[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8845-8916]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




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

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

                              {time}  1811


                     In the Committee of the Whole

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


                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. McKinley

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

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

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

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

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

                              {time}  1815

  Let's make it clear. I acknowledge that climate change is occurring. 
The climate has always been changing. The question is whether or not, 
given the global unrest from these rogue nations and our war on 
terrorism, whether we should be diverting our funds to support an 
ideology instead of maximizing our investments in national security.
  Now, climate change alarmists contend that man-made CO2 is 
the cause of climate change. Most people may not realize that 96 
percent of all the CO2 emissions occur naturally, and 
America's CO2 emissions' contribution to the global 
community is actually less than 1 percent, Mr. Chairman. But even with 
these facts, decarbonizing America's economy is still a long-term goal 
of the climate alarmists. But to what end?
  If America totally stopped burning coal--I mean this, Mr. Chairman. 
If every coal-fired powerhouse, factory, school, institution, if every 
institution in America stopped burning coal today, we would reduce the 
emissions of CO2 in the globe around the world by 0.2 
percent. Think about that, Mr. Chair, 0.2 percent. Within 5 years, the 
rest of the world's CO2 emissions would make up the 
difference while our entire economy would have been turned upside down. 
We would have gained nothing in America at considerable cost to our 
country's economy.
  Yesterday, Secretary of State John Kerry was quoted saying: ``If we 
make the necessary efforts to address climate change, and supposing we 
are wrong, what's the worst that can happen?''
  ``What's the worst that can happen?'' What about spending trillions 
of dollars, the loss of millions of jobs, more expensive electric 
bills, and making our economy less competitive?
  People like this talk about these issues as if there is no downside 
or cost to what they are advocating. Mr. Chairman, you and I know that 
is not the case.
  Germany is switching back to coal-fired power, and China and India 
are building coal-fired power plants every week. America is the only 
industrialized nation discouraging the use of coal and other fossil 
fuels.
  Leadership expert John Maxwell once said: ``He who thinks he leads 
but has no followers is only taking a walk.''
  The President should look around. He is alone on this issue. We 
shouldn't be putting our funds for the military and our defense at risk 
by diverting funds for an ideologically motivated agenda.
  If this administration truly wishes to address the problem of 
CO2 emissions, they should help the rest of the world tackle 
the deforestation of our tropical rain forests.
  Al Gore and the Sierra Club acknowledge that deforestation in Africa 
and the Amazon is five to six times more of a polluter than the 
combination of every coal-fired powerhouse in America--five to six 
times worse. These tropical forests are being destroyed because 
developing nations don't have access to affordable electricity for 
heating and cooking and clean water.

[[Page 8846]]

