will save money, I am not sure they take into
account such things as health care coverage and pensions and things
like that that a Federal employee would receive on top of their salary.
I also question the long-term strategic use, especially in the
Defense Department, of the great amounts of in-sourcing that are being
talked about, because the most innovation that we get comes
historically from the private sector.
People that are in government are well-intentioned, they do their
best, but there just sometimes is not that same cutting-edge innovation
and technology improvement in government service that we see with
people working in the private sector.
The competition is so intense, that can drive innovation in the
private sector. So to give that up for core competencies, core things
that should be done by the private sector is something that I see as
not good for the long-term strategy of the defense industry.
For that reason, too, I really have to question this impulse to take
something that's really not working that great and apply it to all of
government just because you know of a few examples where maybe a
contractor was paid too much.
I agree with Representative Issa. We need to first of all step back
and see if this is even working in the Department of Defense. And to
assume that it is, on very skimpy or scant evidence, and apply it to
the entire government is just way too premature and hasty. I would urge
a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
I know it's well-intentioned, but I would urge strongly everyone to
oppose it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SARBANES. I yield the balance of my time to my colleague from New
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds.
Mr. ANDREWS. The committee supports this amendment because we support
Mr. Sarbanes' approach of merit-driven decision-making. The OMB will
oversee this process. We believe it will improve quality and protect
the taxpayers. We support the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. 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 Maryland
will be postponed.

Amendments En Bloc No. 5 Offered by Mr. Andrews

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, as the
designee of the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, I offer
amendments en bloc No. 5.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 5 offered by Mr. Andrews consisting of
amendments numbered 5, 6, 7, 11, 14, 19, 31, and 33 printed in House
Report 111-498:

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Bordallo of Guam

The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of division A of the bill, insert the following
new title:

[[Page 9667]]

TITLE XVII--GUAM WORLD WAR II LOYALTY RECOGNITION ACT

SEC. 1701. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Guam World War II Loyalty
Recognition Act''.

SEC. 1702. RECOGNITION OF THE SUFFERING AND LOYALTY OF THE
RESIDENTS OF GUAM.

(a) Recognition of the Suffering of the Residents of
Guam.--The United States recognizes that, as described by the
Guam War Claims Review Commission, the residents of Guam, on
account of their United States nationality, suffered
unspeakable harm as a result of the occupation of Guam by
Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II, by
being subjected to death, rape, severe personal injury,
personal injury, forced labor, forced march, or internment.
(b) Recognition of the Loyalty of the Residents of Guam.--
The United States forever will be grateful to the residents
of Guam for their steadfast loyalty to the United States of
America, as demonstrated by the countless acts of courage
they performed despite the threat of death or great bodily
harm they faced at the hands of the Imperial Japanese
military forces that occupied Guam during World War II.

SEC. 1703. PAYMENTS FOR GUAM WORLD WAR II CLAIMS.

(a) Payments for Death, Personal Injury, Forced Labor,
Forced March, and Internment.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations authorized to be appropriated under section
1706(a), after receipt of certification pursuant to section
1704(b)(8) and in accordance with the provisions of this
title, the Secretary of the Treasury shall make payments as
follows:
(1) Residents injured.--The Secretary shall pay compensable
Guam victims who are not deceased before any payments are
made to individuals described in paragraphs (2) and (3) as
follows:
(A) If the victim has suffered an injury described in
subsection (c)(2)(A), $15,000.
(B) If the victim is not described in subparagraph (A) but
has suffered an injury described in subsection (c)(2)(B),
$12,000.
(C) If the victim is not described in subparagraph (A) or
(B) but has suffered an injury described in subsection
(c)(2)(C), $10,000.
(2) Survivors of residents who died in war.--In the case of
a compensable Guam decedent, the Secretary shall pay $25,000
for distribution to eligible survivors of the decedent as
specified in subsection (b). The Secretary shall make
payments under this paragraph after payments are made under
paragraph (1) and before payments are made under paragraph
(3).
(3) Survivors of deceased injured residents.--In the case
of a compensable Guam victim who is deceased, the Secretary
shall pay $7,000 for distribution to eligible survivors of
the victim as specified in subsection (b). The Secretary
shall make payments under this paragraph after payments are
made under paragraphs (1) and (2).
(b) Distribution of Survivor Payments.--Payments under
paragraph (2) or (3) of subsection (a) to eligible survivors
of an individual who is a compensable Guam decedent or a
compensable Guam victim who is deceased shall be made as
follows:
(1) If there is living a spouse of the individual, but no
child of the individual, all of the payment shall be made to
such spouse.
(2) If there is living a spouse of the individual and one
or more children of the individual, one-half of the payment
shall be made to the spouse and the other half to the child
(or to the children in equal shares).
(3) If there is no living spouse of the individual, but
there are one or more children of the individual alive, all
of the payment shall be made to such child (or to such
children in equal shares).
(4) If there is no living spouse or child of the individual
but there is a living parent (or parents) of the individual,
all of the payment shall be made to the parents (or to the
parents in equal shares).
(5) If there is no such living spouse, child, or parent, no
payment shall be made.
(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this title:
(1) Compensable guam decedent.--The term ``compensable Guam
decedent'' means an individual determined under section
1704(a)(1) to have been a resident of Guam who died or was
killed as a result of the attack and occupation of Guam by
Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II, or
incident to the liberation of Guam by United States military
forces, and whose death would have been compensable under the
Guam Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224) if a
timely claim had been filed under the terms of such Act.
(2) Compensable guam victim.--The term ``compensable Guam
victim'' means an individual determined under section
1704(a)(1) to have suffered, as a result of the attack and
occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military forces
during World War II, or incident to the liberation of Guam by
United States military forces, any of the following:
(A) Rape or severe personal injury (such as loss of a limb,
dismemberment, or paralysis).
(B) Forced labor or a personal injury not under
subparagraph (A) (such as disfigurement, scarring, or burns).
(C) Forced march, internment, or hiding to evade
internment.
(3) Definitions of severe personal injuries and personal
injuries.--The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall
promulgate regulations to specify injuries that constitute a
severe personal injury or a personal injury for purposes of
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, of paragraph (2).

SEC. 1704. ADJUDICATION.

(a) Authority of Foreign Claims Settlement Commission.--
(1) In general.--The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission
is authorized to adjudicate claims and determine eligibility
for payments under section 1703.
(2) Rules and regulations.--The chairman of the Foreign
Claims Settlement Commission shall prescribe such rules and
regulations as may be necessary to enable it to carry out its
functions under this title. Such rules and regulations shall
be published in the Federal Register.
(b) Claims Submitted for Payments.--
(1) Submittal of claim.--For purposes of subsection (a)(1)
and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission may not determine an individual is eligible for a
payment under section 1703 unless the individual submits to
the Commission a claim in such manner and form and containing
such information as the Commission specifies.
(2) Filing period for claims and notice.--All claims for a
payment under section 1703 shall be filed within one year
after the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission publishes
public notice of the filing period in the Federal Register.
The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall provide for
the notice required under the previous sentence not later
than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this title.
In addition, the Commission shall cause to be publicized the
public notice of the deadline for filing claims in newspaper,
radio, and television media on Guam.
(3) Adjudicatory decisions.--The decision of the Foreign
Claims Settlement Commission on each claim shall be by
majority vote, shall be in writing, and shall state the
reasons for the approval or denial of the claim. If approved,
the decision shall also state the amount of the payment
awarded and the distribution, if any, to be made of the
payment.
(4) Deductions in payment.--The Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission shall deduct, from potential payments, amounts
previously paid under the Guam Meritorious Claims Act of 1945
(Public Law 79-224).
(5) Interest.--No interest shall be paid on payments
awarded by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission.
(6) Remuneration prohibited.--No remuneration on account of
representational services rendered on behalf of any claimant
in connection with any claim filed with the Foreign Claims
Settlement Commission under this title shall exceed one
percent of the total amount paid pursuant to any payment
certified under the provisions of this title on account of
such claim. Any agreement to the contrary shall be unlawful
and void. Whoever demands or receives, on account of services
so rendered, any remuneration in excess of the maximum
permitted by this section shall be fined not more than $5,000
or imprisoned not more than 12 months, or both.
(7) Appeals and finality.--Objections and appeals of
decisions of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall
be to the Commission, and upon rehearing, the decision in
each claim shall be final, and not subject to further review
by any court or agency.
(8) Certifications for payment.--After a decision approving
a claim becomes final, the chairman of the Foreign Claims
Settlement Commission shall certify it to the Secretary of
the Treasury for authorization of a payment under section
1703.
(9) Treatment of affidavits.--For purposes of section 1703
and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission shall treat a claim that is accompanied by an
affidavit of an individual that attests to all of the
material facts required for establishing eligibility of such
individual for payment under such section as establishing a
prima facie case of the individual's eligibility for such
payment without the need for further documentation, except as
the Commission may otherwise require. Such material facts
shall include, with respect to a claim under paragraph (2) or
(3) of section 1703(a), a detailed description of the injury
or other circumstance supporting the claim involved,
including the level of payment sought.
(10) Release of related claims.--Acceptance of payment
under section 1703 by an individual for a claim related to a
compensable Guam decedent or a compensable Guam victim shall
be in full satisfaction of all claims related to such
decedent or victim, respectively, arising under the Guam
Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224), the
implementing regulations issued by the United States Navy
pursuant thereto, or this title.

SEC. 1705. GRANTS PROGRAM TO MEMORIALIZE THE OCCUPATION OF
GUAM DURING WORLD WAR II.

(a) Establishment.--Subject to section 1706(b) and in
accordance with this section, the Secretary of the Interior
shall establish a grants program under which the Secretary
shall award grants for research, educational, and media
activities that memorialize the

[[Page 9668]]

events surrounding the occupation of Guam during World War
II, honor the loyalty of the people of Guam during such
occupation, or both, for purposes of appropriately
illuminating and interpreting the causes and circumstances of
such occupation and other similar occupations during a war.
(b) Eligibility.--The Secretary of the Interior may not
award to a person a grant under subsection (a) unless such
person submits an application to the Secretary for such
grant, in such time, manner, and form and containing such
information as the Secretary specifies.

SEC. 1706. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Guam World War II Claims Payments and Adjudication.--
For purposes of carrying out sections 1703 and 1704, there
are authorized to be appropriated $126,000,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2013, to the
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission. Not more than 5 percent
of funds made available under this subsection shall be used
for administrative costs.
(b) Guam World War II Grants Program.--For purposes of
carrying out section 1705, there are authorized to be
appropriated $5,000,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2013.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Coffman of Colorado

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE PRIORITY FOR RARE EARTH
NEODYMIUM IRON BORON MAGNETS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) There is an urgent need to restore the United States
capability to manufacture sintered neodymium iron boron
magnets for use in defense applications and there is an
urgent need to eliminate the domestic supply-chain
vulnerability related to these key materials in the defense
supply-chain.
(2) An April 14, 2010 report by the Government
Accountability Office entitled ``Rare Earth Materials in the
Defense Supply Chain'' demonstrates--
(A) the ``United States is not currently producing
neodymium iron boron magnets,'' a key rare earth material;
(B) that future availability of neodymium is largely
controlled by Chinese suppliers;
(C) that alternatives to rare earth materials could reduce
the demand and dependence on rare earth materials in 10 to 15
years, but these materials might not meet current application
requirements;
(D) where rare earth materials are used in defense systems,
the materials are responsible for the functionality of the
component and would be difficult to replace without losing
performance;
(E) fin actuators used in precision-guided munitions are
specifically designed around the capabilities of neodymium
iron boron rare earth magnets, which are primarily available
from Chinese suppliers;
(F) the DDG-51 Hybrid Electric Drive Ship Program uses
permanent-magnet motors using neodymium magnets from China;
and
(G) future generations of some defense system components,
such as transmit and receive modules for radars, will
continue to depend on rare earth materials.
(3) The United States has the technological capability to
restore its neodymium iron boron manufacturing capability.
(4) Worldwide supplies or rare earth materials, including
neodymium, are expected to tighten significantly within the
next 3-5 years.
(5) A domestic effort to restore domestic sintered
neodymium iron boron magnet manufacturing capability,
including efforts to qualify those magnets for use in defense
applications, will take between 3-5 years and should begin
immediately to avoid future weapon system delivery
disruption.
(b) Requirement.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the House of Representatives
and the Senate a plan to establish a domestic source of
sintered neodymium iron boron magnets for use in the defense
supply chain.
(c) Sintered Neodymium Iron Boron Magnets.--For the
purposes of subsection (b), the capability to manufacture
sintered neodymium iron boron magnets includes the alloying,
pressing, and sintering of magnet materials. It does not
include manufacturing magnets from standard shapes or
imported blocks of neodymium. The Secretary's plan shall not
allow the grinding or reprocessing of neodymium to be
considered a ``domestic source of sintered neodymium iron
boron magnets''.

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Ms. Shea-Porter of New Hampshire

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 1047. STUDY ON COMMON ALIGNMENT OF WORLD REGIONS IN
DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES WITH INTERNATIONAL
RESPONSIBILITIES.

(a) Study Required.--The President shall commission a study
to assess the need for and implications of a common alignment
of world regions in the internal organization of departments
and agencies of the Federal Government with international
responsibilities.
(b) Participating Departments and Agencies.--The following
departments and agencies, at a minimum, shall participate in
the study:
(1) The Department of Defense, including the combatant
commands.
(2) The Department of State.
(3) The United States Agency for International Development.
(4) The Department of Justice.
(5) The Department of Commerce.
(6) The Department of the Treasury.
(7) The intelligence community.
(8) Such other departments and agencies as the President
considers appropriate.
(c) Cooperation and Access.--The heads of the departments
and agencies participating in the study shall provide full
cooperation with, and access to appropriate information to,
the team carrying out the study.
(d) Matters Covered.--The study required under subsection
(a) shall, at a minimum, assess--
(1) the problems resulting from different geographic
boundaries within the various departments and agencies;
(2) potential obstacles to implementing a common alignment;
(3) the advantages and disadvantages of a common alignment;
and
(4) impediments to interagency coordination because of
differing regional authority levels.
(e) Report.--The President shall submit to Congress a
report on the study required under subsection (a) not later
than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Kratovil of Maryland

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 406, after line 4, insert the following:

SEC. 1038. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO GIVE MIRANDA
WARNINGS TO AL QAEDA TERRORISTS.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated in this Act
or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense
shall be used in violation of section 1040 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law
111-84; 123 Stat. 2454; 10 U.S.C. 801 note).

Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 12XX. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR ELECTIONS
IN AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Limitation.--No funds authorized to be appropriated by
this Act may be made available to support the holding of
elections in Afghanistan unless and until the President
submits a certification described in subsection (b) to the
congressional officials specified in subsection (c).
(b) Certification Described.--A certification described in
this subsection is certification in writing that contains a
determination of the President of the following:
(1) The Afghanistan Independent Election Commission has the
professional capacity, personnel, skills, independence, and
legal authority to conduct and oversee free, fair, and honest
elections.
(2) The Afghanistan Independent Election Commission, to the
extent possible, has been purged of all members and staff who
committed or were otherwise participants in any fraud of the
2009 presidential elections, including covering up the
electoral fraud or otherwise were negligent in investigating
allegations of electoral fraud.
(3) The Afghan Electoral Complaints Commission is a
genuinely independent body with all the authorities that were
invested in it under Afghanistan law as of December 31, 2009,
and with no members appointed by President Hamid Karzai.
(c) Congressional Officials Specified.--The congressional
officials specified in this subsection are the following:
(1) The Speaker and minority leader of the House of
Representatives.
(2) The majority leader and minority leader of the Senate.
(3) The Chairman and ranking member of the Committee on
Armed Services and the Chairman and ranking member of the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
(4) The Chairman and ranking member of the Committee on
Armed Services and the Chairman and ranking member of the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.

Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Conyers of Michigan

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON THE STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE
SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATION OF AN INCIDENTS AT SEA
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE
GOVERNMENT OF IRAN.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this

[[Page 9669]]

Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
Secretary of State, shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a report evaluating naval security
in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.
(b) Matters To Be Included.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall include an assessment of the strategic
benefits of the successful negotiation of a multilateral or
bilateral Incidents at Sea military-to-military agreement
including the United States and the Government of Iran aimed
at defusing tension and preventing accidental naval conflict
in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. Such an
assessment should consider and evaluate the effect that such
an agreement might have on commercial, military, and other
naval traffic in the region, as well as other United States
regional strategic interests.
(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.

Amendment No. 31 Offered by Ms. Lee of California

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 323, after line 11, insert the following:

SEC. 839. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING COST SAVINGS THROUGH
REDUCTIONS IN WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Secretary of Defense has undertaken meaningful
efforts to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse through
contractor oversight and new policies and procedures aimed at
increasing emphasis on ethics, governance, and fraud
prevention.
(2) The Government Accountability Office report dated
December 16, 2009, on the status of 3,099 recommendations
made to the Department of Defense by the Government
Accountability Office between 2001 and 2008, indicates that
the Department of Defense has implemented 1,871, or 61
percent, of the recommendations.
(3) The Government Accountability Office estimates that the
implementation of these recommendations yielded the Federal
Government a savings of $89 billion from 2001 through 2007,
averaging $12.7 billion in annual financial benefit.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) there is potential for additional and significant cost
savings through further reductions by the Secretary of
Defense in waste, fraud, and abuse, particularly with regard
to contracting processes; and
(2) the Secretary of Defense should make implementation of
the remaining Government Accountability Office
recommendations an utmost priority of the Department of
Defense.

Amendment No. 33 Offered by Ms. Schakowsky of Illinois

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 12XX. RECOMMENDATIONS ON OVERSIGHT OF CONTRACTORS
ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES RELATING TO AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Recommendations Required.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Special Inspector
General for Afghanistan Reconstruction shall, in consultation
with the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the
Inspector General of the United States Agency for
International Development, and the Inspector General of the
Department of State--
(1) issue recommendations on measures to increase oversight
of contractors engaged in activities relating to Afghanistan
that have a record of engaging in waste, fraud, or abuse;
(2) report on the status of efforts of the Department of
Defense, the United States Agency for International
Development, and the Department of State to implement
existing recommendations regarding oversight of such
contractors; and
(3) report on the extent to which military and security
contractors or subcontractors engaged in activities relating
to Afghanistan have been responsible for the deaths of Afghan
civilians.
(b) Elements of Recommendations.--The recommendations
issued under subsection (a)(1) shall include--
(1) recommendations for reducing the reliance of the United
States on--
(A) military and security contractors or subcontractors
engaged in activities relating to Afghanistan that have been
responsible responsible for the deaths of Afghan civilians;
and
(B) Afghan militias or other armed groups that are not part
of the Afghan National Security Forces; and
(2) recommendations for prohibiting the Department of
Defense, the Department of State, or the United States Agency
for International Development from entering into contracts
with contractors engaged in activities relating to
Afghanistan that have a record of engaging in waste, fraud,
or abuse.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, again, this is an example of Members from
both sides of the aisle making well thought out, constructive
contributions on a whole range of issues that we think improve the
bill. Both the majority and minority have examined each of the
provisions in the en bloc amendment. We support each of them.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. At this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman).
Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, the Department of Defense is
facing a near-term shortage of key ``rare earth'' materials necessary
to support our defense weapon systems, and rare Earth magnets are
especially critical. Over 97 percent of rare earth production is
controlled by China.
Currently the United States does not have a manufacturer of
neodymium-iron-boron rare Earth magnets, yet they are found in our
precision guided munitions, ships, aircraft, and other critical weapons
systems.
One key finding of the recent Government Accountability Office report
on rare earth materials in the defense supply chain was that the
Chinese-sourced ``neo'' magnets are being included in weapons platforms
delivered to the Department of Defense. America is not currently
producing these magnets. The time to address this problem is now.
This amendment will help restore America's ability to produce
domestic neo magnets. It requires the Department of Defense to develop
a plan for establishing this domestic capability and submit it to the
congressional defense committees.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Coffman-Ellsworth
amendment.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, it's my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) who has taken a leading
interest in evaluating both the quality and financial impact of our
activities in Afghanistan, very often doing yeoman's work on tedious
detail.
Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I also want to
thank the chairman and ranking member for including this amendment in
the en bloc.
Mr. Chairman, McGovern-Jones-Welch is a straightforward, bipartisan
amendment. It requires the President to certify that the Afghanistan
Independent Election Commission and the Afghan Electoral Complaints
Commission have the professional capacity, legal authority and
independence to carry out and oversee free, fair and honest elections,
absent the fraud that characterized the 2009 presidential elections,
before U.S. taxpayer dollars can support the next round of elections. I
don't think that that's too much to ask.
I was in Afghanistan just after the 2009 elections. I didn't meet
anyone who thought that those elections were honest. The Embassy told
me they were a fraud. The U.N. said they were a fraud. The Afghan
people knew they were a fraud. Even President Karzai conceded that they
were massively fraudulent. And $200 million of U.S. taxpayer money went
into those elections. Just think about it, $200 million. I don't want
to see history repeat itself. I don't want the American taxpayer ripped
off again.
More is at stake than the waste of money. The U.S. military strategy
depends on an honest, competent Afghan government that can win the
loyalty of the people. If September's parliamentary elections are also
fraudulent, the result could be even greater local and regional
turmoil.
No matter where you stand on our policy on Afghanistan, let's make
sure that the September elections are free, fair and honest. This
amendment strengthens our leverage. Our uniformed men and women are
fighting and dying in Afghanistan. The least we can ask is that the
Afghan government carries out free, fair and honest elections.

[[Page 9670]]

[From the Los Angeles Times, May 10, 2010]

U.S. Lost in Afghan Vote

(By Peter W. Galbraith)

Will we ever learn? In 2009, Afghan President Hamid Karzai,
who will meet with President Obama in Washington this week,
ripped off American taxpayers for about $200 million. This is
what the United States contributed to support presidential
elections that Karzai himself admits were massively
fraudulent. Now, the United Nations and the Obama
administration propose to fund Afghanistan's parliamentary
elections in September, even though new rules pushed through
by Karzai--over the opposition of parliament--make fraud even
more likely this time.
Afghanistan's Independent Election Commission, or IEC, a
body appointed by Karzai and subservient to his wishes, was
deeply implicated in the 2009 fraud. The commission and its
staff either produced the phony tallies--which gave Karzai
more than 1 million of his 3 million votes--or collaborated
with those who did. In many instances, the commission
reported pro-Karzai results from polling centers that never
existed.
Fortunately, Afghanistan also had in place a truly
independent body, the Electoral Complaints Commission, which
was empowered to investigate fraud. Three members of that
commission were appointed by the United Nations, and none of
its members was chosen by Karzai. After investigating the
election, the group tossed out enough phony Karzai votes to
force the president into a runoff with the second-highest
vote-getter, Abdullah Abdullah. In the end, that second
election wasn't held because Abdullah withdrew after the IEC
adopted procedures that made fraud even more likely in the
runoff.
The fact that Karzai retained the presidency didn't mollify
him. Angered by the complaint commission's actions after the
first round of last year's vote, and determined to gain full
control over Afghanistan's election machinery, Karzai issued
a decree in February giving himself the authority to appoint
all five members of the Electoral Complaints Commission. He
also stripped the group of its power to initiate reviews of
suspicious ballots on its own. In the parliamentary
elections, the group will be allowed to act only on
complaints referred to it by members of the provincial
election commissions, all of whom are appointed by Karzai.
The United Nations, which is supposed to help the Afghans
hold honest elections, and the United States, which will pick
up most of the tab for them, have responded far too meekly to
Karzai's power grab. Staffan de Mistura, the new head of the
U.N. mission in Afghanistan, negotiated a deal with Karzai
under which two U.N.-nominated international election experts
were appointed to the complaints commission, and one of them
will have veto power. Because of this compromise, De Mistura
is recommending that Western donors proceed with funding the
election. The Obama administration, wishing to move beyond a
recent harsh exchange of words with Karzai (during which
Karzai bizarrely alleged that foreigners, including the U.S.
and the U.N., were responsible for fraud in the last
election), seems inclined to agree.
But the proposed compromise is a sham. Karzai's three
appointees can outvote the two U.N. choices, and the
compromise does not restore the Electoral Complaints
Commission's power to initiate independently reviews of
suspicious votes.
There is only one positive note I've seen in the whole
mess, and that is that Karzai unexpectedly appointed Fazel
Ahmad Manawi as the new head of the IEC, replacing a chairman
deeply implicated in the fraud. This was a pleasant surprise.
I met Manawi, a respected Islamic scholar from the Panjshir
Valley, an opposition stronghold, when I was deputy head of
the U.N. mission in 2009. At the time, he was one of seven
members of the IEC, and he was clearly a person of integrity,
casting the sole vote against the decision to ratify Karzai's
fraudulent election. But Manawi remains only one vote on a
commission stacked with Karzai loyalists, and the leading
candidate for the position of chief electoral officer is
Zekria Barakzai, a smooth-talking IEC official who was a
public apologist for the fraud.
Much more is at stake in Afghanistan's elections than the
waste of millions more U.S. dollars. Our counterinsurgency
strategy depends on an honest and competent Afghan government
that can win the loyalty of the population. During eight
years in office, the Karzai administration has been
ineffective and corrupt. Since Karzai's disputed reelection,
many Afghans also question his legitimacy.
If September's parliamentary elections are fraudulent, it
could lead to an ethnically based civil war. Afghanistan's
opposition dominates the parliament and has come out strongly
against the new electoral procedures. The parliament is the
one national institution that effectively represents
Afghanistan's non-Pashtun minorities; the speaker of the
lower house is an ethnic Tajik who was the runner-up to
Karzai in the 2004 elections.
The Obama administration, now that it has tenuously patched
up relations with Karzai after his anti-American tirades last
month, is reluctant to confront the Afghan president over
electoral procedures. This reluctance is shortsighted.
Insisting on procedures for honest elections now will be far
less costly, both in lives and money, than having another
crooked election that ends up with U.S. troops mired in even
greater chaos and a broadening civil war. The Taliban will be
the only true winner of yet another phony election in
Afghanistan.
Peter W. Galbraith was deputy special representative of the
secretary-general of the United Nations to Afghanistan from
June to September 2009.

Mr. McKEON. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentlelady from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) who has done very careful
work on making sure that the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan
Reconstruction is fully discharging very important functions.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in support of this en bloc amendment, which includes my
amendment to improve oversight of contractors in Afghanistan. The
United States employs over 100,000 contractors in Afghanistan, and we
need to ensure that we have adequate oversight. Reckless behavior by
contractors can endanger our mission in Afghanistan, and failure to
adequately oversee money can leave billions of taxpayer dollars
vulnerable to waste, fraud and abuse.
My amendment requires the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan
Reconstruction to report to Congress on existing contractor oversight
and make recommendations for increasing oversight and preventing
contractors with a history of waste, fraud and abuse from getting
future contracts.
I would like to thank Chairman Skelton for supporting this amendment,
as well as cosponsors Congressmen McGovern, Conyers, Hinchey and Moran.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time each side has
left on this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 6\1/2\ minutes
and the gentleman from California has 8\1/2\ minutes.
Without objection, the gentleman from Missouri will control the time.
There was no objection.
Mr. AKIN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
It is very important that we take assessment of the excellent ideas
in this bill that both parties support. Much of the debate this
afternoon and this evening has obviously been consumed by points of
controversy, but there are some major points of consensus that each
side should be proud of supporting.
Number one, each side is vigorously supporting a significant pay
increase for the men and women who wear the uniform of our country.
Each side is supporting a very significant increase in the quality of
housing, education and health care for the servicemembers and for their
families.

{time} 1900

Each side is supporting a significant step toward our Navy, reaching
the point where our admirals tell us it ought to be.
In 2008, our Navy had authorized and at sea in the fleet 286 ships.
Under this bill, our Navy will have authorized and at sea in the fleet
293 ships, a gain of seven ships. Mr. Taylor, in particular, has worked
very hard on this point with the full bipartisan support of the
Republican side. Our admirals tell us that the optimal size of the Navy
they would like to see us have is 313 ships. So we have a ways to go,
but progress is being made.
I mentioned earlier the legislation before the House authorizes $9.8
billion for our Special Operations Command. In the toughest
neighborhoods in the world, in the toughest circumstances in the world,
it is the men and women under the command of SOCOM who do the toughest
work, and the bill on both sides supports them very substantially.
Also, as I mentioned before, this bill dramatically upgrades the
amount of money we spend on identifying, securing, and disabling
nuclear material

[[Page 9671]]

that could be used to form a nuclear improvised explosive device. This
is very much consistent with the administration's policy and broadly
embraced by both sides.
So, Mr. Chairman, I just want you and others observing tonight to
understand that it is the nature of debate that we do dwell--as we have
these many hours this afternoon--on points of disagreement, and they
are profound points of disagreement; but it is very important that
people understand the points of agreement that are before us. Whether
it is compensation for our servicemembers and their families, their
health care, their housing, their job and educational opportunities,
whether it is the end strength of our Navy--which, frankly, is a
bipartisan commitment to bring us up to those 313 ships--whether it is
the end strength of our Armed Forces; in 2008, the end strength of our
Armed Forces was in the neighborhood of 1.4 million people, active
duty, Guard and Reserve, a little over that. This legislation before us
tonight would have the end strength of our Armed Forces exceed 1.5
million people in our active duty, Guard and Reserve.
So, Mr. Chairman, I again want to say that it is healthy, it is
expected, it is anticipated that the floor of this Chamber will be a
place where our points of disagreement are vigorously and honestly
pursued. But as a compliment to both sides of the aisle, to Mr. McKeon
and Chairman Skelton, the legislative product that is before us tonight
has many, many, many more points of consensus, and we're looking
forward to building on those points of consensus.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California
will control the time.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. May I inquire as to how much time we have left on each
side.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 8\1/2\ minutes
remaining. The gentleman from New Jersey has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. I yield myself 2 minutes.
I also wanted to make reference to the excellent work that's been
done in this bill in the area of our missile defense program. Now,
there are obviously disagreements over what the structure of that
program ought to be; but when one looks at the fortification of
defenses that we already have at Fort Greely and other places, when one
looks at the additional investment that we are making in the successful
regional-range missile programs that have tested and been quite
efficient, I think that the accurate conclusion is that we are
fortifying the defenses which have been proven to work in the missile
defense field, we are building upon those successes, and we are
preparing ourselves for a future generation of defenses that are
effective both in a regional context and in the context of
intercontinental ballistic missiles.
The nonproliferation strategy really has two aspects: it is to be
prepared to defend ourselves if a strike occurs, but it is to
discourage the proliferation of nuclear capability around the world, as
the administration has done in the Security Council negotiations with
Iran and it has done with its layered defense missile strategy. So,
again, I think this is another point where there is more consensus than
disagreement.
There is disagreement between the two sides over the best way to
pursue an effective ballistic missile defense. I don't think there is a
disagreement over whether the pursuit of a ballistic missile defense is
in the interest of the country. It most certainly is.
I would conclude at this point, Mr. Chairman, where I began. We know
that the cornerstone of our country's defense is not found in this
Chamber. It is found at bases throughout the world, both in the
Continental United States and at forward-operating bases and other
places overseas. We are profoundly grateful to the men and women who
volunteer to serve this country. We, on a bipartisan basis, are
expressing our gratitude where it counts: compensation, support for
families, education, health care, and other opportunities.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Akin).
Mr. AKIN. Just to respond briefly here on the subject of missile
defense, I know we are working with some en bloc amendments. We're
comfortable with those amendments. There is some disagreement on
missile defense, and I think at least a considerable vulnerability that
many people on our side are very concerned with was the decision not to
build a ground base system in Poland and the radar in the Czech
Republic, but instead, to suggest that the Aegis class cruisers could
cruise around in the ocean and take care of the mission to stop
ballistic missiles, particularly a longer range ballistic missile
possibly equipped with a nuclear warhead coming out of Iran.
The fact of the matter is that the Aegis class missiles do not have
the velocity necessary to stop a longer-range ballistic missile. And
the only way we had to do that was, quite simply, the ground-based
system, which is a 20-ton missile; the Aegis class missiles are more
two ton. So there is a factor-of-10 difference in the weight of the
missile. Obviously, the much larger missile can develop the velocity it
needs to go after a very high-flying, fast-moving ballistic missile
that could come from Iran as early as in the next few years.
And so there is a serious concern that, in terms of missile defense,
we do not really have protection over Western Europe and our troops
that are stationed in Western Europe. Of more concern to us was some
level of obfuscation that we received from the Pentagon as to what the
real capabilities of this potentially Standard Block 3 missile--it's
called the Standard Block 3, 2A--and what sort of velocities that could
attain. From the most reliable sources that I personally have been able
to discuss this with and keeping things within the nonclassified
setting, that missile we have very little hope will ever develop the
velocity necessary to take out a high-flying ballistic missile.
So we have a big gap in our ballistic missile capabilities, and that
gap is the size of Europe. And we are betting on the development of a
missile that just does not have the physical size or capabilities of
developing the velocities we need to protect Europe. We don't think
that's good strategy. We think that's a weakness in the bill.
I still support the bill, it's a good bill--unless we put bad
amendments on it. This block of amendments is okay, but we do have some
weaknesses.
Mr. ANDREWS. May I inquire of the Chair how much time is remaining on
each side.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 30 seconds
remaining. The gentleman from California has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. TAYLOR. First let me say that I agree with my chairman and the
ranking member on the need to defeat the Murphy amendment.
But to Mr. Akin's point, number one, in the past 20 years, the
Panamanians, the Filipinos, and even our fellow Americans in Puerto
Rico have asked us to leave. If you put your missile defense in Poland
or Czechoslovakia, you are one election away from having spent billions
of dollars and being asked to leave. If you put your missile defense on
ships you can get to within 12 miles of the Iranian coast, you don't
have to ask anyone's permission to fire it. It's there. And if you
think about it, all of our known enemies have a coastline. That's why
it makes sense to put our missile defense on a ship because you put the
ship between our Nation and our enemies.
I thank the gentleman very, very much for yielding me the minute, and
I thank the gentleman for asking a great question.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page 9672]]

Again, back to this point, I think we weren't concerned on the
missile defense about putting them on the ships, what we're concerned
about is we don't have the missile to put on the ships. And there will
be a gap in the time that we don't have the other missiles before we
get the missiles for the ships. So I think that's a concern we have,
and hopefully that will be worked out, that we will have a missile
instead of just a planned missile.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. I yield myself the balance of my time.
First of all, I would like to thank the gentleman from California for
yielding his time to the gentleman from Mississippi. We appreciate that
very much.
I will just conclude by pointing out that we've heard some
disagreements here about the nature of ballistic missile defense. But
to my core point, there is much in this bill that has been embraced by
both sides of the aisle because both sides of the aisle have a profound
respect for the men and women who serve and a profound appreciation for
the core duty we have to preserve and defend the country.
Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Chair, the Department of Defense is
facing a near-term shortage of key ``rare earth'' materials necessary
to support our defense weapon systems, and rare earth magnets are
especially critical. Over 97% of rare earth production is controlled by
China.
Currently, the United States does not have a manufacturer of
neodymium iron boron rare earth magnets, yet they are found in our
precision guided munitions, ships, aircraft, and other critical weapons
systems.
Due to my concern over this critical security issue, last year I
requested a Government Accountability Office, GAO, study on rare earth
materials in the defense supply chain as part of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. Released on April 14, 2010, the
recent GAO Report on Rare Earth Metals in the Defense Supply Chain has
highlighted the near-term need for a sustainable supply chain of rare
earths in the United States, both for critical American national
defense and industrial applications.
One key finding of the GAO report was their determination that some
U.S. defense contractors are currently utilizing ``neo'' magnets from
Chinese sources and incorporating them into the weapons platforms
delivered to the Department of Defense. At present, we have almost no
alternatives to these Chinese components, as the United States is not
currently producing these magnets. Though America is not currently
producing these magnets, we have the technological know-how to do so,
combined with significant deposits of rare earths.
The time to address this problem is now.
This essential amendment will help restore America's ability to
produce domestic ``neo'' magnets. It requires the Department of Defense
to develop a plan for establishing a domestic neodymium iron boron
magnet capability, and submit it to the Congressional defense
committees.
We cannot allow our nation to be dependent on a foreign source of
these critical components. This amendment will help revitalize our
domestic manufacturing sector and contribute directly to our national
security.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Coffman-Ellsworth
amendment.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chair, I thank Congresswoman Schakowsky for her
leadership on this amendment--and on the many issues surrounding
private contractors.
Mr. Chair, this amendment is all about accountability and stopping
waste, fraud and abuse. It's long past time that we increased and
improved the monitoring and oversight of private contractors,
especially military, defense and security contractors.
This amendment, like the provision in my bill, H.R. 5015, places
these contractors under the audit and review of our existing Inspectors
General, and allows the Special IG for Reconstruction in Afghanistan to
make concrete recommendations to the Pentagon, State Department and
USAID on how to bring to account and even stop doing business with
those contractors with records of waste, fraud and abuse--let alone a
record of abusing and killing innocent civilians.
Mr. Chair, this amendment is good for the American taxpayer. It's
good for our national security. And it's good for our reputation and
standing abroad.
It is a win-win amendment.
I ask my colleagues to support the Schakowsky-McGovern-Hinchey-
Conyers-Moran amendment on expanding the oversight over and
accountability of private contractors in Afghanistan.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time and
urge support of the en bloc amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 4 of House Resolution
1404, I hereby give notice that amendment No. 79 may be offered out of
order.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman's request is noted.

Amendments En Bloc No. 6 Offered by Mr. Andrews

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, as the
designee of the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, I offer
amendments en bloc No. 6, including modifications to amendment No. 50.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 6 offered by Mr. Andrews consisting of
amendments numbered 39; 41; 43; 50, as modified; 51, and 57 printed in
House Report 111-498:

Amendment No. 39 Offered by Mr. Lipinski of Illinois

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. PROCUREMENT OF ARTICLES, MATERIALS, AND SUPPLIES
FOR USE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.

(a) Requirement.--In procuring articles, materials, or
supplies for use outside of the United States, including
procurements for military construction projects, the
Department of Defense shall solicit bids from United States
sources.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if the
articles, materials, or supplies to be procured are--
(1) not mined, produced, or manufactured in the United
States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities;
(2) needed on an urgent basis and not acquired on a regular
basis; or
(3) perishable, or will otherwise degrade because of the
time involved in shipping.

Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Braley of Iowa

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON LONG-TERM COSTS OF OPERATION IRAQI
FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The United States has been engaged in military
operations in Afghanistan since October 2001 and in military
operations in Iraq since March 2003.
(2) According to the Congressional Research Service,
through fiscal year 2009, Congress has appropriated
$944,000,000,000 for the Department of Defense, the
Department of State, and for medical costs paid by the
Department of Veterans Affairs. This amount includes
$683,000,000,000 for Iraq and $227,000,000,000 for
Afghanistan.
(3) Over 90 percent of Department of Defense funds for
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have been provided as
emergency funds in supplemental or additional appropriations.
(4) The Congressional Budget Office and the Congressional
Research Service have stated that future war costs are
difficult to estimate because the Department of Defense
provides little information on costs incurred to date, does
not report outlays or actual expenditures for war because war
and baseline funds are mixed in the same accounts, and
because of a lack of information from the Department of
Defense on many of the key factors that determine costs,
including personnel levels or the pace of operations.
(5) Over 2 million United States troops have served in Iraq
and Afghanistan since the beginning of the conflicts.
(6) Over 4,400 United States troops and Department of
Defense civilian personnel have been killed in Operation
Iraqi Freedom and over 1,060 United States troops and
Department of Defense civilian personnel have been killed in
Operation Enduring Freedom.
(7) Over 1,340 service members have suffered amputations as
a result of their service in Iraq and Afghanistan.
(8) More than 243,685 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have
been treated for mental health conditions, more than 129,654
Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been diagnosed with Post-
Traumatic Stress Disorder, and approximately 30,000 have a
confirmed Traumatic Brain Injury diagnosis.
(9) Approximately 46 percent of Iraq and Afghanistan
veterans have sought treatment at Department of Veterans
Affairs hospitals and clinics.
(10) The Independent Review Group on Rehabilitative Care
and Administrative Processes at Walter Reed Army Medical
Center