  Unfortunately, the debate on this issue has turned to name-calling. 
One of my colleagues today has called those of us who disagree with the 
President over this issue ``irresponsible,'' ``Republican science 
deniers,'' and ``members of the Flat Earth Society.'' Al Gore called 
people who question climate change policies ``immoral, unethical, and 
despicable.''
  Mr. Chairman, you and I are old enough to know that bullying and 
name-calling are just childish tactics and don't have a place in this 
debate. Let's stop the name-calling. It is time for an adult 
conversation.
  We should not sacrifice our economy and our national security by 
diverting funds in pursuit of an ideological crusade. This is not the 
time to divert our financial resources from our military for climate 
change purposes when we are confronting Syria, Iran, Russia, Libya, and 
other rogue nations around the world. In addition, we have Boko Haram, 
Hamas, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups promoting instability and 
threatening liberty and freedom around the world.
  Consequently, this amendment will ensure we maximize our military 
might without diverting funds for a politically motivated agenda. I 
urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, the McKinley amendment provides that the Department of 
Defense may not make decisions based on science. Imagine, the 
Department of Defense should not make decisions based on science. They 
should ignore that there may be a cost from climate change. This 
amendment waves a magic wand and decrees that climate change imposes no 
costs at all. Therefore, they would block the Defense Department from 
recognizing the damage caused by climate change.
  This is incredible, because the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review 
called climate change ``an accelerant of instability or conflict'' that 
``could have significant geopolitical impacts around the world, 
contributing to poverty, environmental degradation, and the further 
weakening of fragile governments.'' But the McKinley amendment tells 
the DOD to ignore these impacts.
  Numerous national security experts with unimpeachable credentials--
Democrats and Republicans alike--have warned that climate change 
threatens our national security. Just this month, a panel of retired 
three- and four-star generals and admirals released a report calling 
for action to address this problem.
  It will be too late for action when they see some of their facilities 
being overwhelmed by the increase in rising seas or by storms that may 
destroy some of our defense installations. But according to this 
amendment, they can't look at that. They can't make decisions based on 
the science that may come from these governmental and other scientific 
agencies.
  Well, I think that is science denial at its worst to say that the 
Defense Department cannot recognize damage caused by climate change. It 
looks like it is trying to overturn the laws of nature.
  So we would tie the hands of the Defense Department and tell them 
that even though we might have exacerbated heat waves, droughts, 
wildfires, floods, water- and vector-borne diseases, diseases which 
will pose greater risk to human health and lives around the world, and 
wheat and corn yields are already experiencing the negative impact and 
we have a larger risk of food security globally and regionally, if 
scientists tell us that, we are not allowed to have our Defense 
Department pay any heed to it.
  Well, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to call anybody names, but I think 
this is a seriously flawed amendment, and I urge my colleagues to 
oppose it.
  And I now yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Moran).
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, the Catholic Church is still trying to live 
down condemning Galileo for suggesting that the Sun, instead of the 
Earth, was the center of the universe. But fortunately, our military 
and our President is on the right side of history and science.
  Our military is listening to the facts and acting on the fact of 
climate change by ensuring that its assets are capable of withstanding 
more frequent and severe weather conditions, building resiliency in 
their command and control structures, planning military response 
contingencies that recognize the effects climate change is having on 
people, countries, and organizations around the world that may wish us 
harm. That is what this amendment would prevent the military from 
doing, because they are now reacting to the facts from these studies.
  Climate change is a national security concern. It is a new form of 
stress on military readiness. The Navy, for example, just last week 
identified 128 naval installations that are going to be underwater in 
the near future if we don't take steps now to deal with it. It is a 
catalyst for instability and conflict around the world.
  As my friend from California mentioned, the military's Quadrennial 
Defense Review states that ``the pressures caused by climate change 
will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on 
economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world.''
  The results will be a higher demand for American troops abroad, even 
as we struggle to deal with the devastating impacts caused by flooding 
and extreme weather events at home. We have volatile regions around the 
world that are going to be driven to desperation and resort to 
terrorist activity in response to the impacts of climate change and the 
resulting resource competition.
  This is what the military is telling us. Climate change's ``effects 
are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad, such as 
poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social 
tensions.'' It is a catalyst for conflict.
  For the sake of our military, for the sake of our national security, 
we have got to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West 
Virginia will be postponed.


             Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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


            amendment no. 2 offered by mr. gosar of arizona

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

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

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


            amendment no. 3 offered by mr. welch of vermont

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

[[Page 8847]]



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

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


           amendment no. 5 offered by Mr. Lamborn of Colorado

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

     SEC. 5__. REVISED REGULATIONS FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.

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


          amendment no. 12 offered by Mr. Cleaver of missouri

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

                   Subtitle H--World War I Memorials

     SEC. 1091. SHORT TITLE.