[[Page 9673]]

and National Naval Medical Center identified Traumatic Brain
Injury, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, increased survival of
severe burns, and traumatic amputations as the four signature
wounds of the current conflicts.
(11) The Independent Review Group report also states that
the recovery process ``can take months or years and must
accommodate recurring or delayed manifestations of symptoms,
extended rehabilitation and all the life complications that
emerge over time from such trauma''.
(b) Report Requirement; Scenarios.--Not later than the date
on which the budget of the United States Government is
submitted under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States
Code, for fiscal year 2012, the President, with contributions
from the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, and
the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, shall
submit a report to Congress containing an estimate of the
long-term costs of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation
Enduring Freedom. The report shall contain estimates for the
following scenarios:
(1) The number of personnel deployed in support of
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom is
reduced from current levels to approximately 150,000 by the
end of fiscal year 2011, 65,000 by the end of fiscal year
2012, and 30,000 by the end of fiscal year 2013, and remains
at that level through fiscal year 2020.
(2) The number of personnel deployed in support of
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom is
increased from current levels to approximately 235,000 by the
end of fiscal year 2010, is reduced to 230,000 by the end of
fiscal year 2011, is reduced to 195,000 by the end of fiscal
year 2012, is reduced to 135,000 by the end of fiscal year
2013, is reduced to 80,000 by the end of fiscal year 2014, is
reduced to 60,000 by the end of fiscal year 2015, and remains
at that level through fiscal year 2020.
(3) An alternative scenario, defined by the President and
based on current war and withdrawal plans, which takes into
account expected troop levels and the expected length of time
that troops will be deployed in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
(c) Special Considerations.--The estimates required for
each scenario shall make projections through at least fiscal
year 2020, shall be adjusted appropriately for inflation,
shall be based on historical trends, and to the maximum
extent practicable shall take into account and specify the
following:
(1) The total number of troops expected to be activated and
deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan during the course of
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. This
number shall include all troops deployed in the region in
support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
Freedom and activated reservists in the United States who are
training, backfilling for deployed troops, or supporting
other Department of Defense missions directly or indirectly
related to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
Freedom. This number shall also break down activations and
deployments of Active Duty, Reservists, and National Guard
troops.
(2) The number of troops, including National Guard and
Reserve troops, who have served and who are expected to serve
multiple deployments.
(3) The number of contractors and private military security
firms that have been utilized and are expected to be utilized
during the course of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
(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 Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
(6) The current number of pending Department of Veterans
Affairs claims from Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, and the
total number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans expected to
seek disability compensation benefits from the Department of
Veterans Affairs.
(7) The total number of troops who have been killed and
wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan to date, including noncombat
casualties, the total number of troops expected to suffer
injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the total number of
troops expected to be killed in Iraq and Afghanistan,
including noncombat casualties.
(8) Funding already appropriated for the Department of
Defense, the Department of State, and the Department of
Veterans Affairs for costs related to the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan. This shall include 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 Iraq and Afghanistan.
(9) Current and future operational expenditures, including
funding for combat operations; deploying, transporting,
feeding, and housing troops (including fuel costs);
deployment of National Guard and Reserve troops; the
equipping and training of Iraqi and Afghani forces;
purchasing, upgrading, and repairing weapons, munitions and
other equipment; and payments to other countries for
logistical assistance.
(10) Past, current, and future cost of government
contractors and private military security firms.
(11) Average annual cost for each troop and combat brigade
deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and 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 activating National Guard
and Reserve forces and paying them on a full-time basis.
(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 United States troops in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
(16) Current and future cost of providing healthcare for
returning veterans. This estimate shall include 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 their service in
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. This
estimate shall also include the cost of lifetime prosthetics
care and treatment for veterans suffering from amputations as
a result of their service in Operation Iraqi Freedom and
Operation Enduring Freedom.
(17) Current and future cost of providing Department of
Veterans Affairs disability benefits for lifetime of
veterans.
(18) Current and future cost of providing survivors'
benefits to survivors of service members.
(19) Cost of bringing troops and equipment home at the end
of the wars, including cost of demobilizing troops,
transporting troops home (including fuel costs), providing
transition services from active duty to veteran status,
transporting equipment, weapons, and munitions (including
fuel costs), and an estimate of the value of equipment which
will be left behind.
(20) Cost to restore the military and military equipment,
including the National Guard and National Guard equipment, to
full strength after the wars.
(21) Cost of the administration's plan to permanently
increase the Army and Marine Corps by 92,000.
(22) Amount of money borrowed to pay for the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and the sources of that money.
(23) Interest on borrowed money, including interest for
money already borrowed and anticipated interest payments on
future borrowing for the war in Iraq and the war in
Afghanistan to the extent all spending associated with the
war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan have been and will be
financed with borrowed money.

Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mr. Murphy of Connecticut

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON WAIVERS UNDER BUY
AMERICAN ACT BY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REQUIRED
TO BE INCLUDED IN ANNUAL REPORT.

Section 812 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136; 10 U.S.C. 2501 note) is
amended in subsection (c)(2)(A) by striking clause (vi) and
inserting the following:
``(v) An itemized list of all waivers granted with respect
to such articles, materials, or supplies under the Buy
American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.), including--
``(I) an analysis of the domestic capacity to supply the
articles, materials, or supplies; and
``(II) an analysis of the reasons for an increase or
decrease in the number of waivers granted from fiscal year to
fiscal year.''.

Amendment No. 50 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place in the bill insert the following:
Whereas, on January 12, 2010, the nation of Haiti was hit
by a magnitude 7.0 earthquake, adversely affecting nearly
3,000,000 people;
Whereas the United States Government has provided millions
of dollars in humanitarian assistance to meet immediate needs
on the ground and plans to give more over the next year;
Whereas the United States Armed Forces have diligently
worked to aid the people of Haiti during their time of need,
providing humanitarian aid and logistical support;
Whereas the United States Armed Forces, civilians, and
charitable groups have led the charge in an effort to
maintain civility and bring some small semblance of hope to
the devastated nation;
Whereas members of the United States Armed Forces serve as
the premier ambassadors of liberty, freedom, and goodwill
when tasked with a humanitarian mission;

[[Page 9674]]

Whereas the generosity of the people of the United States
is known the world over and the United States flag is
universally recognized as a symbol of that generosity; and
Whereas the United States Government has provided more aid
to the nation of Haiti than all other nations combined: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That Congress--
(1) commends the United States Armed Forces for their
commitment to completing their humanitarian mission in Haiti;
and
(2) encourages the President to order the United States
flag to be flown over all military and civilian outposts in
Haiti under the United States' jurisdiction.

Amendment No. 51 Offered by Ms. Edwards of Maryland

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. REQUIREMENT TO INCLUDE EFFECTS ON DOMESTIC JOBS IN
PERIODIC ASSESSMENTS OF DEFENSE CAPABILITY.

Section 2505(b)(4) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after ``title)'' the following: ``,
including the effects on domestic jobs,''.

Amendment No. 57 Offered by Mr. Price of North Carolina

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. EXTENSION OF REGULATIONS ON CONTRACTORS PERFORMING
PRIVATE SECURITY FUNCTIONS.

(a) Extension of Regulations.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense, in coordination
with the Secretary of State, shall issue regulations to
extend and apply the requirements of section 862 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
(Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 2302 note) to additional areas
as designated under paragraph (2) and as listed in paragraph
(3).
(2) Additional areas designated.--The Secretary of Defense
shall designate as additional areas for purposes of this
section any area--
(A) that is an area within a foreign country or an area
covering all or part of more than one foreign country;
(B) that is not an area of combat operations as designated
under subsection (c) of section 862 of such Act; and
(C) in which significant military operations, as designated
by the Secretary, are being carried out by United States
Armed Forces.
(3) Additional areas listed.--In addition to any areas
designated by the Secretary under paragraph (2), the
following areas shall be considered additional areas listed
in this paragraph for purposes of this section:
(A) The Horn of Africa region.
(B) Yemen.
(C) The Philippines.
(D) Haiti.
(b) Extension Timelines.--The Secretary shall prescribe
regulations applicable to the additional areas--
(1) designated under subsection (a)(2), not later than
March 1, 2012; and
(2) listed in subsection (a)(3), not later than March 1,
2011.
(c) Report on Implementation.--Not later than 90 days after
the dates specified in subsection (b), the Secretary of
Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall
submit to Congress a report on the implementation of the
regulations prescribed under this section. The report shall
include--
(1) a complete list of additional areas designated by the
Secretary under subsection (a)(2), and a detailed description
of the criteria used to make the designation;
(2) the total number of contractors performing private
security functions in each additional area designated under
subsection (a)(2) or listed in subjection (a)(3); and
(3) an assessment of the long-term options for reducing the
use of contractors for private security functions, including
the use of Government personnel to provide such functions.
(d) Private Security Functions.--Notwithstanding section
864 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008
(P.L. 110-181), as amended by section 813 of the NDAA for FY
2010 (P.L. 111-84), in this section, the term ``private
security functions'' means activities engaged in by a
contractor as follows:
(1) Guarding of personnel, facilities, or property of a
Federal agency.
(2) Any other activity for which personnel are required to
carry weapons in the performance of their duties.
Page 304, line 15, strike ``and''.
Page 304, line 21, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
Page 304, after line 21, insert the following:
``(C) the desirability and feasibility of including in the
common databases identified under section 861(b)(4)
information about contracts subject to the regulations
required by section 839 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (providing for extending and
applying the requirements of section 862 to additional areas
designated or listed in that section 839).

Amendment No. 50 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia, as Modified

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification to amendment
No. 50.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 452, after line 10, insert the following:

SEC. 1065. SENSE OF CONGRESS ENCOURAGING THE PRESIDENT TO
ORDER THE UNITED STATES FLAG TO BE FLOWN OVER
UNITED STATES MILITARY AND CIVILIAN OUTPOSTS IN
HAITI DURING EARTHQUAKE RELIEF EFFORTS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On January 12, 2010, the nation of Haiti was hit by a
magnitude 7.0 earthquake, adversely affecting nearly
3,000,000 people.
(2) The United States has provided millions of dollars in
humanitarian assistance to meet immediate needs on the ground
and plans to give more over the next year.
(3) The Armed Forces have diligently worked to aid the
people of Haiti during their time of need, providing
humanitarian aid and logistical support.
(4) The Armed Forces, civilians, and charitable groups have
led the charge in an effort to maintain civility and bring
some small semblance of hope to the devastated nation.
(5) Members of the Armed Forces serve as the premier
ambassadors of liberty, freedom, and goodwill when tasked
with a humanitarian mission.
(6) The generosity of the people of the United States is
known the world over and the United States flag is
universally recognized as a symbol of that generosity.
(7) The United States has provided more aid to the nation
of Haiti than all other nations combined.
(b) Sense of Congress.--The Congress--
(1) commends the Armed Forces for their commitment to
completing their humanitarian mission in Haiti; and
(2) encourages the President to order the United States
flag to be flown over all military and civilian outposts in
Haiti under United States jurisdiction.

Mr. McKEON (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that we dispense with the reading.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.

{time} 1915

[[Page 9675]]

and we have lost over 4,400 American lives in Iraq and over 1,060 lives
in Afghanistan. Because of this immense cost, the American people
deserve to have an honest estimate about how much these wars are going
to cost us over the long term. This is especially critical on the issue
of future health care costs.
My amendment addresses an important issue. This goes back to an
Oversight Subcommittee hearing we had after the Walter Reed Building 18
fiasco in 2007. At that hearing, retired Lieutenant General Chip
Roadman, a former Air Force surgeon general and a member of the
Independent Review Group, told me, ``We recognize the cost is immense,
and it is our moral obligation to address those issues.''
In the Independent Review Group report, the four signature injuries
of these wars were identified. Posttraumatic stress disorder, traumatic
brain injury, increased survival of severe burns, and traumatic
amputations are the four signature wounds. The recovery process for
these signature wounds ``can take months or years and must accommodate
recurring delayed manifestations of symptoms, extended rehabilitation
and all the life complications that emerge over time from such
trauma.'' We don't have a good understanding today of how much it is
going to cost to take care of these wounded veterans, and we need to
acknowledge the true cost.
Already, over 1,300 servicemembers have suffered amputations as a
result of their service in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than 243,000 have
been treated for mental health conditions. Over 129,000 have been
diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder. These numbers will only
continue to grow. We also know, according to the U.S. Life Tables, Mr.
Chairman, the life expectancy of an 18- to 19-year-old male is 58
years. That means almost 60 years of treatment and care for many of
these wounded veterans. That is why we need an honest and accurate
assessment of the true cost of the war.
My amendment requires the President to estimate the number of
veterans expected to suffer from these signature wounds and the cost it
is going to take to treat them and to provide them with the care they
deserve.
That is why this amendment is a commonsense, transparent requirement.
It is long overdue, and it is going to give the American taxpayers, who
are footing the bill for these deserving veterans, a better idea of
what the long-term cost is actually going to be. That is why I urge
everyone to support it.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment that is
included in this en bloc amendment. It includes my language, which
encourages the President of the United States to order that the U.S.
flag be flown at the American outpost in Haiti. It is to be flown at
this outpost as we continue to assist in our earthquake relief.
I would like to thank Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon for
their hard work on this bill and for including my amendment in this en
bloc package.
As the United States extends a helping hand to our neighbor nation of
Haiti, I am disheartened that the President has decided that our
service men and women should not work in their outpost under the
American flag and that he has ordered that the American flag cease to
fly over that outpost.
The American flag is a symbol that our men and women in uniform are
promoting the American spirit of rebuilding hope, prosperity, and
opportunity. As a marine and naval medical officer, I understand that
it is critical for morale that our military should work under the
American flag, especially when our presence in a foreign country is
under peaceful conditions.
As a sign of respect and support for the selfless efforts of the
service men and women, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I request that my full statement be entered into the
Record.
Mr. Chair, I would like to thank Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member
McKeon for their hard work on this critical bill, which is the life-
blood for those defending our freedoms at home and abroad. And thank
you gentlemen, for allowing me to offer this amendment before the
House.
I rise today in support of my amendment which encourages the
President to order the flag of the United States to be flown over all
military and civilian outposts in Haiti during earthquake relief
efforts.
As Memorial Day approaches, Americans will be honoring those brave
souls who, as Abraham Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address, ``gave
the last full measure of devotion'' to our nation, by flying the
American Flag at their homes and places of business.
However, there is one place where the flag will not be waving, and
that is in the Republic of Haiti, on American outposts where our
servicemen and women are leading humanitarian efforts to aid those
adversely effected by the magnitude 7 earthquake that devastated the
island nation.
The President has decided that the stars and stripes would be viewed
with disdain in Haiti. That our servicemen and women providing basic
essentials would be viewed as an occupying force if they did it under
our flag. So he has ordered the Department of Defense not to fly our
flag in Haiti, for fear of being viewed unfavorably by the rest of the
world.
I strongly disagree with the President, and I believe he could not be
more wrong about how the world views the United States and our flag. I
submit that every member of this body will agree with me when I say
that when tasked with a mission of mercy, there are no better
ambassadors for the United States than our men and women in uniform. In
Berlin after World War II, and most recently in places like The
Philippines, Bolivia, Djibouti, and Colombia, it has been our service-
members who have delivered hope to those who have none.
In all these places our Flag has flown proudly over these merchants
of mercy. The situation is no different in Haiti, our servicemen and
women are still giving hope to an impoverished people, they should be
allowed to do this under the symbol that embodies all that we hold
dear.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment that honors our
military and their efforts in Haiti, and encourages the President to
allow them to serve under our proud flag.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time remaining on
both sides?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 5\1/2\ minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from California has 8\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I am pleased to yield 3
minutes to a gentleman who is an Appropriations subcommittee chairman
and who has taken the lead on making sure that the use of private
contractors is done properly, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Price).
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of an amendment extending
oversight and accountability for security contractors overseas, for
contractors performing security functions, as one element of this en
bloc amendment.
The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) joins me in this
effort, and I also want to acknowledge the leadership of other Members,
especially that of Ms. Schakowsky, in this critical area of defense
policy.
This amendment is brief and straightforward. It would simply extend a
section of the fiscal year 2008 defense authorization bill that
strengthened the oversight of private security contractors in Iraq and
Afghanistan to additional areas in which there is or could be a
significant security contractor presence.
I don't need to recount here, Mr. Chairman, the arguments in favor of
greater oversight and accountability for armed contractors,
particularly those operating in areas in which our military is
operating. The high-profile incidents of contractor misconduct that
have punctuated our campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan should speak for
themselves.
In responding to these incidents, Congress has come a long way toward
improving Federal management and oversight of private security
contractors, most notably through several important reforms, including
those in the fiscal 2008 defense authorization bill. These reforms,
many of which were drawn from my broader contractor accountability
legislation, have been

[[Page 9676]]

credited with improving both the operational capabilities of the Armed
Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and Congress' ability to conduct
effective oversight of private security contractors.
As our military faces new and emerging threats in other areas of the
world, it is critical that these effective oversight measures be
maintained and extended. This amendment seeks to do just that by
extending several of the key reforms enacted in 2008 to additional
areas with significant contractor presence. The amendment lists four
such areas by name, but its broader intent is to give the Defense
Department, the State Department, and USAID the tools and authority
they need to apply these coordination and oversight mechanisms to any
area in which our military is conducting significant operations.
I want to thank Chairman Skelton, Ranking Member McKeon and the Armed
Services Committee for their leadership in drafting this legislation as
well as for their support and cooperation in the effort to improve
transparency and accountability in the use of contractors.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure at this point to yield 1
minute to a gentleman who has been in the forefront of trying to
promote American jobs through this bill, the gentleman from Connecticut
(Mr. Murphy).
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Chew on this fact.
In 2007, there were 14,000 waivers granted to the Buy American law by
DOD. One year later, in 2008, that number jumped to 65,000. That's a 1-
year 450 percent increase in Buy American waivers that likely cost tens
of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of U.S. manufactured jobs.
That's why the amendments being offered in this block by myself, by
Representative Edwards, and by Representative Lipinski are so
important, because we need to start shining a light on this outrageous
flow of U.S. defense jobs overseas.
My amendment would specifically require DOD to explain large
increases in waiver approvals from one year to the next, and it would
require the DOD to explain if they even looked for American-made
products before they granted these waivers. We want to grow American
manufacturing. We need to start with the billions and billions of
American taxpayer dollars spent at the Department of Defense.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my friend and
colleague, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).
Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I want to thank especially Chairman Skelton and the House Armed
Services Committee for their leadership on this issue and for their
continued commitment to what it takes for our servicemembers and their
families.
I want to thank most especially my colleagues, Representatives
Lipinski from Illinois and Chris Murphy from Connecticut, for working
with us, for working together to advance provisions that bolster
domestic job creation. There are no better advocates for domestic job
growth than these two gentlemen.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge a ``yes'' vote on this en bloc
amendment as well as on the underlying legislation.
Most specifically, the amendment that I led directs the Department of
Defense to start accounting for the domestic employment impact of major
defense acquisition programs. With the DOD's spending billions of
dollars a year, it is necessary that we are able to analyze the impact
of this spending on our economy.
The amendments led by my two colleagues are as equally important.
They seek to ensure that our domestic companies are included on
procurement opportunities for use by the DOD overseas. The amendments
also strengthen transparency of the Buy American waiver process. Taken
together, these provisions close major loopholes and fix major
deficiencies.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on this en bloc amendment.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, at this point, I am privileged to yield 1
minute to another champion of growth of American jobs here from the
runner-up city in this year's Stanley Cup finals, the gentleman from
Chicago, Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
Mr. LIPINSKI. I would like to commend Chairman Skelton and Ranking
Member McKeon for all of their work on this bill and for our troops.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of three Buy American
amendments that I've offered, I along with Ms. Donna Edwards and Mr.
Chris Murphy. These amendments would bolster national security, and
they would create American jobs--two critical goals for America.
In this recession, the loss of our manufacturing base to countries
such as China has only sped up. This is bad enough when it involves
consumer goods, but depending on foreign companies to supply America's
military weakens our national security.
When the Buy American Act was first passed in 1933, it exempted goods
used abroad because of shipping time and expense, but that has changed,
and it is time American manufacturers competed for these contracts. In
2008, the DOD spent over $8 billion on products used abroad. My
amendment would give U.S. companies a chance to compete by requiring
the DOD to solicit bids from American suppliers.
This and the other Buy American amendments will strengthen our
national security and will create American jobs. I urge my colleagues
to support these amendments, the en bloc amendments.
Go, Hawks.

{time} 1930

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
It has been a while since I read any of these letters. Maybe some
people haven't heard of these letters yet, so I would like to read
them. We are only given 5 minutes to discuss Don't Ask, Don't Tell, so
we have to talk about it when we get an opportunity, because this is
something that I think is going to affect the 2.5 million people in the
military plus their families. So we have very strong feelings about
this. It is unfortunate that the majority has only given us 5 minutes
in which to express our views and have a chance to let the people of
America know what is happening here.
This is a letter from Secretary Gates that was written April 30, and
then 2 days ago he reaffirmed his stand, that he still stands by what
he wrote to Chairman Skelton:
``Dear Mr. Chairman, I am writing in response to your letter of April
28th requesting my views on the advisability of legislative action.''
So he is talking about the possibility that the Murphy amendment
would be made in order for this legislation taken to repeal the so-
called Don't Ask, Don't Tell statute prior to the completion of the
Department of Defense review of this matter.
``I believe in the strongest possible terms that the Department must,
prior to any legislative action, be allowed the opportunity to conduct
a thorough, objective, and systematic assessment of the impact of such
a policy change, develop an attentive, comprehensive plan, and provide
the President and the Congress with the results of this effort in order
to ensure that this step is taken in the most informed and effective
manner.
``A critical element of this effort is the need to systematically
engage our forces, their families, and the broader military community
throughout this process. Our military must be afforded the opportunity
to inform us of their concerns, insights, and suggestions if we are to
carry out this change successfully.
``Therefore, I strongly oppose any legislation that seeks to change
this policy prior to the completion of this vital assessment process.
Further, I hope Congress will not do so, as it would send a very
damaging message to our men and women in uniform that in essence their
views, concerns, and perspectives do not matter on an issue

[[Page 9677]]

with such direct impact and consequence for them and their families.''
Signed by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, and
Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense.
May I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 4\1/2\ minutes
remaining; the gentleman from New Jersey has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I will continue to yield myself such time
as I may consume.
What the Secretary is saying here is there was a process set in
place. The President, in the State of the Union, said he wanted the
repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell by the end of this year. The Secretary,
in response, set up a process whereby the military could be contacted,
their opinions could be heard, the opinions of all of them that are
contacted could be taken under advisement by the Chairman, by each of
the Chiefs. They could give their best military advice to the
Secretary, which he could then give to the Congress and to the
President as to how we proceed on this matter.
That was supposed to be done before December of this year. They are
on track to do it. This month, a company was hired by competitive bid
to go into the field to interview people, which they will do with
various methods, to give us a comprehensive answer as to what people
feel about this. They will survey 350,000 people.
Now, if this passes tonight, if this amendment passes, I know the
amendment says nothing will take place prior to that study being handed
in, but we all know, it is like we say we are going to talk to you, but
we have already made the decision. So, go ahead, tell us whatever you
want. It is like they will know that their opinions really don't matter
because the vote has already taken place, the decision has already been
made, and they are left out of the loop.
As the Chiefs of the various services told me, this disrespects the
military, and it should not be done. Each of them have stated on the
phone to me and in letters that this should not be done.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, through the Chair I would say to my friend
from California, we have only Mr. Kennedy left to speak, and I believe
we have the right to close on this. So does the gentleman intend to
speak again?
Mr. McKEON. How much time do I have left?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I would be happy to yield 1 minute to my good friend from
Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy).
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. McKeon and obviously
Mr. Andrews for their great stewardship of this important legislation
and say the real Don't Ask, Don't Tell question that we have for our
military is don't ask how many antidepressants you are on because this
Nation had to call you up, not once, not twice, but three and four
times.
The real Don't Ask, Don't Tell question is don't ask how many parents
or how many wives are at home waiting with their children, worried
about their families getting called up over and over and over again
because we won't up the standing military so that we don't have to
overextend these tours of duty over and over and over again, creating
the largest generation of military men and women who are going to be
permanently scarred because of their overextension of service of duty.
That is the real Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
The Don't Ask, Don't Tell is what is the long-term cost to this
country, mental health-wise, for this terrible neglect of our men and
women in uniform.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman from Rhode Island has
expired.
Mr. ANDREWS. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.
Mr. KENNEDY. I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey, because
one more thing you won't hear the answer to is that 72 percent of the
health care for veterans is going to be the private insurance market,
and thanks to this gentleman, Mr. Andrews, and many others, who led the
way for the private insurance market covering, with no preexisting
condition, no annual or lifetime caps, those 72 percent of veterans out
there today are going to have their cognitive neurological disorders,
the traumatic brain injury, covered, covered, covered by the private
insurance system, thanks to this gentleman from New Jersey, Mr.
Andrews, and his colleagues on the Democratic side.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate my friend from Rhode Island's
passion, and I share that with him. I have very deep concerns about the
military. They have been asked over and over again, and they have
responded over and over and over again. I have been to funerals and I
have looked into the parents' eyes and talked to them. I also know in
war there are no unwounded, as somebody more eloquent than I stated,
and that is one of the tragedies.
The other tragedy is what happened on 9/11, where we were attacked,
and now we have been engaged in this worldwide war on terrorism. It is
not something we asked for. It is just something that our Nation has
responded from the days of the creation of this Nation, when the men
rode to the sound of the guns, when they died at Valley Forge, frozen
to death, starved to death. They have sacrificed for years.
I am saying, give them an opportunity to have their say, to follow
through with the plan that has been set.
I yield back my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 30 seconds.
Mr. ANDREWS. I thank the gentleman from California for yielding the
time to the gentleman from Rhode Island, and I would say, of course we
recognize our duty to listen to those who serve in uniform. We also
recognize our duty to raise their pay, to give them the tools and
weapons necessary to do their job, to support their families, and to
give them the strategy that works to defend this country. This bill
does all of those things. We should support the bill and support the en
bloc amendment before the body.
I yield back the balance of our time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.

Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mr. McMahon

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 62
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. McMAHON. 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:

Amendment No. 62 offered by Mr. McMahon:
Page 284, after line 22, insert the following:

SEC. 727. SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE CONGRESSIONALLY-MANDATED RECOMMENDATIONS OF
THE INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE STUDY.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Section 717 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 1073
note) directed the Secretary of Defense to enter into a
contract with the Institute of Medicine of the National
Academy of Sciences to conduct a study and make
recommendations regarding the credentials, preparation, and
training of licensed mental health counselors.
(2) In the study, the Institute of Medicine of the National
Academy of Sciences recommends permitting counselors to
practice independently under the TRICARE program.
(3) In addition, the Institute of Medicine of the National
Academy of Sciences recommends that TRICARE implement a
comprehensive quality management system for all of its mental
health professionals.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Secretary of Defense should implement the requirements of
subsection (a) of such section 717 by not later than December
31, 2010, because such implementation will increase the
urgently needed mental health staff of the Department of
Defense and ensure that members of the Armed Forces will
receive timely and confidential

[[Page 9678]]

post-deployment screenings with a mental health professional.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. McMahon) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
Mr. McMAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the House Committee on Armed Services, led by
the great gentleman from Missouri, for recognizing the significance of
the increasing suicide rates in our armed services and the need to
increase mental health professionals to combat this disturbing trend. I
would also like to thank my colleagues, Congressman Tom Rooney, Harry
Teague and Ben Lujan for their partnership with me on this amendment
and on veterans' mental health issues we have tackled in a very
bipartisan fashion.
Mr. Chairman, serving in the military can have lingering effects on
servicemembers and the families that support them. For this reason, the
mental health care needs of the TRICARE population are large and
diverse, requiring a skilled group of professionals to diagnose and
treat a variety of disorders. Unfortunately, these professionals do not
currently exist, and the mental health needs of our servicemen and -
women are, quite frankly, not being met.
But Congress can help increase this pool by implementing the
recommendations of the congressionally mandated Institute of Medicine
study, which makes recommendations for permitting counselors to
practice independently under the TRICARE program. In addition, the
committee recommends that TRICARE implement a comprehensive quality
management system for all its mental health professionals.
Under current TRICARE rules, mental health counselors are required to
practice under a physician's supervision, and their patients must be
referred to them by a physician in order for their services to be
eligible for reimbursement. This requirement distinguishes them from
other mental health professionals who practice without such
restrictions.
This amendment would encourage the Secretary of Defense to implement
these goals by the end of the year and to increase mental health
professionals available to our men and women in uniform. We need to
provide the coverage, but we also need to provide the professionals who
can provide the care.
We see in so many cases the high rates of suicides of our returning
warriors, and we must address this. Eventually, this increase will
reduce the stigma of seeking mental health treatment and reduce the
aberrantly high levels of suicide in the armed services, as I
mentioned.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I don't oppose the amendment, but I rise to
claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Again, if we had been given the time to discuss Don't Ask, Don't
Tell, we could have spent more time talking about all of the good
things in the bill. But only having 5 minutes to discuss that, we have
to use whatever time we can to explain to people what is going on.
When I talked to members of the Joint Chiefs a couple of days ago,
one of them said one of the reasons that he opposes doing anything
right now in opposition to the plan that was set up earlier this year
was because, he says, I am here. I understand the innuendoes around the
Hill. I understand the process of the amendment, and I understand that
it doesn't really kick in until later. But, he said, the people in the
field, the service people that we promised to hear from before we take
action, don't understand that.

{time} 1945

And he said, the headline will read, Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repealed.
Well, they don't even have to wait for us. The Senate already did it.
The breaking news alert on Fox News is: ``The Senate Armed Services
Committee votes to repeal military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy on
gays.'' And then if we follow through and do the same thing tonight
with the Murphy amendment, that will be the headline. So the young men
and women in Afghanistan, when they're watching on Fox News, that's
what they're seeing right now.
So then when we do get around to this company that we hired to make
this survey to reach out to 350,000 of our servicepeople and their
families, when they hear the question they're going to say, what,
you're asking us now, after the decision?
What kind of respect is that to show to our young men and women who
are out there laying their life on the line?
They signed a contract. They joined the military. They're an all-
volunteer force. And they signed under certain circumstances, and now
those are going to be changed without any input from them.
Oh, yeah. We're going to follow through with the charade. We will
have the survey, it will be turned in in December, but the die is
already cast if that amendment passes tonight. And I don't think that
is the way that we should be treating our military, especially the
people on this committee.
Our responsibility is to look out for those young men and young women
that are out there defending us and defending freedom around the world.
And the lack of respect to give them the opportunity to have input on
this very important issue, one that we've lived with now for 17 years,
that has to be changed now, just doesn't make sense.
A Member earlier this evening talked about common sense and the lack
of it that we see around here. And one of the reasons why we're given
an 18 percent vote of approval from the American people, because we
show a lack of common sense, we show a lack of respect. This amendment
will show a lack of respect to the young men and young women in uniform
and their families.
Again, let me read from Admiral Roughead's letter, the admiral, he's
the Chief of Naval Operations.
He says, I share the view of Secretary Gates that the best approach
would be to complete the Department of Defense review before there is
any legislation to change the law. My concern is that legislation
changes at this point, regardless of the precise language used in
this--and this amendment was written very carefully--may cause
confusion on the status of the law in the fleet and disrupt the review
process itself by leading sailors to question whether their input
matters.
And he is right on target.
Obtaining the views and opinions of the force and assessing them in
the light of the issues involved will be complicated by a shifting
legislative backdrop and its associated debate.
I plead with you to give the time necessary to have the evaluation,
to follow the process that's been set.
What are we afraid of?
Is something going to happen that you think is going to change this
process?
Why not let them have their input? Why not follow through with the
process that was set by the Secretary?
The company that's been hired to go out and reach out to these
350,000 of our 2.5 million serving, let's follow through with the
process; let's respect our young men and women in uniform and follow
through with the process that has been determined.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McMAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remainder of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I must apologize to my good friend, the gentleman from
California, because perhaps my New York accent wasn't, my pronunciation
wasn't clear enough, or perhaps I did not speak loudly enough.
The amendment that I am proposing seeks to provide to our returning
warriors when they come home and when they continue their lives here in
this country, to get the mental health treatment that they need that
they cannot currently have.

[[Page 9679]]

Mr. Chairman, the issue that I spoke to in my remarks dealt with a
very important issue, and that is how to make sure that this country
provides the mental health services for our returning warriors. I did
not think that that issue would be one that would be picked up, in my
eloquence, by Fox News. I'm not quite sure how it dealt with the other
issues, but I just want to be clear, and I want the record to be clear
that I was speaking to amendment 62, which is, I think, a very
important issue, a very important issue that everyone in this body
addresses and deals with, and that is providing adequate mental health
services for our returning warriors. That's all I spoke to.
That being said, at this time, I yield the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. McMahon).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 7 Offered by Mr. Skelton

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, I offer
amendments en bloc No. 7.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 7 offered by Mr. Skelton consisting of
amendments numbered 38, 49, 53, 60, 72, 73, and 75 printed in House
Report 111-498:

Amendment No. 38 Offered by Ms. Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 415, after line 25, insert the following:

SEC. 1047. REQUIRED REPORTS CONCERNING BOMBER MODERNIZATION,
SUSTAINMENT, AND RECAPITALIZATION EFFORTS IN
SUPPORT OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY.

(a) Air Force Report.--
(1) Report required.--Not later than 360 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air
Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees,
the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, and the
Comptroller General of the United States a report that
includes--
(A) a discussion of the cost, schedule, and performance of
all currently planned efforts to modernize and keep viable
the existing B-1, B-2, and B-52 bomber fleets and a
discussion of the forecasted service-life and all sustainment
challenges that the Secretary of the Air Force may confront
in keeping those platforms viable until the retirement of
such aircraft;
(B) a discussion, presented in a comparison and contrast
type format, of the scope of the 2007 Next-Generation Long
Range Strike Analysis of Alternatives guidance and subsequent
Analysis of Alternatives report tasked by the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics in the
September 11, 2006, Acquisition Decision Memorandum, as
compared to the scope and directed guidance of the year 2010
Long Range Strike Study effort currently being conducted by
the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Office of
the Secretary of Defense's Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation Office;
(C) a discussion of an objectivity and sufficiency review
of the final report issued subsequent to the 2010 Long Range
Strike study effort currently being conducted by the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Office of the
Secretary of Defense's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation
Office;
(D) a discussion of the progress of efforts to field a next
generation long-range strike platform, including a review
of--
(i) the next generation long-range strike requirements
development and validation;
(ii) the threshold and objective key performance
parameters;
(iii) the acquisition strategy, the acquisition oversight
strategy, projected life-cycle costs, the cost-risk analysis,
the technology readiness levels of planned capabilities; and
(iv) the development, testing, production and fielding
timelines;
(E) a discussion of the costs, development, testing,
fielding and operational employment challenges, capability
gaps, limitations and shortfalls of the Secretary of
Defense's plan to field a long-range, penetrating,
survivable, persistent and enduring ``family of systems'' as
compared to the development, testing, fielding and
operational employment of a singular platform that
encompasses all the required aforementioned characteristics;
and
(F) a discussion of the planning efforts for developing and
fielding a transformational long-range strike capability in
the 2035 timeframe.
(2) Preparation of report.--The report under paragraph (1)
shall be prepared by the Institute for Defense Analyses and
submitted to the Secretary of the Air Force for submittal by
the Secretary in accordance with that paragraph.
(b) Cost Analysis and Program Evaluation Report.--The
Director of the Cost Analysis and Program Evaluation of the
Office of the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees, the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office, and the Comptroller General of
the United States a report that includes--
(1) the assumptions and estimated life-cycle costs of the
Department's long-range, penetrating, survivable, persistent,
and enduring ``family of systems'' platforms; and
(2) the assumptions and estimated life-cycle costs of the
Next Generation Platform program, as planned and approved by
the Secretary of Defense, prior to the cancellation of the
program on April 6, 2009.
(c) CBO Report.--Not later than 360 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Congressional Budget Office
shall submit to the congressional defense committees and to
the Comptroller General of the United States a report that
includes--
(1) a life-cycle-cost analysis of the costs of modernizing
and sustaining the current fleet of B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers
to meet future long-range strike requirements compared to the
costs of development, testing, fielding, and operational
employment of a singular Next Generation Bomber platform to
replace the existing fleet of B-1, B-2 and B-52 platforms;
(2) a life-cycle-cost analysis of the costs of the
Secretary of Defense's plan to field a long-range,
penetrating, survivable, persistent, and enduring ``family of
systems'' compared to the costs of developing, testing,
fielding and operational employment of a singular Next
Generation Bomber platform;
(3) a life-cycle-cost analysis of the costs the Secretary
of Defense's plan to field a long-range, penetrating,
survivable, persistent and enduring ``family of systems''
compared to the costs of modernizing and sustaining the
current fleet of B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers to meet future
long-range strike requirements; and
(4) the results of an objectivity and sufficiency review of
the cost analysis described in subsection (b)(1).
(d) Access to Programmatic Information.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary
of the Air Force shall provide prompt access to programmatic
information requested by agency personnel for the purpose of
producing a report required under this section, including any
and all classified information pertaining to the Department's
``family of systems'' programs.
(2) Prompt access defined.--For purposes of paragraph (1),
the term ``prompt access'' means access provided not later
than 15 business days after receiving a request.

Amendment No. 49 Offered by Mr. Childers of Mississippi

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 528, after line 17, insert the following:

SEC. 1523. REPORT ON MINE RESISTANT AMBUSH PROTECTED
VEHICLES.

(a) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report on the
procurement of mine resistant ambush protected vehicles.
(b) Matters Included.--The report under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) An evaluation of potential cost benefits and
manufacturing efficiencies with respect to mine resistant
ambush protected vehicles.
(2) An evaluation of the advisability and feasibility of
sustained low-level production of mine resistant ambush
protected vehicles across the industrial base as part of a
long-term sustainment fleet integration strategy.

Amendment No. 53 Offered by Mr. Foster of Illinois

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 452, after line 10, insert the following:

SEC. 1065. STUDY ON OPTIMAL BALANCE OF MANNED AND UNMANNED
AERIAL VEHICLE CAPABILITY.

(a) Study.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
commission a study by an independent, non-profit organization
on the optimal balance between manned and unmanned aerial
vehicle forces of the Armed Forces.
(2) Selection.--The independent, non-profit organization
selected for the study under paragraph (1) shall be qualified
on the basis of having performed work in the fields of
national security and combat systems.
(b) Matters Included.--The study under subsection (a) shall
include the following:
(1) With respect to each military department (but in
particular the Air Force), an assessment of the feasibility
and desirability of a more rapid transition from manned to
unmanned vehicles for a range of operations, including combat
operations.
(2) An evaluation of the current ability of each military
department to resist attacks mounted by foreign militaries
with significant investments in research and development and
deployment of unmanned combat drones, including an assessment
of each military department's ability to defend against--
(A) a large enemy force of unmanned aerial vehicles; and
(B) any other relevant unmanned scenario the Secretary
determines appropriate.

[[Page 9680]]

(3) An analysis of--
(A) current and future capabilities of foreign militaries
in developing and deploying unmanned systems; and
(B) vulnerabilities to drone systems revealed in past war
games and other strategy materials.
(4) Conclusions on the matters described in paragraphs (1)
through (3) and what the independent, non-profit organization
conducting the study determines is the optimal balance of
investment in development and deployment of manned versus
unmanned platforms.
(c) Report.--Not later than December 1, 2011, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a
report that includes the study under subsection (a).
(d) Form.--
(1) Study.--The study under subsection (a) shall include a
classified annex with respect to the matters described in
subsection (b)(3).
(2) Report.--The report under subsection (c) may include a
classified annex.

Amendment No. 60 Offered by Mr. Lujan of New Mexico

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 679, after line 25, insert the following:

SEC. 3115. ENHANCING PRIVATE-SECTOR EMPLOYMENT THROUGH
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ACTIVITIES.

(a) In General.--The Administrator for Nuclear Security
shall encourage technology transfer activities at the
national security laboratories (as defined in section 3281 of
the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (50 U.S.C.
2471)) that lead to the creation of new private-sector
employment opportunities.
(b) Reports.--Not later than January 31 of each year, the
Administrator shall submit to Congress a report detailing the
number of new private-sector employment opportunities created
as a result of the previous years' technology transfer
activities at each national security laboratory.

Amendment No. 72 Offered by Mr. Hinchey of New York

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. PROCUREMENT OF PHOTOVOLTAIC DEVICES.

(a) Contract Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that each contract awarded by the Department of
Defense that includes the procurement of photovoltaic
devices, including contracts described in subsection (b),
includes a provision requiring the photovoltaic devices to
comply with the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.).
(b) Contracts Described.--The contracts described in this
subsection include, but are not limited to, energy savings
performance contracts, utility service contracts, land
leases, and private housing contracts.
(c) Definition of Photovoltaic Devices.--In this section,
the term ``photovoltaic devices'' means devices that convert
light directly into electricity through a solid-state,
semiconductor process.

Amendment No. 73 Offered by Mr. Hinchey of New York

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 839. REQUIREMENT FOR CONTRACTS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN
TO USE EMPLOYEES AND NOT INDEPENDENT
CONTRACTORS FOR PRIVATE SECURITY SERVICES.

(a) Requirement.--Any contract in Iraq or Afghanistan for
the procurement of private security services shall contain a
requirement that, in the case of any contractor using
individuals who are United States citizens and required to
have a United States security clearance to perform private
security services under the contract, the contractor shall
use employees and not independent contractors for the
provision of such services.
(b) Contract in Iraq or Afghanistan.--In this section, the
term ``contract in Iraq or Afghanistan'' means a contract
with the Department of Defense, the Department of State, or
the United States Agency for International Development, a
subcontract at any tier issued under such a contract, or a
task order or delivery order at any tier issued under such a
contract (including a contract, subcontract, or task order or
delivery order issued by another Government agency for the
Department of Defense, the Department of State, or the United
States Agency for International Development), if the
contract, subcontract, or task order or delivery order
involves work performed in Iraq or Afghanistan for a period
longer than 14 days.
(c) Private Security Services.--In this section, the term
``private security services'' means activities engaged in by
a contractor under a contract in Iraq or Afghanistan and
includes--
(1) guarding of personnel, facilities, or property of a
Federal agency, the contractor or subcontractor, or a third
party;
(2) any other activity for which personnel are required to
carry weapons in the performance of their duties; and
(3) training in any activity covered by paragraph (1) or
(2).
(d) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of State, or the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development may waive the
requirement in subsection (a) with respect to a contract of
the Department of Defense, the Department of State, or the
United States Agency for International Development,
respectively, if the Secretary concerned or the
Administrator--
(1) determines in writing that a waiver is necessary in the
interests of national security; and
(2) submits to Congress a notification of such waiver.