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

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

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

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

       (a) Redesignation.--Pershing Park in the District of 
     Columbia is hereby redesignated as the ``National World War I 
     Memorial''.
       (b) Ceremonies.--The Commission may plan, develop, and 
     execute ceremonies for the rededication of Pershing Park, as 
     it approaches its 50th anniversary, as the National World War 
     I Memorial and for the enhancement of the General Pershing 
     Commemorative Work as authorized by subsection (c).
       (c) Authority To Enhance Commemorative Work.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission may enhance the General 
     Pershing Commemorative Work by constructing on the land 
     designated by subsection (a) as the National World War I 
     Memorial appropriate sculptural and other commemorative 
     elements, including landscaping, to further honor the service 
     of members of the United States Armed Forces in World War I.
       (2) General pershing commemorative work defined.--The term 
     ``General Pershing Commemorative Work'' means the memorial to 
     the late John J. Pershing, General of the Armies of the 
     United States, who commanded the American Expeditionary 
     Forces in World War I, and to the officers and men under his 
     command, as authorized by Public Law 89-786 (80 Stat. 1377).
       (d) Compliance With Standards for Commemorative Works.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     chapter 89 of title 40, United States Code, applies to the 
     enhancement of the General Pershing Commemorative Work under 
     subsection (c).
       (2) Waiver of certain requirements.--
       (A) Site selection for memorial.--Section 8905 of such 
     title does not apply with respect to the selection of the 
     site for the National World War I Memorial.
       (B) Certain conditions.--Section 8908(b) of such title does 
     not apply to this subtitle.
       (e) No Infringement Upon Existing Memorial.--The National 
     World War I Memorial may not interfere with or encroach on 
     the District of Columbia War Memorial.
       (f) Deposit of Excess Funds.--
       (1) Use for other world war i commemorative activities.--
     If, upon payment of all expenses for the enhancement of the 
     General Pershing Commemorative Work under subsection (c) 
     (including the maintenance and preservation amount required 
     by section 8906(b)(1) of title 40, United States Code), there 
     remains a balance of funds received for such purpose, the 
     Commission may use the amount of the balance for other 
     commemorative activities authorized under the World War I 
     Centennial Commission Act (Public Law 112-272; 126 Stat. 
     2448).
       (2) Use for other commemorative works.--If the authority 
     for enhancement of the General Pershing Commemorative Work 
     and the authority of the Commission to plan and conduct 
     commemorative activities under the World War I Centennial 
     Commission Act have expired and there remains a balance of 
     funds received for the enhancement of the General Pershing 
     Commemorative Work, the Commission shall transmit the amount 
     of the balance to a separate account with the National Park 
     Foundation, to be available to the Secretary of the Interior 
     following the process provided in section 8906(b)(4) of title 
     40, United States Code, for accounts established under 
     section 8906(b)(3) of such title, except that funds in such 
     account may only be obligated subject to appropriation.
       (g) Authorization To Complete Construction After 
     Termination of Commission.--Section 8 of the World War I 
     Centennial Commission Act (Public Law 112-272) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``The Centennial 
     Commission'' and inserting ``Except as provided in subsection 
     (c), the Centennial Commission''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Exception for Completion of National World War I 
     Memorial.--The Centennial Commission may perform such work as 
     is necessary to complete the rededication of the National 
     World War I Memorial and enhancement of the General Pershing 
     Commemorative Work under section 1093 of the World War I 
     Memorial Act of 2014, subject to section 8903 of title 40, 
     United States Code.''.

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

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

[[Page 8848]]

       (c) Limitation on Obligation of Federal Funds.--
       (1) Limitation.--Section 9 of such Act (Public Law 112-272; 
     126 Stat. 2453) is amended to read as follows:

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

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

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


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

       At the end of title XI, add the following:

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

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


             amendment no. 18 offered by mr. turner of ohio

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

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

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


          amendment no. 19 offered by mr. hunter of california

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

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

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) On September 11, 2012, United States facilities in 
     Benghazi, Libya were attacked by an organized group of armed 
     terrorists, killing United States Ambassador Chris Stevens, 
     Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods.
       (2) On September 14, 2012, President Obama stated that: 
     ``We will bring to justice those who took them from us. . 
     .making it clear that justice will come to those who harm 
     Americans.''.
       (3) On May 1, 2014, White House spokesman Jay Carney stated 
     that: ``I can assure you that the President's direction is 
     that those who killed four Americans will be pursued by the 
     United States until they are brought to justice. And if 
     anyone doubts that, they should ask...friends and family 
     members of Osama bin Laden.''.
       (4) In testimony before Congress in October 2013, the 
     Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin 
     Dempsey, asserted that the President lacks the authority to 
     use military force to find and kill the Benghazi attackers.
       (5) Since the Benghazi attacks, the President has not 
     requested authority from Congress to use military force 
     against the Benghazi attackers.
       (6) No terrorist responsible for the Benghazi attacks has 
     been brought to justice.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that--
       (1) the persons and organizations who carried out the 
     attacks on United States personnel in Benghazi, Libya on 
     September 11 and 12, 2012, pose a continuing threat to the 
     national security of the United States;
       (2) the failure to hold any individual responsible for 
     these terrorist attacks is a travesty of justice, and 
     undermines the national security of the United States; and
       (3) the uncertainty surrounding the authority of the 
     President to use force against the terrorists responsible for 
     the attack against United States personnel in Benghazi, 
     Libya, undermines the President as Commander-in-Chief of the 
     Armed Forces of the United States.
       (c) Report and Determination.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to 
     Congress--
       (A) a report that contains--
       (i) the identity and location of those persons and 
     organizations that planned, authorized, or committed the 
     attacks against the United States facilities in Benghazi, 
     Libya that occurred on September 11 and 12, 2012; and
       (ii) a detailed and specific description of all actions 
     that have been taken to kill or capture any of the persons 
     described in clause (i); and
       (B) a determination regarding whether the President 
     currently possesses the authority to use the Armed Forces of 
     the United States against all persons and organizations 
     described in subparagraph (A)(i).
       (2) Form.--The report and determination described in this 
     subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form to the 
     maximum extent possible, and may contain a classified annex.
       (d) Strategy to Combat Regional Terrorist Threats.--
       (1) Timing and content.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit 
     to the appropriate congressional committees a comprehensive 
     strategy to counter the growing threat posed by radical 
     Islamist terrorist groups in North Africa, West Africa, and 
     the

[[Page 8849]]

     Sahel, which shall include, among other things--
       (A) a strategy to bring to justice those persons who 
     planned, authorized, or committed the terrorist attacks 
     against the United States facilities in Benghazi, Libya that 
     occurred on September 11 and 12, 2012;
       (B) a description of the radical Islamist terrorist groups 
     active in North Africa, West Africa, and the Sahel, including 
     an assessment of their origins, strategic aims, tactical 
     methods, funding sources, leadership, and relationships with 
     other terrorist groups or state actors;
       (C) a description of the key military, diplomatic, 
     intelligence, and public diplomacy resources available to 
     address these growing regional terrorist threats; and
       (D) a strategy to maximize the coordination between, and 
     the effectiveness of, United States military, diplomatic, 
     intelligence, and public diplomacy resources to counter these 
     growing regional terrorist threats.
       (2) Form.--The strategy described in this subsection shall 
     be submitted in unclassified form to the maximum extent 
     possible, and may contain a classified annex.
       (3) Definition of appropriate congressional committees.--In 
     this subsection, the term ``appropriate congressional 
     committees'' means--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Foreign Relations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence 
     of the Senate; and
       (B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Foreign Affairs, and the Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the House of Representatives.


           amendment no. 20 offered by mr. rigell of virginia

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

     SEC. 12_. WAR POWERS OF CONGRESS.