Amendment No. 75 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

SEC. 12XX. REQUIREMENT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES TO COUNTER VIOLENT EXTREMISM
IN AFRICA.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, shall monitor and evaluate the
impact of United States Africa Command (USAFRICOM) Combined
Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa's (CJTF-HOA) activities to
counter violent extremism in Africa, including civil affairs,
psychological operations, humanitarian assistance, and
operations to strengthen the capacity of partner nations.
(b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the
following:
(1) An evaluation of the impact of CJTF-HOA's activities
described in subsection (a) to advance United States security
objectives in the Horn of Africa, including the extent to
which CJTF-HOA's activities--
(A) disrupt or deny terrorist networks;
(B) combat violent extremist ideology;
(C) are aligned with USAFRICOM's mission; and
(D) complement programs conducted by the United States
Agency for International Development.
(2) USAFRICOM's efforts to monitor and evaluate the impact
of CJTF-HOA's activities described in subsection (a),
including--
(A) the means by which CJTF-HOA follows up on such
activities to evaluate the effectiveness of such activities;
(B) USAFRICOM's specific assessments of CJTF-HOA's
activities; and
(C) a description of plans by the Secretary of Defense to
make permanent CJTF-HOA's presence in Djibouti.
(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.

[[Page 9681]]

This amendment is a commonsense approach to ensuring that, as the
Department makes key investments in renewable energy, American
manufacturing jobs are supported and increased.
I urge the support of my colleagues, and I express my deep gratitude
to Chairman Skelton for his steadfast support for our national defense.
My second amendment will help strengthen our Nation's oversight over
armed security contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan and eliminate a tax
loophole that has been used by the defense contractor Blackwater. For
too long, the private armies of defense contractors have undermined our
Nation's mission in Afghanistan and Iraq through the conduct of their
personnel.
The key to American success is the ability of U.S. forces to win
support from the Afghan and Iraqi people, many of whom do not
distinguish between armed security contractors and the U.S. military.
For this reason, every time a contractor kills or injures innocent
civilians, the very people we seek to protect, it is a devastating blow
to our country's strategy to protect the local population.
Let us recall one example. On May 5 of last year, two independent
contractors working for Paravant, a Blackwater front company, fired
their weapons, killing two Afghan civilians and wounding a third.
Adding insult to injury by classifying workers in Iraq as independent
contractors rather than employees, Blackwater appears to have avoided
at least $31 million in employment-related taxes.
This amendment, sponsored by myself and Schakowsky and Moran, is an
amendment that requires armed private security contractors who are
using U.S. citizens in Iraq or Afghanistan to hire those individuals as
direct employees rather than independent contractors. The amendment is
narrow and it is focused. It applies only to U.S. citizens who are
required to have security clearances for armed security contracts in
Iraq or Afghanistan. The amendment also contains a national security
waiver provision.
This amendment will help close the door on a tax loophole and ensure
contractors have full responsibility and better oversight over
employees. I urge support for this amendment, and I again thank
Chairman Skelton for his work on this bill and deep commitment to the
men and women of the United States military.
Mr. McKEON. I will reserve my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my friend, the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman.
I want to speak specifically to this amendment that addresses a
duplicitous employment practice by private security contractors in
Afghanistan. Last year, four employees of Paravant, a Blackwater
subsidiary, were involved in a shooting incident where a number of
Afghan civilians, one was killed, others were wounded. A subsequent
investigation found that Paravant employees were not classified as
employees but were, instead, classified as independent contractors.
Then it was revealed that Paravant classified them as independent
contractors in order to avoid taking responsibility for their actions.
Raytheon, who was the main contractor on the Afghan Border Police
contract, attempted to sever ties with them, but they were rebuffed
because this company claimed to have no responsibility for or oversight
over the four in question, even though they had hired them and were
paying for them. This can't be permitted. There has to be
responsibility for private contractors. They can't be free agents doing
what they want over there. They are recognized as working for the
American Government. We need to make employers responsible for their
employees.
This is a duplicitous method of avoiding taxes, but most importantly,
direct responsibility for the actions of private security contractors.
It needs to be ended. And I support the other amendments that address
the accountability and oversight over private security contractors.
Mr. McKEON. May I inquire of the chairwoman what the time is
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR (Ms. McCollum). The gentleman from Missouri has 4\1/
2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from California has 10 minutes
remaining.

{time} 2000

Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairwoman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Again, I am sorry that we weren't given more time to debate Don't
Ask, Don't Tell, but in using the time that I do have, I would like to
read a couple more letters into the Record. This first one is from the
American Legion, from the national commander, and this is a letter that
he sent to President Obama.
``Dear Mr. President, The American Legion is concerned about reports
that you might seek an amendment in Congress which would end the
military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy,'' which amendment will be
before us shortly this evening.
``As the Nation's largest wartime veterans organization, we feel
strongly that the current policy has served the U.S. military well for
17 years and it would not be wise to make a major cultural change in
the middle of two wars and with tension rising on the Korean Peninsula.
Moreover, the Department of Defense has already directed a study on the
policy, and it would be premature to act before the commission
conducting the study releases its finding. It defies logic.''
I will put that letter in the Record.

The American Legion,
Indianapolis, IN, May 25, 2010.
Hon. President Barack Obama,
The White House,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President, The American Legion is concerned about
reports that you might seek an amendment in Congress which
would end the military's ``don't ask, don't tell'' (DADT)
policy.
As the nation's largest wartime veterans organization, we
feel strongly that the current policy has served the U.S.
military well for 17 years and it would not be wise to make a
major cultural change in the middle of two wars and with
tension rising on the Korean peninsula. Moreover, the
Department of Defense has already directed a study on the
policy and it would be premature to act before the commission
conducting the study releases its findings. It defies logic.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, who
sat on the committee when DADT was implemented, opposes its
repeal. Additionally, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James
Conway and Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey have also
voiced concerns about the impact such a change would have on
the current forte structure.
The military is a unique environment, in which DADT has
worked well without diminishing our nation's war-fighting
capability. Indeed, the core purpose of our military is to
fight and win our nation's wars. We believe that repealing
the DADT policy at this time may well be detrimental to the
security of our nation. Therefore, we urge you to postpone
any such decision until the wisdom of this action has been
fully studied.
Sincerely,
Clarence E. Hill,
National Commander, The American Legion.

The second one is from the National Military Family Association. The
letter says, ``The National Military Family Association has long been
an advocate for improving the quality of life of our military family
members who have sacrificed greatly in support of our Nation. While our
association does not have a position on the Don't Ask, Don't Tell
policy, we are pleased that Secretary Gates has appointed a working
group charged to look at the true views and attitudes of our
servicemembers and their families if that policy is repealed. We
believe inclusion of servicemembers and their families in the process
is imperative and that the review process must be allowed to run its
course.
``Our association agrees with Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen that
the Department of Defense must be allowed, prior to any legislative
action, the opportunity to complete the assessment of the impact of
such a policy change, and most importantly, develop an attentive
comprehensive implementation plan. Our servicemembers and their
families deserve no less.''
I will include that letter in the Record.

[[Page 9682]]

May 21, 2010.
Hon. John Boehner,
Minority Leader, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Boehner: The National Military Family
Association has long been an advocate for improving the
quality of life of our military family members, who have
sacrificed greatly in support of our Nation. While our
Association does not have a position on the Don't Ask, Don't
Tell policy, we are pleased that Secretary Gates has
appointed a working group charged to look at the true views
and attitudes of our service members and their families if
that policy is repealed. We believe inclusion of service
members and their families in the process is imperative and
that the review process must be allowed to run its course.
Our Association agrees with Secretary Gates and Admiral
Mullen that the Department of Defense must be allowed, prior
to any legislative action, the opportunity to complete the
assessment of the impact of such a policy change, and most
importantly, develop an attentive comprehensive
implementation plan. Our service members and their families
deserve no less.
We join with Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen in opposing
any legislation that seeks to change this policy prior to
completion of the assessment process. Should you have any
questions please contact Kathleen Moakler, Government
Relations Director.
The National Military Family Association is the only
national organization whose sole focus is the military family
and whose goal is to influence the development and
implementation of policies that will improve the lives of the
families of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast
Guard, and the Commissioned Corps of the Public Health
Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. For over 40 years, its staff and volunteers,
comprised mostly of military family members, have built a
reputation for being the leading experts on military family
issues.
Sincerely,
Joyce Wessel Raezer,
Executive Director.

I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Childers).
Mr. CHILDERS. I want to thank Chairman Skelton and the Armed Services
Committee for bringing this important legislation to the floor and for
allowing me to introduce this amendment.
The uncertainty of whether or not a company will be awarded a
military contract, as well as the finite period of time required to
fulfill a contract, means that many times contractors are stuck in a
cycle of ramping up and ramping down employment and, consequently,
hiring, laying off, and rehiring employees. My amendment addresses this
issue in the production of the various types of MRAPs our soldiers use
for transportation and protection from IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The First District of Mississippi calls itself home to Navistar
Defense, which produces the MRAP. Last year, Navistar was forced to lay
off hundreds of employees when one of its contracts ended. More
recently, Navistar was awarded another contract, requiring them to
rehire 800 employees in order to meet the production deadlines put in
place by the military. But the majority of these employees will be laid
off again in October when the contract is completed.
My amendment ensures that the Department of Defense begins to look at
ways that we can meet our military needs while at the same time making
contracting decisions that save taxpayer money and keep skilled workers
employed for sustainable amounts of my time.
I urge my colleagues to pass this amendment.
Mr. McKEON. May I inquire again of the time remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 7\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairwoman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. I thank the ranking member for his
graciousness. And I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the management
of this bill. I appreciate the bipartisan leadership the committee has
provided on these issues. Let me also thank you for working with the
House Foreign Affairs Committee and myself on this amendment, which
requires the Secretary of Defense to establish monitoring and
evaluation metrics for its activities in the Horn of Africa,
specifically the Combined Joint Task Force.
Among other things, this task force partners with the Navy and
CENTCOM forces to conduct maritime security operations to protect
shipping routes in the Gulf of Aden near Somalia, the Gulf of Oman, the
Arabian Sea, Red Sea, and the Indian Ocean. The task force currently
does not use any form of metric to evaluate the effectiveness of its
activities. According to a GAO report, the task force is not currently
evaluating whether its activities are, in fact, achieving the desired
results. This amendment would make that requirement.
I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their support of the
amendment and urge its adoption.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair would like to remind those in the Chamber
to keep their conversations down to a minimum. Even the Chair had a
difficult time hearing the last speaker.
Mr. SKELTON. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the majority leader.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for yielding.
I want to thank the chairman, who is one of the giants on behalf of
national security, military defense, quality of life for our troops,
who for decades has been one of the outstanding spokespersons for
making sure that we had the defense we needed and that our troops had
the equipment, the resources, the quality of life that we would expect
to have our young people have. So I congratulate him. I thank Mr.
McKeon, as well, for his cooperative spirit in bringing this bill to
the floor.
Democrats in Congress have worked closely with President Obama to
fight our enemies, promote our interests, and support our troops and
their families, compiling a record of securing our Nation in stronger
and smarter ways. We have strengthened America's military by putting
new and better weapons into the battlefield, like more aerial drones.
We have killed or captured much of the top leadership of al Qaeda and
the Taliban. And for the first time, there is a clear plan for a way
forward in Afghanistan, which, frankly, was neglected for years under
the previous administration.
Democrats, often in the face of Republican opposition, have increased
funding for human intelligence collection, cybersecurity, and security
for our skies, our ports, and our borders. All of this was necessary
and appropriate. We are looking out for our troops, our veterans, and
our families.
Again, I say there is no Member of this body, and almost every
Member, indeed, of this body on both sides of the aisle has worked
together to maintain the quality of life for our troops and give them
the resources they need; none more so than Chairman Skelton, however.
Democrats are making sure that our troops get the body armor and
mine-resistant vehicles they need when they are in the field, and the
health care and opportunity for college education they deserve when
they return home. That's good for them and it's good for our country.
Today's defense authorization bill builds on that record, authorizing
crucial national security programs for fiscal year 2011. It promotes
efforts to disrupt and destroy terrorist networks and strengthens the
ability of our special forces to act directly against terrorist
organizations. It increases our international cooperation against
terrorists, especially against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
At the same time, it also insists on accountability, requiring
semiannual reports from the administration on the status of the Taliban
and the capacity of the Afghan Government and security forces. That
accountability is important and necessary.
Because the threats we face have changed in a post-Cold War world,
this bill also supports ballistic missile defense and nuclear
counterproliferation, including the President's effort to secure all of
the world's known vulnerable nuclear material in the next 4 years. The
conference the President

[[Page 9683]]

convened here in Washington was an extraordinary step forward in that
effort.
Further, this bill invests in the well-being of our troops and the
strength of our Armed Forces. It keeps TRICARE strong and ensures that
the military families can keep their children on TRICARE policies up to
the age of 26, just as all Americans can do under the health reform law
that we passed.
It also reduces strain on our forces by providing for 7,000 more
personnel for the Army and 500 for the Air Force, while helping all of
the services rebuild the equipment and weapons systems that have been
severely worn down by two wars. Now, maybe because there is an
agreement on that we haven't talked about it very much.
Finally, the bill strengthens our military by providing for a process
to repeal a discriminatory provision. Now, I want my friends to listen
to this, and they are not going to be happy with me. I am 70 years of
age. I was in college in the late fifties and early sixties. Now, Bill
Clinton was in college in the late sixties. His generation of Americans
were motivated by the Vietnam war one way or the other. Now, frankly, I
was a member of the State senate and supported that effort in the State
senate.
But in the late fifties and early sixties, the motivating force for
young people in this country was civil rights. It was about living out
the promise of American equality. It was about a commitment of this
country, which was the bedrock of this country, that all men were
created equal and endowed not by us, but by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights. And I will tell my friends, I have some rhetoric
here that was used in 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946, when
there were some Americans you didn't have to ask, they didn't have to
tell, because you knew they were African Americans. There was no hiding
that. And we segregated them.
And I heard Strom Thurmond stand on the floor of the Senate, he was a
Democrat, speaking about discriminating against people because of the
color of their skin. Separate but equal. I have heard the same
rhetoric. Let me read some of it.
``The Army is the wrong place for social experiments. Keep African
Americans in their place.''
I was angered in the 1950s and 1960s when I saw that kind of rhetoric
because I thought that was not the America that I was so proud of. Hear
that language that was used back in 1948 and read the transcripts
today.
In 1990, I was the sponsor of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
There was an amendment offered that said people with AIDS could not be
waiters and waitresses. Why? Because people wouldn't come into
restaurants if they knew that somebody with AIDS was serving them. Of
course all the scientists, all the medical personnel said there was no
way to transmit AIDS by handling plates or food. And I pulled out some
rhetoric, interesting enough, from 1965, when the public accommodations
law was considered on this floor. And guess what they said? They said,
If we have African American waiters and waitresses, people won't come
into our restaurant. That's why we don't have African American waiters
and African American restaurants.
That was not the America for which I stand.
Strom Thurmond, however, said, and other Democrats--now, he didn't
stay a Democrat, as all of you know, throughout his career--said no, we
will keep people separate. And because you are driving down Route 1
from New York to Florida, and you stop and your little girl asked when
the Howard Johnson's comes by, ``Can I have an ice cream cone?'' And
you say to your little child, ``I am sorry, you can't go in there. You
are the wrong color. Can't stay at that hotel.''
Now, in their era they thought they were being good Americans, I
presume, and there were filibusters after filibusters to stop treating
people as people with their God-given, unalienable rights.
Ladies and gentlemen, look to your hearts and your conscience. Look
at the debates of 1948.
Is there one of us, is there one of us that would say General Powell,
as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, undermined the morale and the
effectiveness of the United States Army? Is there one of us? I will
yield to anybody who wants to say that he undermined the morale of our
services. No one? No one? This is not a social experiment any more than
that was a social experiment.

{time} 2015

Anymore than 1990 when we wanted to deal with those with
disabilities. It was a social experiment. It was the bedrock of what
America is.
Now, I think it's unfortunate that we've spent so much time on this
issue. Almost every speaker. In the beginning of my talk, I talked
about the substance of this bill: fighting terrorists, keeping America
safe, making sure that we have the strongest Armed Forces in the world
bar none, that technically they are able to confront any enemy,
anywhere, any time because we owe that to the American public to keep
them safe. That is what we're committed to, a strong defense.
Barry Goldwater said when this issue came up, I care whether they can
shoot straight, not whether they are straight. Why? Because he wanted
to look at the content of their character, the content of their
ability, the content of their commitment to this country and to their
service. They were patriots. And he thought if they're patriots and
they shoot straight--now let me tell you, something, friends. I don't
want anybody bothering me. I don't care who they are. You hear me? And
I don't want any male member of the Armed Forces bothering any female
member of the Armed Forces, and I don't want anybody else bothering
anybody else. Why? Because that's against the law, and it's against
morality.
But I tell you, my friends, this bill is about our national security.
This bill is about people who perform their service to our country.
This bill is about making sure that America is safe. This bill is about
making sure that we defeat terrorism and keep America safe. Let's focus
on that. Let's not be distracted. Let's focus on protecting America,
defeating terrorists, and taking care of our troops.
Mr. McKEON. May I inquire how much time I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
You know, I listened raptly to the majority leader. I always try to.
He always has a lot to say, and he says it very well. And that was a
very eloquent speech, and because you are a Member of Congress and
because we are Members of Congress, we can come here to the floor and
we can express our opinion. I'm asking that the members of the armed
services have the same opportunity before we have this vote tonight on
the Murphy amendment.
And the reference was made to General Powell. And I was not on the
committee at the time. But when Don't Ask, Don't Tell was instituted,
he was a strong proponent. And he also mentioned that he didn't believe
the comparison held up between the blacks having civil rights and the
Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
So while I think that your comments were very, very well spoken, I
think all of us should have that opportunity to have that great debate.
I just think that we should follow the process that's been established
where the Secretary appoints this study. They make the study, and then
after the study is presented to us in December, after the military has
a chance to give their say, that after the study is released, we follow
the process.
I don't know why we're so afraid to stick with the policy, to listen
to the members of the armed services, to give them the opportunities
they have. I have letters from each of the Chairmen and the members of
the Joint Chiefs saying we owe that to them. We should not break faith
with them. They went out in good faith after the Secretary set that
policy, and now we're short circuiting.
I would be happy to yield to the majority leader.

[[Page 9684]]

Mr. HOYER. I thank my friend for yielding, and I agree with my
friend. As a matter of fact, I talked to Bob Gates today, and I talked
to him 2 weeks ago about this issue. I was concerned about this issue
and shared his view that we certainly ought to solicit the views of how
and why we ought to proceed.
That is why I worked to make sure that this amendment, which was the
exact same amendment adopted in the Senate Armed Services Committee a
little earlier today, did in fact provide that both the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen--who has made his comments on this pretty
clear, as you know--Secretary Gates, and the President of the United
States have to certify that the processes are in place. I understand
the difference of opinion here is that, and I am sympathetic with your
view.
Mr. McKEON. Let me reclaim my time because here's what's actually
going to happen. And as I talked to the chiefs on the phone, one of
them said very clearly, Look. I know how this works around here. I know
what this means. I know how the amendment was written, that we take the
vote tonight and then we follow through the process. But it becomes a
sham because the headline, as he said, would be ``Don't Ask, Don't
Tell,'' is repealed. And it's already on the headline. I just saw the
news alert. ``Senate votes to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'' He says,
I understand that. But those troops out at the FOBs in Afghanistan,
when they see it, when they hear it, they're going to see it's
repealed. Why are you now asking me my opinion? It's done. It's a done
deal.
So while we may understand that by law that it will follow through
this process, in reality, it will be set tonight. And that's why we
should have had more than 10 minutes, 5 minutes on our side, to discuss
this. All we were given was 5 minutes. And that's why we've had to take
time.
We could have spent time talking about all of the wonderful things in
this bill, and yet we've had to talk because this thing is going to
have more impact on our military and on our country.
You smile, Mr. Leader. And if you really feel that, then why don't we
just follow the process?
And I'll be happy to yield.
Mr. HOYER. I smile only because that rhetoric was the same rhetoric
that was used in 1946.
Mr. McKEON. Well, I'm sorry. I have not read that. And I'm not
quoting from that same rhetoric. And as Colin Powell said, it is not
the same.
In fact, this is Mr. Powell's quote: ``Skin color is a benign, non-
behavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most
profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is
a convenient but invalid argument.''
Mr. Powell's comment.
Mr. HOYER. I didn't quote Mr. Powell. I referred to him.
Mr. McKEON. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Madam Chairwoman, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).
Mr. FOSTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of an amendment to optimize the
technological posture of our Armed Forces, but I am also the son of a
civil rights lawyer who wrote a lot of the enforcement language behind
the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And I am proud to serve with our majority
leader and the representative of the Pennsylvania Eighth district.
I rise in support of an amendment which would direct the Secretary of
Defense to commission an independent study assessing the optimal
balance of manned versus unmanned aircraft, as well as whether our
military is capable of defending against an enemy force consisting of
unmanned aerial vehicles. I believe it's the duty of Congress to ask
hard questions and to take the long view of matters on national
security.
In Afghanistan and Iraq, we've already seen how UAV technology has
revolutionized warfare and how rapidly we can launch an attack half a
world away without risking a single American life. Between 2002 and
2008, the number of unmanned aircraft used by the Department of Defense
increased from 167 to over 6,000. This year for the first time in
history, the Air Force trained more UAV pilots than traditional fighter
pilots.
This amendment will help us optimize the balance between manned and
unmanned aircraft, and I urge its support.
Mr. McKEON. I yield 30 seconds to the Army colonel in the Reserve,
Mr. Buyer from Indiana.
Mr. BUYER. I want to thank Ike Skelton for, years ago, his thoughtful
considerations to make this policy the law. And we should not be
changing this policy. It is very clear that homosexuality is
incompatible with military service. The purpose of the military: We
kill and break things. We inculcate young men and women with values,
and those values are extremely important.
Now there are some that are trying to make this argument somehow that
tolerance requires a moral equivalency. It does not when it comes to
homosexuality. If in fact military is the inculcation of values, to say
that we're going to say that sodomy now should be repealed from the
Uniform Code of Military Justice is wrong.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from California
controls the time.
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 1 minute remaining.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Chair, I yield that time to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).
Mr. FOSTER. Thank you for yielding an additional minute.
As I was explaining that this year for the first time in history, the
Air Force trained more UAV pilots than traditional fighter pilots.
However, our fleet of unmanned aircraft has expanded, and we have also
maintained and continued to build a large force of conventional manned
aircraft.
This study will help Congress better understand the optimal most
cost-effective balance between the two for a range of operations. It
will also help us determine the feasibility and desirability of a more
rapid transition to unmanned aircraft for these operations.
This study will also force the Department of Defense and Congress to
confront the fact that the United States is not the only Nation capable
of building and deploying these very effective, very lethal
technologies. If the future of warfare lies in unmanned technology,
will our military be prepared to defend the United States and its
allies against attacks by enemies who possess large numbers of unmanned
aircraft?
It's my hope that this study will help Congress prioritize and plan
for this future and adopt the most cost-effective mix of manned and
unmanned aircraft. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and
I thank Chairman Skelton for his hard work in bringing this amendment
to the floor.
Mr. McKEON. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds.
Mr. GOHMERT. I was shocked to hear the majority leader bring up the
Americans with Disability Act. It was a wonderful thing that this
Congress did in making all areas accessible to those with disability.
But to bring it up in this debate next brings the question, will this
majority not stop meddling with the military, and next we expect an
extension of the ADA so that the military will next be required to put
those who are disabled on the front lines to defend the Nation?
It's time to stop meddling. Let the military do the job for which
they were assigned and for which they volunteered. Put the military in
charge.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Madam Chair, I rise today in strong support of
amendment number 38 to the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal
Year 2011.
I would like to thank Chairman Skelton for including this amendment,
which I introduced, in an en bloc package today.
Representative John Fleming of Louisiana, a member of the Armed
Services Committee's Air and Land Forces Subcommittee, is cosponsoring
the amendment. I appreciate his

[[Page 9685]]

support and the leadership he has shown on the issue of improving and
protecting our nation's bomber fleet.
This amendment requires reports from the Institute of Defense
Analyses, the Congressional Budget Office and the Department of Defense
that, taken together, will provide a comprehensive review of the
sustainment and modernization requirements and costs related to the
U.S. bomber force and long-range strike capability.
Over the past year, as I've met with Air Force leaders, including
Secretary Michael Donley and Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz, we
have discussed the need to sustain and modernize our nation's current
bomber fleet as the Air Force begins to develop a next-generation
bomber and long-range strike capability needed to maintain a strategic
deterrence.
Since I was first elected to Congress in 2004, I have worked closely
with the brave airmen at Ellsworth Air Force Base in my state of South
Dakota. Ellsworth is home to two wings of B-1 bombers, and I know the
important role those planes have played in Iraq and Afghanistan. These
planes, and the other bombers in our fleet, project power across the
globe in order to keep potential enemies at bay and also serve to
protect and save the lives of troops fighting on the ground.
As Members of Congress, we are charged with equipping our Armed
Forces and are responsible for allocating taxpayer funds in the most
fiscally responsible manner. This amendment ensures that we will
accomplish both goals by better informing Congress and the Department
of Defense on the best path forward for our nation's bomber fleet.
I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.

{time} 2030

Amendment No. 79 Offered by Mr. Patrick J. Murphy of Pennsylvania

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 79
printed in House Report 111-498.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. 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:

Amendment No. 79 offered by Mr. Patrick J. Murphy of
Pennsylvania:
At the end of subtitle D of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE POLICY CONCERNING
HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Comprehensive Review on the Implementation of a Repeal
of 10 U.S.C. Sec. 654.--
(1) In general.--On March 2, 2010, the Secretary of Defense
issued a memorandum directing the Comprehensive Review on the
Implementation of a Repeal of 10 U.S.C. Sec. 654 (section
654 of title 10, United States Code).
(2) Objectives and scope of review.--The Terms of Reference
accompanying the Secretary's memorandum established the
following objectives and scope of the ordered review:
(A) Determine any impacts to military readiness, military
effectiveness and unit cohesion, recruiting/retention, and
family readiness that may result from repeal of the law and
recommend any actions that should be taken in light of such
impacts.
(B) Determine leadership, guidance, and training on
standards of conduct and new policies.
(C) Determine appropriate changes to existing policies and
regulations, including but not limited to issues regarding
personnel management, leadership and training, facilities,
investigations, and benefits.
(D) Recommend appropriate changes (if any) to the Uniform
Code of Military Justice.
(E) Monitor and evaluate existing legislative proposals to
repeal 10 U.S.C. Sec. 654 and proposals that may be
introduced in the Congress during the period of the review.
(F) Assure appropriate ways to monitor the workforce
climate and military effectiveness that support successful
follow-through on implementation.
(G) Evaluate the issues raised in ongoing litigation
involving 10 U.S.C. Sec. 654.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (f)
shall take effect 60 days after the date on which the last of
the following occurs:
(1) The Secretary of Defense has received the report
required by the memorandum of the Secretary referred to in
subsection (a).
(2) The President transmits to the congressional defense
committees a written certification, signed by the President,
the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, stating each of the following:
(A) That the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the
recommendations contained in the report and the report's
proposed plan of action.
(B) That the Department of Defense has prepared the
necessary policies and regulations to exercise the discretion
provided by the amendments made by subsection (f).
(C) That the implementation of necessary policies and
regulations pursuant to the discretion provided by the
amendments made by subsection (f) is consistent with the
standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit
cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.
(c) No Immediate Effect on Current Policy.--Section 654 of
title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect until
such time that all of the requirements and certifications
required by subsection (b) are met. If these requirements and
certifications are not met, section 654 of title 10, United
States Code, shall remain in effect.
(d) Benefits.--Nothing in this section, or the amendments
made by this section, shall be construed to require the
furnishing of benefits in violation of section 7 of title 1,
United States Code (relating to the definitions of
``marriage'' and ``spouse'' and referred to as the ``Defense
of Marriage Act'').
(e) No Private Cause of Action.--Nothing in this section,
or the amendments made by this section, shall be construed to
create a private cause of action.
(f) Treatment of 1993 Policy.--
(1) Title 10.--Upon the effective date established by
subsection (b), chapter 37 of title 10, United States Code,
is amended--
(A) by striking section 654; and
(B) in the table of sections at the beginning of such
chapter, by striking the item relating to section 654.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Upon the effective date
established by subsection (b), section 571 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (10 U.S.C. 654
note) is amended by striking subsections (b), (c), and (d).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1404, the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I yield myself
such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, when I served in Baghdad, my team did not care whether a
fellow soldier was straight or gay. We cared if they could fire their
M-4 assault rifle or run a convoy down Ambush Alley; could they do
their job so that everybody in our unit would come home safely.
With our military fighting two wars, why on Earth would we tell over
13,500 able-bodied Americans that their services are not needed? This
policy hurts our national security, and it has cost the American
taxpayers over $1.3 billion already on this unjust policy.
Our troops deserve a Congress that puts their safety and our
collective national security over rigid partisan interests and a close-
minded ideology.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and support the brave
men and women willing to take a bullet for our families.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
chairman of the Armed Services Committee. But before doing that, I ask
unanimous consent that the time for debate on amendment No. 79 offered
by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy) be extended
by 30 minutes, evenly divided between opponent and proponent.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I object.
The Acting CHAIR. Objection is heard.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, in that case, I yield 1 minute to the
distinguished chairman of the committee, Mr. Skelton.
Mr. SKELTON. Madam Chairman, the bill before us is an excellent piece
of legislation; it's one of the best that our committee has written.
It's strong on our attempt to quell terrorism, it takes care of the
troops, and it looks after their families.

[[Page 9686]]

On this issue before us, inquiry was made of Secretary Gates and
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen. A letter dated
April 30 states: ``Therefore, I strongly oppose any legislation that
seeks to change this policy prior to the completion of this vital
assessment process. Further, I hope Congress will not do so as it would
send a very damaging message to our men and women in uniform that, in
essence, their views, concerns, and perspectives do not matter on an
issue with such direct impact and consequence for them and their
families.''
I oppose the amendment.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I yield 30
seconds to my fellow Blue Dog and strong leader on this issue, Mr.
Matheson of Utah.
Mr. MATHESON. Madam Chair, anyone who is willing to put on this
country's uniform and put his or her life on the line to protect our
freedoms deserves our respect and should not be subject to
discrimination. Repealing this flawed policy is an important way for us
to show that respect. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Parliamentary Inquiries

Mr. WAMP. Madam Chairman, parliamentary inquiry.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
Mr. WAMP. Could the Chair tell me if it might be in order for the
time to be extended on this very, very important matter before the
House at least equal to the time that might be taken by the Speaker of
the House?
The Acting CHAIR. Only by unanimous consent, which was just
unsuccessful.
Mr. WAMP. May I ask unanimous consent, then, that the time be
extended equally so that the time that the Speaker may claim to speak
on her side of this issue might be allotted to the minority?
The Acting CHAIR. Can the gentleman state a specific amount of time?
Mr. WAMP. I wish we could; we don't know. I just think 5 minutes per
side is not sufficient on a matter this important before the House.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will restate his unanimous consent
request.
Mr. WAMP. I ask unanimous consent that the time on this amendment be
extended by 15 minutes per side.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Tennessee?
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I object.
The Acting CHAIR. Objection is heard.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I have a parliamentary
inquiry.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Do the records of the House contain the
length of time of the speech made by the minority leader on the health
care bill under a 1-minute recognition?
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair cannot serve as historian.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. HUNTER. Madam Chair, parliamentary inquiry.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California will state his
parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. HUNTER. Is it proper for the gentleman who this amendment belongs
to to object to debate on his own amendment?
The Acting CHAIR. Any Member may object.
Mr. HUNTER. Even to their own, which they should want to discuss,
Madam Chair?
The Acting CHAIR. Any Member may object.
The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairwoman, may I yield 5 seconds to the sponsor of
the amendment to say why you don't want it discussed fully?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman may yield.
Mr. McKEON. The gentleman doesn't wish to respond?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. McKEON. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chairwoman, next Monday is Memorial Day. Americans will pause
in many ways and in many places to honor and celebrate the courage,
sacrifices, and patriotism of those who have served and are serving
this Nation in the Armed Forces.
The Hill newspaper yesterday carried a special insert entitled, ``A
Tribute to the Troops.'' Among the contributors were Mrs. Michelle
Obama and Dr. Jill Biden. They coauthored a piece emphasizing that ``it
is our sacred obligation as Americans to take care of the men, women,
and families who protect and serve this country.''
I could not agree more with them. We do have a sacred obligation to
those who care to serve. That is why today I rise in strong opposition
to the amendment being offered by Representative Murphy that would have
Congress act to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell even before the
comprehensive review directed by the Secretary of Defense is completed
and even before Congress has received the comprehensive views of those
who will be most directly affected by any change in the law.
They have unhesitatingly and selflessly responded in a magnificent
manner, without hesitation, putting mission and Nation ahead of self
and family. Now the proponents of repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell want
to rush a vote to the floor, disrupting the process that was put in
place earlier this year to get input from those people most affected by
this decision.
After making the continuous sacrifice of fighting two wars over the
course of 8 years, the men and women of our military deserve to be
heard. Congress acting first is the equivalent of turning to our men
and women in uniform and their families and saying, your opinions don't
count.
I've read into the Record letters from the chairmen of each of the
services asking us to not do this. Don't disrespect the military. Give
them the opportunity to have their input.
The Secretary also sent us a letter, and his letter said: ``I believe
in the strongest possible terms that the Department must, prior to any
legislative action, be allowed the opportunity to conduct a thorough,
objective, and systematic assessment of the impact of such a policy
change. A critical element of this effort is the need to systemically
engage our forces, their families, and the broader military community
throughout this process. Our military must be afforded the opportunity
to inform us of their concerns, insights, and suggestions if we're to
carry out this change successfully. Therefore, I strongly oppose any
legislation that seeks to change this policy prior to the completion of
this vital assessment process.
``Further, I hope Congress will not do so as it would send a very
damaging message to our men and women in uniform that, in essence,
their views, concerns, and perspectives do not matter on an issue with
such direct impact and consequence for them and their families.''
Now, I know that this amendment and those proponents will say, well,
we're going to take this vote, but we will still follow the process. We
will have the survey. But you all know, I mean, you have to know that
when the surveyors go out into the field, they're already going to have
heard on the news--as was already reported on Fox News tonight--the
Senate repealed Don't Ask, Don't Tell. So how are they given an
opportunity to--I mean, this is a sham. It is a total sham from here
forward if this amendment passes tonight.
You have the chairman of the committee, a man who has devoted years
of his life to our young men and women in uniform, and it's not an easy
thing for him, but he stands up to say no on this amendment. I join him
in saying no on this amendment. Most of the members of the committee--
if we had had a chance to bring this up in committee where it should
have been, it wouldn't be here tonight.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I yield 30
seconds to the chairwoman of the Personnel Subcommittee on the House

[[Page 9687]]

Armed Services Committee, Mrs. Davis from California.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Chair, we are listening to our troops
and military leaders. I held two hearings on this policy. DOD is
gathering service and family member feedback. Remember, this process
was set up to understand how to implement reform, not whether it should
happen. That in 10, Madam Chair, is contained in the amendment.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell weakens our national security by asking
servicemembers to lie, firing them for being gay, and telling able
recruits, We don't want you. Please, America can do better. Vote
``yes.''
Mr. TAYLOR. Madam Chair, I rise for a unanimous consent request.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his request.
Mr. TAYLOR. I request unanimous consent to support the wishes of
Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Mississippi?
There was no objection.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I yield 30
seconds to the gentleman from Michigan, a freshman Congressman, a
former lieutenant commander of the United States Navy Reserve, Mr.
Peters.
Mr. PETERS. Madam Chair, as a former lieutenant commander in the
United States Navy Reserve, I strongly support Representative Murphy's
amendment. We must allow our military to recruit and retain any
qualified, patriotic, and courageous American who wants to serve our
country.
During my service in the United States Navy Reserve, I served with
many brave, patriotic, and dedicated men and women who were always
ready to serve their country anytime and anywhere. I was never
concerned about their sexual orientation, just their ability to serve
the United States honorably. I urge passage of the Murphy amendment.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I yield 30
seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota, the highest ranking enlisted
soldier ever to serve in the United States Congress, Command Sergeant
Major Tim Walz.

{time} 2045

Mr. WALZ. I thank the gentleman.
Madam Chair, the greatest privilege I've had in my life has been in
serving this Nation for almost 25 years in uniform. I know how
important it is to fill our military with qualified professional and
motivated volunteers. We are blessed in this Nation. That's exactly
what we have. It is time for us to honor their professionalism and know
that they are ready to end this discriminatory practice.
I support this amendment because it allows for the study of
implementation, and it allows the Department of Defense to implement it
after their study is done.
We do this all the time in the military. It took us 6 months to
change from hats to berets. The process will be orderly. It will be
right down the line the way it needs to be, and at the end of the day,
don't question their ability to do it. I support the amendment.
Mr. SHIMKUS. I have a unanimous consent request, Madam Chair.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his unanimous consent
request.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Madam Chair, as a 20-year Army veteran, 5 years of
active infantry and Airborne Ranger--I don't wear it on my sleeve--I
support Ranking Member McKeon and Chairman Skelton. This is devastating
to the warfighters and to the combat infantrymen.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair recognized the gentleman for a unanimous
consent request, but not for debate.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, it is my great
privilege to yield 30 seconds to my mentor on civil rights, the Freedom
Rider and great civil rights leader, the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
John Lewis.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Madam Chair, ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'' What
does it mean? It didn't make sense then, and it doesn't make sense now.
Just like the military helped end segregation based on race, we
should have put an end to Don't Ask, Don't Tell long ago. It is an
affront to human dignity and to the dignity and the worth of every man
and woman serving in our military.
We cannot wait. We cannot be patient. We must end discrimination in
the military, and we must end it now. Discrimination is wrong, and we
must end it now.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, how much time is
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute
to the Speaker, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).
Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership
and service to our country.
Madam Chair, this weekend, on Memorial Day, America will come
together to honor all those who have served our Nation in uniform, and
those brave Americans have no better friend than the chairman of our
Armed Services Committee, Mr. Skelton.
Today, by repealing the discriminatory Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy,
we also honor the service and sacrifice of all who dedicated their
lives to protecting the American people. We honor the values of our
Nation, and we close the door on fundamental unfairness.
In 1993, I spoke on this same House floor, calling on the President
``to act definitively to lift the ban that keeps patriotic Americans
from serving in the U.S. Armed Forces because of their sexual
orientation.'' Instead, despite everyone's good intentions, Don't Ask,
Don't Tell was enacted--a policy which has been discriminatory to our
brave men and women in uniform.
Under Don't Ask, Don't Tell, more than 13,000 men and women in
uniform have been discharged from the military. Thousands more have
decided not to reenlist. Fighter pilots, infantry officers, Arabic
translators, and other specialists have been discharged at a time when
our Nation is engaged in two wars.
That is why I support repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and that
support has come from all over the country. Nearly 8 out of 10
Americans want to end this era of discrimination.
Admiral Mullen, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs said, ``It
is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly
would be the right thing to do. We have in place a policy which forces
young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their
fellow citizens.'' He went on to say, ``For me, personally, it comes
down to integrity--theirs as individuals and ours as institutions.''
General Colin Powell, who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs when this
policy was implemented, has said that he now thinks this restrictive
policy should be repealed.
Then, in a letter to Congress, 51 retired generals, admirals, and a
former Army Secretary called for the repeal of this policy, saying that
they ``have dedicated our lives to defending the rights of our citizens
to believe whatever they wish.''
Passing this amendment today respects the timeline of the Pentagon's
Implementation Study Group. Repeal would take place only after the
study group completes its work in December 2010 and after the
President, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of Defense all
certify that repeal will not hurt military readiness or unit cohesion.
No one in this body would jeopardize our national security.
America has always been the land of the free and the home of the
brave. We are so because of our brave men and women in uniform who have
been willing to fight for our country. Let us honor their service by
recommitting to the values they fight for on the battlefield.
I urge my colleagues to vote for the repeal of this discriminatory
policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and to make America more American.