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


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

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

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

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


           amendment no. 23 offered by Mr. Daines of Montana

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

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

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The April 2010 Nuclear Posture Review stated--
       (A) ``After considering a wide range of possible options 
     for the U.S. strategic nuclear posture, including some that 
     involved eliminating a leg of the Triad, the NPR concluded 
     that for planned reductions under New START, the United 
     States should retain a smaller Triad of SLBMs [submarine 
     launched ballistic missiles], ICBMs [intercontinental 
     ballistic missiles], and heavy bombers. Retaining all three 
     Triad legs will best maintain strategic stability at 
     reasonable cost, while hedging against potential technical 
     problems or vulnerabilities.'';
       (B) ``ICBMs provide significant advantages to the U.S. 
     nuclear force posture, including extremely secure command and 
     control, high readiness rates, and relatively low operating 
     costs.'';
       (C) ``a survivable U.S. response force requires continuous 
     at-sea deployments of SSBNs [ballistic missile submarines] in 
     both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, as well as the ability 
     to surge additional submarines in crisis.''; and
       (D) nuclear-capable bombers--
       (i) ``[provide] a rapid and effective hedge against 
     technical challenges with another leg of the Triad, as well 
     as geopolitical uncertainties''; and
       (ii) ``are important to extended deterrence of potential 
     attacks on U.S. allies and partners.''.
       (2) In a letter to the Senate on February 2, 2011, 
     regarding the New START Treaty, President Obama stated that 
     ``I intend to modernize or replace the triad of strategic 
     nuclear delivery systems: a heavy bomber and air- launched 
     cruise missile, an ICBM, and a nuclear-powered ballistic 
     missile submarine (SSBN) and SLBM.''.
       (3) In the Resolution Of Advice And Consent To Ratification 
     of the New START Treaty, the Senate stated that ``it is the 
     sense of the Senate that United States deterrence and 
     flexibility is assured by a robust triad of strategic 
     delivery vehicles. To this end, the United States is 
     committed to accomplishing the modernization and replacement 
     of its strategic nuclear delivery vehicles, and to ensuring 
     the continued flexibility of United States conventional and 
     nuclear delivery systems.''.
       (4) On June 19, 2013, the Secretary of Defense, Chuck 
     Hagel, stated, ``First, the U.S. will maintain a ready and 
     credible deterrent. Second, we will retain a triad of 
     bombers, ICBMs, and ballistic missile submarines. Third, we 
     will make sure that our nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, 
     ready and effective.''.
       (5) Section 1062 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 10 U.S.C. 495 note) 
     states that--
       (A) ``It is the policy of the United States to modernize or 
     replace the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems''; 
     and
       (B) ``Congress supports the modernization or replacement of 
     the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems consisting of 
     a heavy bomber and air-launched cruise missile, an 
     intercontinental ballistic missile, and a ballistic missile 
     submarine and submarine launched ballistic missile''.
       (6) On March 6, 2014, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
     Staff, General Martin Dempsey, testified to the Committee on 
     Armed Services of the House of Representatives that the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff have determined that ``our recommendation is 
     to remain firmly committed to the triad, the three legs of 
     the nuclear capability, and that any further reduction should 
     be done only through negotiations, not unilaterally, and that 
     we should commit to modernizing the stockpile while we have 
     it.''.
       (7) On April 2, 2014, the Commander of United States 
     Strategic Command, Admiral

[[Page 8850]]

     Cecil Haney, testified to the Committee on Armed Services of 
     the House of Representatives that ``First and foremost, I 
     think it is important that we as a country realize just how 
     important and foundational our strategic deterrent is today 
     for us and well into the future. As you have mentioned, there 
     is a need for modernization in a variety of areas. When you 
     look at the credible strategic deterrent we have today, that 
     includes everything from the indications and warning, to the 
     command and control and communication structure that goes all 
     the way from the President down to the units, and to what 
     frequently we talk about as the triad involving the 
     intercontinental ballistic missiles, the submarines, and the 
     bombers--each providing its unique aspect of deterrence.''.
       (8) In the June 2013 Report on Nuclear Employment Strategy 
     of the United States required by section 491 of title 10, 
     United States Code, the Secretary of Defense, on behalf of 
     the President, stated that ``the United States will maintain 
     a nuclear Triad, consisting of ICBMs, SLBMs, and nuclear-
     capable heavy bombers. Retaining all three Triad legs will 
     best maintain strategic stability at reasonable cost, while 
     hedging against potential technical problems or 
     vulnerabilities. These forces should be operated on a day-to-
     day basis in a manner that maintains strategic stability with 
     Russia and China, deters potential regional adversaries, and 
     assures U.S. Allies and partners.''.
       (b) Statement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United 
     States--
       (1) to operate, sustain, and modernize or replace the triad 
     of strategic nuclear delivery systems consisting of--
       (A) heavy bombers equipped with nuclear gravity bombs and 
     air-launched nuclear cruise missiles;
       (B) land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles equipped 
     with nuclear warheads that are capable of carrying multiple 
     independently targetable reentry vehicles; and
       (C) ballistic missile submarines equipped with submarine 
     launched ballistic missiles and multiple nuclear warheads.
       (2) to operate, sustain, and modernize or replace a 
     capability to forward-deploy nuclear weapons and dual-capable 
     fighter-bomber aircraft;
       (3) to deter potential adversaries and assure allies and 
     partners of the United States through strong and long-term 
     commitment to the nuclear deterrent of the United States and 
     the personnel, systems, and infrastructure that comprise such 
     deterrent; and
       (4) to ensure the members of the Armed Forces that operate 
     the nuclear deterrent of the United States have the training, 
     resources, and national support required to execute the 
     critical national security mission of the members.