[[Page 9688]]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the leadership of several members in
bringing this amendment to the floor today:
Congressman Patrick Murphy. Before Congressman Murphy came to the
House, he was a Captain in the 82nd Airborne Division and served as a
paratrooper in the Iraq War. He understands the issue of military
readiness and has demonstrated tremendous leadership on repealing a
policy that harms our national security.
Chairman Barney Frank.
Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin.
Congressman Jared Polis.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 30 seconds
remaining.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, former Air Force
Sergeant David Hall was walking into this gallery when I was walking in
today.
Sergeant Hall wasn't asked. Sergeant Hall didn't tell. Someone outed
him for being gay, and he was kicked out of the Air Force. He had
already served in the Middle East.
He said to me, ``I assure you I am fit for military duty. Please stop
discharging patriotic Americans who just want to serve the country they
love.''
Mr. SPRATT. Madam Chairman, I was a member of Congress and served on
the House Armed Services Committee, when the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell''
policy was adopted. It was a clever solution, but the policy and its
consequences deserve an updated review.
The Secretary of Defense, Robert M. Gates, has proposed such a
review. He told the House Armed Services Committee that he had managed
several large institutions, like the Department of Defense and the
Central Intelligence Agency, and had found that when imposing major
policy changes, it was better not to cram change from the top-down, but
to help it percolate from the bottom-up. What Secretary Gates proposed
was a year-long review, bringing the troops into the dialog, and
weighing issues like fraternization and problems not even apprehended
at this point.
In a letter to Chairman Ike Skelton dated April 30, Secretary Gates
wrote: ``I believe in the strongest possible terms that the Department
must, prior to any legislative action, be allowed the opportunity to
conduct a thorough, objective, and systematic assessment of the impact
of such a policy change; develop a comprehensive implementation plan,
and provide Congress and the President with the results of this effort
in order for it to be taken in the most informed and effective manner.
A critical element of this effort is the need to systematically engage
our forces, their families, and the broader military community
throughout this process. Therefore, I strongly oppose any legislation
that seeks to change this policy prior to completion of this vital
assessment process.''
I basically agree with Secretary Gates and will vote to support the
process of review that he and Admiral Mullen have laid out.
Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, as I listen to the arguments of those who wish
to continue the policy of driving gay or lesbian soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines out of military service, I am reminded that the
people of the United States are a pragmatic people.
Those who wish to exclude gays tell the American people that the
inclusion of gays would harm the morale, cohesion, and effectiveness of
the military in defending our nation. They ask everyone to ignore the
unmistakable parallels between their arguments and the arguments made
in the 1940's against the racial integration of the services. Never
mind, they say, that the same arguments about morale, cohesion, and
effectiveness were offered to preserve the despicable policy of racial
segregation. Never mind, they say, that back then it was claimed that
it would devastate our Army's effectiveness if white soldiers had to
share a barracks or bunkhouse or showerhouse with a black man.
Those who want to continue the practice of driving gays out of
military service ask everyone to ignore that gays do and always have
served in the U.S. military.
Suddenly all of American history became clear to me. Now I understand
the devastating effect of gays in our military. Now I understand why we
failed to win our independence from the British. Although I could never
understand before why the United States lost two wars to the Germans
and the Axis, now I realize it was because our military could not be
effective. The presence of gays, despite our nation's material and
economic might, so crippled our military morale, cohesion, and
effectiveness that we were helpless and hopeless. Now I understand that
is what happens if we allow gays to serve in the defense of our nation.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I agree with the Secretary of
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the time has
come to repeal the current ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' policy, which
dishonors men and women who are willing to give their lives in service
to our country and also prevents capable men and women with vital
skills from serving in the armed forces. However, I believe a vote
today is premature.
Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen indicated initially that the
impact of such a drastic change in military and cultural policy should
be thoroughly reviewed, studied, and appropriate policies developed by
the Department of Defense before Congress takes legislative action.
Such a review and policy development would be completed by December 1,
2010.
Therefore, I believe Congress should forgo legislative action until
appropriately informed by the Pentagon's impact study, policy
development, and implementation plan.
Mr. ACKERMAN. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of the Murphy
Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act to repeal ``Don't
Ask, Don't Tell.''
The time to end this absurd policy is long past due. Since it was
implemented in 1994, ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' has resulted in more
than 13,000 gay and lesbian servicemembers being discharged for no
reason other than their sexual orientation. As the United States has
fought wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq, hundreds of mission-critical
troops, including crucial Arabic and Farsi linguists, have been
discharged because the Department of Defense believed they were gay.
Such blatant discrimination is both morally wrong and, from a practical
perspective, self-defeating.
Last year, I received a letter from a gay soldier from Long Island
who has bravely served our nation for more than twenty years in two
branches of our military. Throughout his numerous tours of duty in
Afghanistan and in Iraq, he has earned multiple bronze stars. Although
he could retire, he did not want to leave the military when our nation
needed him most. So, he volunteered for another combat zone deployment.
In his letter, this soldier told me that he has served side-by-side
with gay soldiers from the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia and
has seen no evidence to suggest that these nations, which have no
discriminatory policies against gay and lesbian servicemembers, have a
problem with unit cohesion. In fact, an openly gay officer from
Australia with whom he served was decorated with a U.S. medal at the
end of his tour.
This soldier concluded by asking if, after looking at his service
record, I thought the military and our nation would be better off
without his service. My answer is absolutely not. I thank him for his
service and proudly cast my vote to allow him and all other gay and
lesbian servicemembers to continue their service to our nation without
living in fear of being discharged for simply being who they are. Our
service men and women deserve a policy that honors the principles they
protect. I stand with our nation's principles. I support the Murphy
amendment.
Mr. HONDA. Madam Chair, I rise today to support the Repeal of Don't
Ask, Don't Tell. During his State of the Union address, President Obama
declared that his administration would work with Congress to end the
Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy of excluding openly lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender, LGBT, Americans from serving their country
in the armed forces. I have long envisioned our country reaching this
moment, and am thrilled that the 111th Congress will soon take another
step forward in our long journey toward equality regardless of race,
nationality, gender, and sexual orientation.
Reflecting one of our country's last officially sanctioned forms of
bigotry, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy stigmatizes patriotic
Americans by excluding them from military life. This policy works to
silence LGBT personnel among the ranks of our military, making them
invisible to the American public they bravely volunteer to defend.
Notwithstanding the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, countless veterans
have served, and countless service members continue to serve selflessly
in the defense of our nation. Yet while thousands of our men and women
put their lives on the line to protect our freedom and liberty, many
are dismissed once their orientation or identification becomes known.
According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, SLDN, over 1,200
service personnel were unfairly stigmatized when discharged as being
unfit for service in 2001. The contributions made by LGBT veterans and
those in active duty in an atmosphere hostile to them underscores the
tremendous sacrifices they make to serve this nation.
Another reason for the repeal of this government-sanctioned
discrimination is the law's

[[Page 9689]]

disproportionate impact on women and minorities. Servicemembers United
compiled Department of Defense (DOD) data showing that in 2008, 45
percent of troops discharged under Don't Ask, Don't tell were
minorities, while minorities comprised 30 percent of the service.
Similarly, women accounted for 34 percent of the discharges but were
only 14 percent of the military. That a discriminatory policy has an
even more discriminatory application is another reason to celebrate its
abolishment.
When President Obama called for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell,
Defense Secretary Gates reminded the Congress of their definitive role
in changing the intolerant policy. I am proud that this Congress is
acting. While I realize this repeal is still contingent on a completion
of the DOD Study and certification from the President, I am confident
that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is at its end. I appreciate the difficulty
of the DOD's task and I commend their courage to take this step forward
for our country. I am proud to cast a vote for repeal of Don't Ask,
Don't Tell--we cannot let the opportunity to right this wrong pass us
by.
Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Chair, it is time to repeal the ``Don't Ask,
Don't Tell, Don't Pursue'' policy and to allow lesbian, gay and
bisexual persons to serve openly in the military.
From the initial introduction of this profoundly misguided policy in
1993, I have never wavered in my belief that our nation's armed forces
should not discriminate against otherwise qualified citizens on the
basis of their sexual orientation. Today, at a time when our nation is
engaged militarily in both Iraq and Afghanistan, the extent to which
the so-called compromise ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' policy has damaged
America's military readiness has become even more apparent than it was
seventeen years ago.
The policy against allowing lesbian, gay, and bisexual service
members to serve openly has resulted in depriving our armed forces of
the abilities, experience and dedication of thousands of qualified
active duty personnel. This institutionalized discrimination is
completely illogical and counter-productive as we grapple with an
increasingly dangerous world, with our servicemembers serving all over
the world
The U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO, has documented the
cost to our nation. In 2005, the GAO estimated the cost of
discriminating against service members on the basis of their sexual
orientation at nearly $200 million over the course of just the last
decade. This estimate may, in fact, be too low, as the GAO itself
acknowledged and as other studies conducted by reputable academic
institutions like the Michael Palm Center at the University of
California have documented.
Advocates for the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' policy continue
stubbornly to cite elusive factors to justify its inherent
institutionalized discrimination. The most common argument is the
specious insistence that ``unit cohesion'' among the armed forces will
suffer if lesbians, gay men, and bisexual persons are allowed to serve
openly--an argument that even Richard Cheney, while serving as the
Secretary of Defense during the presidency of George H. W. Bush,
acknowledged in congressional testimony was ``a bit of an old chestnut
to be tossed onto an open fire and consigned forever to the ashbin of
history.''
The fact is that many other nations--including trusted allies whose
armed forces are respected around the world such as Great Britain,
Israel, Australia, and Canada--have allowed their citizens to serve in
their armed forces regardless of their disclosure of their sexual
orientation. It is high time that the United States of America, which
prides itself as a beacon of liberty and equality, joins their ranks.
I urge the members of this House to vote to repeal this misguided and
counterproductive and un-American policy.
Mr. NADLER of New York. Madam Chair, I am pleased that today we are
finally faced with an amendment on the floor to end the policy of Don't
Ask, Don't Tell. Seventeen years ago, I introduced a bill to ban
discrimination in the Armed Forces on the basis of sexual orientation.
I commend Congressman Pat Murphy for his great efforts that have
resulted in finally getting this amendment on the floor today.
Now it is up to us to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell once and for all.
I opposed this policy and voted against it at its inception, I have
introduced legislation over the years to repeal it, and I am a proud
co-sponsor of H.R. 1246, the Military Readiness Enhancement Act which
would end this policy. And I stand before you today to support its
inclusion in the Defense Authorization bill. Let us move promptly to
end this discriminatory policy and ensure that all service members,
regardless of sexual orientation, can enjoy the freedoms for which they
so selflessly fight.
This absurd and overtly discriminatory policy remains a stain on our
national conscience and tarnishes the march toward equality for all
Americans. And, in this time of incredible strain on our military, our
nation's security depends upon the recruitment--and retention--of every
person willing and able to serve. I entirely reject the argument that
allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would undermine troop
morale. We don't need any study to know that this canard is simple
prejudice, for which there is no evidence whatsoever. We should act as
President Truman did in 1948. No study--no delay. Just repudiate the
prejudice and end the discrimination.
To his great credit, President Obama has repeatedly declared his
commitment to repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell and he supports our
efforts today to do so.
I appreciate the fact that the Department of Defense has also
implemented regulatory changes concerning current enforcement of the
policy, which should lead to fewer unwarranted discharges. But in order
to repeal the policy we, Congress, must act, and that is exactly what
we are doing here today. We owe it both to our service members and to
LGBT Americans to move forward now without further delay.
Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of the amendment by
Representative Murphy to repeal the ``Don't Ask Don't Tell'' policy.
The Don't Ask Don't Tell policy is discriminatory and it harms U.S.
military readiness. Over the last 17 years, our nation has paid a heavy
price for pursuing this policy. Since 1993, more than 13,000 qualified,
well trained men and women have been dismissed from the military simply
because of their sexual orientation. These are men and women we could
ill afford to lose, especially at a time when our armed forces are
engaged in two major military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is why so many of this country's highest current and retired
military leaders favor repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, including the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen. Admiral Mullen
recently wrote, ``No matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape
being troubled by the fact that we have a policy which forces young men
and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow
citizens.'' Retired General Colin Powell and the former Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, General John Shalikashvili also have urged
repeal.
The argument has been made that repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell would
negatively affect military unit cohesion. The evidence simply does not
support this. Many other countries--including Britain, Canada and
Israel--successfully allow gays and lesbians to serve openly. In any
case, the Murphy amendment specifically states that repeal will take
place only after the President and our nation's military leaders
certify that the Department of Defense has prepared the necessary
policies and regulations to implement repeal and that these policies
are consistent with military standards for readiness, effectiveness,
unit cohesion, recruiting and retention.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Chair, I rise today to clarify why I
was unable to vote on Thursday, May 27 and Friday, May 28 in favor of
the so-called Murphy Amendment and the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2011, respectively. I would also like to reaffirm
in the strongest possible terms my support for repealing the law known
as ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'' which prohibits gay and lesbian service
members from serving openly, as soon as possible.
As you know, Congressman Patrick Murphy's amendment, which passed in
the House of Representatives by a vote of 234-194, provides for a
process to be set in place to implement the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't
Tell as soon as the Pentagon completes its review of the issue and
President Obama, Defense Secretary Gates, and Admiral Mullen, Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, certify that repeal implementation will
not negatively affect our military.
During the Rules Committee's meeting on Wednesday to consider
amendments to the Defense Authorization bill, I openly declared my
support for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and for Congressman
Murphy's amendment.
Unfortunately, I had an official trip in my capacity as Co-Chairman
of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (U.S. Helsinki
Commission) that was scheduled prior to the vote. The consideration of
amendments to the Defense Authorization bill on the House floor was
such that I was unable to vote. Had I been present and not on official
travel, I would have voted in favor of the Murphy amendment's
inclusion, as well as in favor of the final Defense Authorization bill.
I commend my colleagues, Congressman Murphy, Senator Lieberman, and
Senator Levin, for their leadership on this repeal effort.

[[Page 9690]]

As I have said time and again, Don't Ask, Don't Tell threatens our
national security and costs us millions of dollars each year to kick
out dedicated and highly-skilled service members because of their
sexual orientation and to retrain new ones.
I am also heartened to hear that our colleagues in the Senate Armed
Services Committee voted 16-12 to bring Senator Lieberman's companion
amendment to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell to the Senate floor along
with the Defense Authorization bill for consideration.
It is indeed a historic day for our military, the American people,
and our nation. What should have happened 17 years ago is now closer
than ever before. By passing the Murphy amendment along with the
Defense Authorization bill, the House of Representatives has pledged to
fulfill its promise of upholding the values for which the United States
stands by allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve openly in the
military.
As we celebrate this victory, we are reminded of the long battle that
has brought us to this point. I would be terribly remiss if I did not
acknowledge the hard work and sacrifices of countless service members
and veterans, many of whose lives have been negatively impacted by this
bigoted law, as well as those military and policy leaders, advocacy
organizations, and everyday Americans who have taken a stand against
discrimination.
Madam Chair, I am eternally grateful to the brave men and women in
our Armed Forces who protect this nation and the American people each
and every single day and look forward to Don't Ask, Don't Tell being
repealed once and for all.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Chair, when the President
announced his decision to repeal the current policy, known as ``Don't
Ask, Don't Tell,'' earlier this year, the military service chiefs and
the Secretary of Defense requested the opportunity to carry out the
President's directive in an orderly manner that would assure the
maintenance of discipline and morale in the Armed Forces. It was agreed
to at that time, including by the President, that a survey would be
sent to all the troops so that their input would be taken into account
regarding how best to implement the new policy, and that a report with
such recommendations as to how to best implement the new policy would
be issued this December, before any legislative action was taken. I
believe that process, which was agreed to by the President pursuant to
the request of the service chiefs and the Secretary of Defense, should
be followed.
Breaking the agreement now by having this vote is most unfortunate,
and I strongly disagree with the decision of the President, the
Speaker, and the majority leadership to break that agreement today.
Mr. FARR. Madam Chair, when we pass the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, we take a historic step to
restore equality in the ranks of our military by voting to repeal Don't
Ask Don't Tell.
Looking back in our history, social change occurred because of
leadership. President Obama, our military leaders and gay Americans
have shown leadership to overturn this discriminatory policy.
Comparable to the leadership shown by President Truman in 1948 when he
issued Executive Order 9981 that ordered the integration of the armed
forces, we can be proud that the civil rights of all Americans who want
to serve in our All Volunteer Forces is preserved. During its 17 year
history, DADT has discharged far too many highly qualified and trained
Arab linguists, doctors and mission critical specialists in every field
and in every service who simply wanted to serve their country. For the
last 17 years I been a Member of Congress who has fought to overturn
this policy that has prohibited openly gay men and women from serving
in the military.
Madam Chair, as we move forward in the legislative process, you may
be assured of my continued strong support for repeal of Don't Ask Don't
Tell.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Chair, we've heard these arguments before.
The Secretary of the Army said he was concerned about how the
proposed change would affect ``the efficiency . . . of the Army.''
A five-star General warned of ``social experiments'' and worried that
with reform in military personnel policy ``. . . we may have difficulty
attaining high morale.''
Those are not quotations from 2010 about the right of gay and lesbian
Americans to serve openly in the military. They're from more than 60
years ago, during the debate over racial integration of the armed
forces.
Does anyone believe they were right? If so, please speak up.
Is anyone prepared to argue that our military has suffered from the
full participation of African-Americans in its ranks?
I hope we all remember this history lesson as we prepare to vote on a
repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, an embarrassment unworthy
of a great country and a great military.
It is responsible for the discharge of 13,000 honorable Americans,
men and women who were told their service is dispensable . . . not
because of how they behaved, but because of who they are.
It does violence to cherished American values like equality,
inclusion, and tolerance. And it damages our national security too.
Given the military's recruitment challenges at a moment that we're
still, unfortunately, fighting two wars . . . it is incomprehensible to
me that we would reject any capable person who wishes to serve.
It was particularly galling to watch as hundreds of language
specialists who could speak Farsi and Arabic were dismissed just when
they were needed most, when our occupation of Iraq began.
The assertion that openly gay service members would undermine unit
cohesion is just bunk, Madam Chair.
It is an argument based on fear, not fact. The research suggests that
Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are comfortable serving side-by- side
with fellow soldiers who happen to be gay or lesbian.
To suggest otherwise is to insult our troops, as the author of the
amendment Mr. Murphy has pointed out. Because the morale argument
assumes our soldiers are so unprofessional--and even unpatriotic--that
they would let another soldier's sexual orientation distract them from
the mission.
Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, may have
put it best when he said, ``I cannot escape being troubled by . . . a
policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in
order to defend their fellow citizens. For me personally, it comes down
to integrity--theirs as individuals and ours as an institution.''
And now it comes down to our integrity, the integrity of those of us
privileged to serve in the people's House.
We must have the integrity to do what's right . . . to support our
troops and strengthen our military . . . by repealing the cruel and un-
American Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.
Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Chair, when the President
announced his decision to repeal the current policy, known as ``Don't
Ask, Don't Tell,'' earlier this year, the military service chiefs and
the Secretary of Defense requested the opportunity to carry out the
President's directive in an orderly manner that would assure the
maintenance of discipline and morale in the Armed Forces. It was agreed
at that time, including by the President, that a survey would be sent
to all the troops so that their input would be taken into account
regarding how best to implement the new policy, and that a report with
such recommendations as to how to best implement the new policy would
be issued this December, before any legislative action was taken. I
believe that that process, which was agreed to by the President
pursuant to the request of the service chiefs and the Secretary of
Defense, should be followed.
Breaking the agreement now by having this vote is most unfortunate,
and I strongly disagree with the decision of the President, the
Speaker, and the majority leadership to break that agreement today.
Mr. ACKERMAN. Madam Chair, several months ago I received a letter
from a solider who lives in New York. The letter was very similar to
those that many members of Congress receive from brave servicemen and
women who reside in their districts. The letter spoke of multiple tours
through Iraq and Afghanistan, of volunteering for more service even
after completing enough tours to retire, and of the pride of a soldier
who loves his country and is willing to sacrifice so much to defend it.
But this letter was not quite the same as those that many of us here
in the Capitol receive from time to time. You see, despite serving his
country for more than 20 years, despite volunteering to serve in a
combat zone to defend America's principles of freedom from tyranny and
from persecution, and despite receiving two bronze stars for
meritorious service to his country, the gay soldier who wrote this
letter is required by United States law to lie about who he is or face
being discharged from the military.
For 16 years, ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' has placed an unthinkable and
immoral burden on gay and lesbian servicemen and women, who, under
United States law and unlike their heterosexual counterparts, must hide
their sexual orientation and their partners from the military. Their
partners are not eligible for the military spousal benefits to which
the partners of heterosexual servicemen and women are entitled,

[[Page 9691]]

including health care and better housing. Madame Speaker, ``Don't Ask,
Don't Tell'' is, by definition, a discriminatory policy.
In the course of tonight's debate, several members have characterized
the House of Representatives' impending vote to repeal ``Don't Ask,
Don't Tell'' as a step forward for morality and equality. And it is.
But, before we collectively pat ourselves on the back for a job well
done, I would remind my colleagues that tonight's step forward is only
a result of the giant leap backwards we took when we instituted the
policy in the first place. Years from now, when our children read about
``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' in their history books, what will they think
of a government that so shamefully turned its back on gay servicemen
and women in the interest of a political compromise?
Madam Chair, politics is a business of grays. Seldom do we have the
opportunity to vote on legislation that is black or white, moral or
immoral, right or wrong. Tonight is the rare exception.
For the thousands of gay servicemen and women who so bravely serve
our country everyday but who live in constant fear of being discovered
for who they are, for the principles of freedom and equality upon which
the United States of America was founded, and in the interest of
righting a wrong that has persisted for far too long, I rise in support
of the amendment before us and for the patriotic soldier whose letter I
enclose for the record; a letter in which he implores me: ``If and when
this issue ever comes up for debate, and even for a vote in Congress, I
respectfully ask you to remember all the gay military personnel who are
right now risking our lives to defend the U.S. and its values.''
Madam Chair, that moment has come.

Hon. Gary Ackerman,
Member of the House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Ackerman: I am a captain in the United
States Army Reserve, and am presently deployed to
Afghanistan. I am writing to you with regard to the
military's so-called ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' (DADT) policy.
As you may know, there is currently a strong push in Congress
to overturn DADT--under which otherwise qualified gay men and
women are still being involuntarily dismissed from service--
and replace it with a policy of nondiscrimination on the
basis of sexual orientation. I strongly support this proposed
policy change. I would like to explain the basis for my
judgment.
I am a veteran of both the U. S. Navy Reserve and the U. S.
Army Reserve. In the latter I have served as both a sergeant
and as a commissioned officer. Since the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001 I have completed tours of duty in
Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kuwait. I was informed that I had
completed twenty good years of Reserve military service, and
had thus earned the right to retire. But I did not want to
retire with my country still at war. So I volunteered for
another combat zone deployment, and am serving once again in
Afghanistan. I have been at my current duty station------. I
recite this brief resume to let you know that I am no mere
observer of the military, but rather someone who has
dedicated much of my life to our national defense.
Congressman Ackerman, I am also one of the many gay
military personnel who have served our country faithfully in
these times of terrorism and war. I want to give you my
personal perspective on why DADT is so wrong. First of all,
it is widely recognized that a married service member's
relationship with his or her spouse has a profound impact on
that service member's fitness for duty. Thus, straight
married service members are free, within the limits of
resource availability and operational constraints, to
maintain communications with their spouses. In fact, such
communication is actively encouraged. Regular phone calls, e-
mail, and postal letters really help both the service member
and spouse get through the strain of combat zone deployments
in particular.
Many gay service members have committed partners who, every
day, face the same stress and make the same sacrifices as do
their straight counterparts. But because of DADT, gay service
members and their partners have to constantly worry that an
overheard telephone call, an intercepted e-mail message, or
other type of compromised communication could lead to a
degrading, career-destroying investigation. It is wrong, I
believe, to place such additional burdens on the back of
American patriots.
I write of these matters from personal experience. When the
9/11 terrorist attacks occurred I was in a serious long-term
relationship. But the extensive post-9/11 active duty I
performed put a serious strain on this relationship. The
relationship finally fell completely apart during my first
Afghanistan deployment in------.
As you may know, the military has seen a troubling increase
in the service member suicide rate since 9/11. Furthermore,
the loss of a serious relationship is one of the critical
risk factors that may contribute to such suicides. I
experienced this particular risk factor and my situation was
compounded by its occurrence in a war zone. Six years later,
I can still vividly remember cradling my government-issue
pistol in my hands and fighting the urge to blow my own
brains out.
I made it through that crisis. I completed my mission in
Afghanistan successfully, and in fact was decorated with a
Bronze Star Medal at the conclusion of that tour. I went on
to earn a second Bronze Star Medal in Iraq two years later,
and was promoted to------ shortly after that.
What made that crisis particularly difficult was the
isolation imposed on me as a result of DADT. A straight
Soldier in a comparable crisis could turn to his commander,
his first sergeant, or a ``battle buddy'' for help and
advice. But such avenues are legally closed to gay troops. If
I, for example, had shared the details of my situation with
my commander--a decent and honorable man--he would have been
legally obligated to have initiated an investigation that
would have heaped even more stress upon me, disrupted my
unit's mission, and ultimately destroyed my career.
I know that many would say that a gay service member in
such a situation could go to a chaplain in confidentiality. I
have great respect for our military chaplains and for all the
good work that they do. But I also believe that no service
member should feel forced to see a chaplain as his or her
only option. Every service member should have the right to
speak freely with a commander, a trusted noncommissioned
officer, or a battle buddy. I assert this not only as an
individual Soldier, but also as an officer with extensive
experience as a platoon leader and company commander. When I
have been in these command positions, I have had Soldiers
share with me some very personal information about their
families and home lives. I was glad that these Soldiers
trusted me, and this bond of trust and openness enabled me to
give each individual the counsel or moral support that was
needed. But what about gay troops? They are legally deprived
of such a relationship with a commander, a senior
noncommissioned officer, or a battle buddy. This is wrong.
These gay troops--especially those experiencing the stress of
combat zone duty--deserve access to such relationships. The
DADT policy shackles the hands of leaders like myself and
prevents us from properly supporting all our troops. This
policy puts service members and their loved ones at risk.
DADT is a shameful blot on our national honor.
I know that many are wary of a repeal of DADT. Perhaps
some--particularly those who oppose homosexual conduct on
religious grounds--see such a policy change as the equivalent
of governmental approval of homosexual conduct. But this is
not so. Let me strike an analogy. Many religious individuals
are opposed, on biblical grounds, to divorce and remarriage.
But persons who have divorced and remarried are plentiful in
the armed services, and many serve alongside very
conservative religious persons every day. Respecting
divorced-and-remarried persons as military professionals does
not mean one agrees with their personal life choices, or that
the government is advocating such choices. To me, the main
issue is that we respect personnel who serve their country
honorably and who act with responsibility and integrity in
their personal lives. For example, in the military we will
punish a ``deadbeat dad'' who neglects to pay his child
support, but we support and respect the divorced father who
stays committed to his parental responsibilities. I believe
that we need to take a comparable stance towards gay service
members.
There are also some who claim that repealing DADT will
negatively impact morale and discipline in our armed
services. But I have never seen a single shred of empirical
evidence to support such assertions. In fact, the available
evidence suggests that treating gay and straight troops
equally has no negative impact on military forces. Consider
the fact that many of our key allies in current combat and
security operations--nations such as the United Kingdom,
Canada, and Australia--do not discriminate on the basis of
sexual orientation in their armed services. These fighting
forces continue to perform admirably. Furthermore, troops
from these and other nondiscriminatory nations live and serve
side by side every day with U.S. troops in war zones. On this
current tour, for example, I personally have shared living
and bathing facilities with uniformed personnel from
Australia, Canada, Denmark, Spain, and the United Kingdom--
never have I seen a U.S. serviceman run shrieking from the
showers because he feared that he might encounter an openly
gay individual from one of these allied nations. Last year I
met an openly gay chief petty officer from the Australian
navy. He had served as part of a U.S.-led multinational team
in Iraq. He told me that not only was his presence no problem
for the Americans, but they decorated him with a U.S. medal
at the end of his tour! Surely if Americans can accept a gay
Australian, they can also accept gay fellow Americans. People
who claim that the U.S. military cannot manage a policy of
sexual orientation nondiscrimination are not only ignoring
the realities of current operations, but they are also
essentially saying that American service personnel are less
professional than those of the U.K., Canada, and

[[Page 9692]]

other nondiscriminatory nations--I consider such an assertion
to be a highly offensive insult.
Of course, my argument ultimately leads to a logical--and
fair--question: How do we manage this change in policy? The
answer is simple. Hold gay service members to exactly the
same standards we hold straight service members. If gay
individuals were to commit acts of sexual harassment, or
engage in any other type of activity that goes contrary to
military order, we would discipline them appropriately--and
separate them from the service if necessary. This happens to
straight service members when necessary; I myself once had to
discipline a straight male noncommissioned officer for his
inappropriate behavior towards a junior female Soldier. This
NCO accepted my counsel, corrected his behavior, and
completed his tour of duty successfully. On the other hand,
those gay individuals who conduct themselves with honor and
dignity, and who demonstrate respect for their fellow service
members, would continue to do their jobs. This is exactly the
policy that coalition militaries, many U. S. police
departments, and dozens of civilian corporations have been
following successfully for years. Are we really to believe
that this course of action is beyond the capability of the
U.S. military?
In fact, I believe that the demise of DADT will happen as
smoothly and quietly as did similar policy changes in the
militaries of allied nations. Gay troops who have been
behaving in a professional manner prior to the demise of DADT
are not suddenly going to begin engaging in outrageous or
disruptive behavior. Today's gay troops, despite the burdens
of DADT, are putting their lives on the line every day to
defend this country; many of us have been tested in Iraq,
Afghanistan, Somalia, and other challenging locations. If the
military gets rid of DADT, we will continue to do our jobs
and take care of our battle buddies; we and our commanders
will simply have a terrible burden lifted from our shoulders.
Congressman, after more than two decades of military
service--at sea and on land, from the Cold War era to the
Global War on Terror, in joint service and multinational
environments--I think I know the women and men of our armed
forces pretty well. I can tell you that every day U. S.
service members overcome barriers of difference--difference
in race, ethnic heritage, religion, regional origin, gender,
socioeconomic class, and other areas. Sexual orientation is
just another element in this complex equation. We are able to
overcome all these types of difference and form cohesive
teams by focusing on the basics: mutual respect, a solid work
ethic, personal integrity, and commitment to our common
missions. We are also able to recognize that a person whose
difference may initially unsettle us may also possess a
critical skill, a body of knowledge, or a depth of experience
that we need to accomplish these common missions. Can we
afford to lose a fluent Arabic linguist because she is a
lesbian? Can we afford to discard a combat seasoned
infantryman because he is gay?
I have enclosed with this letter some documentation from my
combat zone service. My contributions have been modest
compared to the heroism shown by many of my sisters and
brothers in arms. Still, I am proud of what I have achieved.
I leave it to you to look at my record and determine whether
or not the military would be better off if I--and, for that
matter, thousands of people like me--were to be involuntarily
dismissed from duty.
I am an ordinary guy who grew up in New York. My dad is a
retired New York City cop who was deeply impacted by the 9/11
terrorist attacks. Like any other deployed Soldier, I call my
folks at least once a week, and they worry about me just like
the parents of any Soldier. I don't want to turn the military
into some sort of gay utopia. I just want gay Soldiers,
Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen--together with
our loved ones--to have the sort of peace of mind that our
straight sisters and brothers take for granted.
Congressman Ackerman, I read on your Web site about how you
stood up for Soldiers who were not getting their combat zone
tax exemption in Iraq. So I know you are a leader who
believes in taking care of the troops. Sir, I believe that
now is the time to give troops like me relief from the
injustice of ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'' If and when this
issue comes up for debate, and even for a vote, in Congress,
I respectfully ask you to remember all the gay military
personnel who are right now risking our lives to defend the
United States and its values. If you have any questions or
comments about anything I have written, you may contact me
via e-mail. And please feel free to share this letter and its
enclosures, including my contact information, with any
individuals or organizations whom you deem appropriate.
Sincerely, ------.

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Chair, I rise today in strong support of the
amendment to repeal the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' policy of our
nation's military, a discriminatory and self-defeating policy that I
have opposed from its inception.
Our restrictive policy undermines our national security. It has
resulted in the discharge of more than 13,000 trained and qualified men
and women from our armed forces. It has caused thousands more not to
re-enlist and countless others not to serve at all.
That these brave men and women are being denied the opportunity to
serve their country is a grave injustice. And, we have been so
misguided in our pursuit of this discriminatory policy that we have
ignored the very real harm it causes our military personnel at a time
when our nation is engaged in two wars and the need for talented and
dedicated service members could not be greater.
Twenty-five advanced militaries throughout the world, including our
closest allies such as Israel, Canada, and Britain, allow gays and
lesbians to serve and none have seen any damage to their readiness. In
stark contrast, the United States military, because of ``Don't Ask,
Don't Tell,'' has undermined its readiness by discharging capable
fighter pilots, infantry officers, translators, and other highly
trained specialists who are in high demand.
Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said, ``we
have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about
who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens.'' Today, many
Americans defending our nation could be subject to a ``Don't Ask, Don't
Tell'' dismissal. They should be able to serve without fear that their
nation will punish them for being open about who they are.
``Don't Ask Don't Tell'' is contrary to the values this country
stands for. America was founded on the principle of human dignity and
on the belief that all men are created equal--and yet this policy
perpetuates the absurd notion that some are more equal than others.
Those who oppose the repeal of ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' are using
the same language used by those who opposed the racial integration of
our Armed Forces in 1948, fought the inclusion of women, and argued
against the Civil Rights Act in 1965. The arguments are just as wrong
today as they were then.
I want to commend Speaker Pelosi and President Obama for their
leadership on this issue, and I ask all of my colleagues to support
repeal. Passage of this amendment will bring an end to this shameful
inequity.
Mr. RUSH. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of the Murphy
amendment. By adopting this amendment the House, today, takes an
important step in eliminating discrimination in our nation's armed
forces.
Madam Chair, critics of this amendment, and the repeal effort, have
often stated that allowing open service will ``disrupt unit cohesion''
and lead to a breakdown in ``good order and discipline.'' These are the
same arguments that were used in the 1940s to object to the integration
of America's armed forces. Since that time, tens of thousands of
African-Americans, myself included, have proudly served this nation
that they love. Some have even risen to positions of distinction such
as Colin Powell, who served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Much in that same honorable tradition, Madam Chair, gay and lesbian
service members have also served our country with distinction. Whether
on land, sea, or in the air gay and lesbian Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen,
Marines and Coast Guardsmen have served, and continue to serve,
professionally and admirably.
Madam Chair, open service is a policy that is embraced by many of our
key allies. In fact, in our current conflicts, American forces have
served side by side with British, Canadian and Australian forces. These
nations all permit open service and have demonstrated--through their
soldiers' blood, sweat and tears--that they, too, are an effective
fighting force.
In fact, Madam Chair, 35 countries, thirty-five, allow for open
service. That's 35 countries, on all six inhabited continents, that
have moved past prejudice and bigotry. Now is the time for the United
States to be the 36th country to join them.
Of our NATO allies, Turkey and the United States are the only
countries that have not yet allowed for open service. By passing this
amendment, Madam Chair, the United States takes the first step in
rectifying that situation.
Madam Chair, I will close with a quote from one of our former
colleagues that I seldom, if ever, agreed with: Republican Senator
Barry Goldwater.
In 1993, Senator Goldwater penned an op-ed for the Washington Post
and the Los Angeles Times where he stated, ``It's no great secret that
military studies have proved again and again that there's no valid
reason for keeping the ban on gays.'' I ask my colleagues to remember
Senator Goldwater's words and to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Chair, Last week, the House of
Representatives considered an amendment offered by Congressman Patrick
Murphy to H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2011, to repeal the Armed Forces personnel

[[Page 9693]]

policy of ``don't ask, don't tell.'' Due to a death in the family, I
was not present for the vote on the House floor. Had I been present, I
would have voted against this amendment.
While I believe no American should be denied the ability to serve
their country because of their sexual orientation, it is important to
balance this commitment to serve with the practical implications of
this dramatic policy change.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the Joint Chiefs of Staff
repeatedly asked Congress to allow the Department of Defense the time
to complete its comprehensive review of ``don't ask, don't tell''
before taking legislative action to change this policy. These requests
were denied by the Majority, whose actions imply that Members of
Congress are in a better position to determine personnel policies than
military leaders themselves.
We have a responsibility to consider the views of those men and women
in uniform, and a duty to allow the leaders of our Armed Forces to
finish their review before taking premature legislative action. By
refusing to take into consideration the ongoing review by the
Department of Defense, the Majority risks undermining the relationship
between our elected leaders and the men and women serving our Nation. I
have serious concerns with the potential for this preemptive decision
to negatively impact our military's ability to recruit, retain, and
ready servicemembers now and in the future.
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I urge my
colleagues to support 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 Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. McKEON. 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 Pennsylvania
will be postponed.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 111-498 on
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 82 by Mr. Inslee of Washington;
Amendment No. 21 by Mr. Gutierrez of Illinois;
Amendment No. 42 by Ms. Eshoo of California;
Amendment No. 80 by Ms. Pingree of Maine;
Amendment No. 79 by Mr. Patrick J. Murphy of Pennsylvania;
Amendment No. 47 by Mr. Sarbanes of Maryland.
Except for amendments numbered 80 and 79, the Chair will reduce to 5
minutes the time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this
series.

Amendment No. 82 Offered by Mr. Inslee

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington
(Mr. Inslee) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 410,
noes 8, not voting 19, as follows:

[Roll No. 313]

AYES--410

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--8

Brady (TX)
Campbell
Flake
Hensarling
Herger
McClintock
Paul
Shadegg

NOT VOTING--19

Bishop (UT)
Boren
Braley (IA)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Conyers
Costa
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
Graves
Hastings (FL)
Marshall
Melancon
Moore (KS)
Pierluisi
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Wu

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 2117

Messrs. HERGER and SHADEGG changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''

[[Page 9694]]

Messrs. LUETKEMEYER and KING of Iowa changed their vote from ``no''
to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Gutierrez

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Gutierrez) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 372,
noes 52, not voting 13, as follows:

[Roll No. 314]

AYES--372

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gerlach
Giffords
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Pitts
Platts
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)

NOES--52

Akin
Alexander
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bishop (UT)
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Campbell
Carter
Cassidy
Conaway
Culberson
Flake
Fleming
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey (GA)
Green, Gene
Griffith
Hall (TX)
Hensarling
Herger
Issa
Johnson, Sam
King (IA)
Lamborn
Linder
Marchant
Minnick
Neugebauer
Owens
Paul
Pence
Petri
Poe (TX)
Price (GA)
Rooney
Scalise
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Sullivan
Thornberry
Visclosky
Westmoreland
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--13

Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Graves
Hastings (FL)
Melancon
Pierluisi
Pingree (ME)
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Sarbanes

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 2126

Mrs. BLACKBURN and Ms. FOXX changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 42 Offered by Ms. Eshoo

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Eshoo) on which further proceedings were postponed and
on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 315]

AYES--218

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Andrews
Arcuri
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Ehlers
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kingston
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)

[[Page 9695]]

Murphy (NY)
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rohrabacher
Rothman (NJ)
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NOES--210

Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bean
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Childers
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Costello
Crenshaw
Culberson
Dahlkemper
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Djou
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Edwards (TX)
Ellsworth
Emerson
Etheridge
Fallin
Filner
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Granger
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Himes
Hinojosa
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Ortiz
Owens
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Pence
Perriello
Peterson
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Salazar
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Stearns
Sullivan
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Visclosky
Walden
Wamp
Watt
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--10

Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Graves
Hastings (FL)
Melancon
Pierluisi
Ryan (WI)
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 2134

Messrs. LEWIS of California, CLEAVER, BOCCIERI, and DICKS changed
their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. MOLLOHAN and CAPUANO changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 80 Offered by Ms. Pingree of Maine

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Maine
(Ms. Pingree) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 193,
noes 231, answered ``present'' 3, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 316]

AYES--193

Altmire
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Camp
Campbell
Capito
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Christensen
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Dicks
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Eshoo
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Garrett (NJ)
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Himes
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kagen
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Lance
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Mack
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Matsui
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Perlmutter
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Posey
Quigley
Rahall
Rehberg
Reyes
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ross
Rush
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Sensenbrenner
Shadegg
Sherman
Speier
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Tanner
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Tiahrt
Titus
Towns
Upton
Van Hollen
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Watt
Waxman
Westmoreland
Wu

NOES--231

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Bright
Brown (SC)
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Cantor
Cao
Capuano
Carson (IN)
Carter
Castle
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Costello
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Culberson
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Delahunt
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Djou
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Driehaus
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Etheridge
Fallin
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gerlach
Goodlatte
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Higgins
Hill
Hinojosa
Hunter
Inglis
Israel
Issa
Jordan (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
King (IA)
Kingston
Kissell
Kline (MN)
Kucinich
Lamborn
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maffei
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McCotter
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Mica
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Norton
Nunes
Nye
Olson
Payne
Pence
Perriello
Peters
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pomeroy
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rangel
Reichert
Richardson
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schmidt
Schock
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)

[[Page 9696]]

Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Spratt
Sutton
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Watson
Weiner
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--3

Slaughter
Waters
Woolsey

NOT VOTING--10

Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Graves
Hastings (FL)
Melancon
Pierluisi
Ryan (WI)
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). Two minutes remain in this vote.

{time} 2151

Mr. CONYERS changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 79 Offered by Mr. Patrick J. Murphy of Pennsylvania

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy) on which further proceedings were
postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 234,
noes 194, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 317]

AYES--234

Ackerman
Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Bordallo
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Cao
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McMahon
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NOES--194

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boucher
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Childers
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Davis (TN)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Emerson
Etheridge
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Green, Gene
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Ortiz
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Spratt
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--10

Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Graves
Hastings (FL)
Melancon
Pierluisi
Ryan (WI)
Sablan

Announcement By the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 5 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 2207

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Announcement By the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair will remind all persons in the gallery
that they are here as guests of the House and that any manifestation of
approval or disapproval of proceedings is in violation of the rules of
the House.

Amendment No. 47 Offered by Mr. Sarbanes

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland
(Mr. Sarbanes) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 318]

AYES--253

Ackerman
Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Cao
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers

[[Page 9697]]

Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kratovil
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McMahon
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth

NOES--172

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Dahlkemper
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Ehlers
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Stearns
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--12

Boren
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Graves
Hastings (FL)
Linder
Melancon
Pierluisi
Radanovich
Ryan (WI)
Sablan

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in
this vote.

{time} 2216

Mr. BOYD changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. SKELTON. Madam Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Capuano) having assumed the chair, Ms. McCollum, 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. 5136) to
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for military activities
of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths
for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution
thereon.

____________________