           amendment no. 32 offered by Mr. rigell of virginia

       Page 53, after line 9, insert the following:

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

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


          amendment no. 33 offered by mr. kilmer of washington

       Page 66, after line 11, insert the following:

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

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


          amendment no. 60 offered by mr. smith of washington

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

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

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


          amendment no. 72 offered by ms. speier of california

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

     SEC. 7__. RESEARCH REGARDING BREAST CANCER.

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


          amendment no. 82 offered by ms. speier of california

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

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

       (a) In General.--Subsection (m) of section 8 of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(m)) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(7) Authority for sole source contracts for economically 
     disadvantaged small business concerns owned and controlled by 
     women.--A contracting officer may award a sole source 
     contract under this subsection to any small business concern 
     owned and controlled by women meeting the requirements of 
     paragraph (2)(A) if--
       ``(A) such concern is determined to be a responsible 
     contractor with respect to performance of the contract 
     opportunity;
       ``(B) the anticipated award price of the contract 
     (including options) will not exceed--
       ``(i) $6,500,000, in the case of a contract opportunity 
     assigned a standard industrial code for manufacturing; or
       ``(ii) $4,000,000, in the case of any other contract 
     opportunity; and
       ``(C) in the estimation of the contracting officer, the 
     contract award can be made at a fair and reasonable price.
       ``(8) Authority for sole source contracts for small 
     business concerns owned and controlled by women in 
     substantially underrepresented industries.--A contracting 
     officer may award a sole source contract under this 
     subsection to any small business concern owned and controlled 
     by women that meets the requirements of paragraph (2)(E) and 
     is in an industry in which

[[Page 8851]]

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

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

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


          amendment no. 86 offered by ms. speier of california

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

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

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


            amendment no. 100 offered by mr. turner of ohio

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


         amendment no. 113 offered by mr. kilmer of washington

       At the end of title XI, add the following:

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

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


           Amendment no. 147 offered by mr. polis of colorado

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McKEON. 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 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Rigell), my friend and colleague, who is a member of the Armed Services 
Committee.
  Mr. RIGELL. I thank my friend from California, Chairman McKeon, for 
yielding.

[[Page 8852]]

  Mr. Chairman, in 1793, George Washington said: ``The Constitution 
vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore, no offensive 
expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have 
deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.''
  In a letter to Thomas Jefferson in 1798, James Madison wrote: ``The 
Constitution supposes what the history of all governments demonstrate, 
that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and 
prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question 
of war to the legislature.''
  That is why it is right for President Obama to announce in the Rose 
Garden that he would seek congressional authorization before taking any 
military action against Syria. He said: ``I've long believed that our 
power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a 
government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And that's 
why I've made a second decision: I will seek authorization for the use 
of force from the American people's representatives in Congress.''
  It is deeply encouraging tonight, Mr. Chairman, to see such strong 
bipartisan support for my amendment, which advances the just cause of 
ensuring that the Obama administration and future administrations 
adhere to the Constitution and the grave matter of engaging U.S. forces 
in hostilities.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
  Mr. KILMER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment includes two provisions that I authored. 
The first provision ensures that Navy employees, like those in Puget 
Sound Naval Shipyard, can continue to earn the overtime pay that they 
deserve when working overseas.
  This amendment supports our national security and ensures that we are 
standing up for our civilian workforce. It allowed nuclear engineers to 
earn the same amount of money when they work in Japan as they would 
when they work in the United States.
  Without that authorization to pay overtime to the civilian personnel 
serving the mission, we will lose the ability to attract and retain 
qualified and experienced men and women to step up and serve in this 
capacity. The inclusion of this provision helps ensure our Navy's 
readiness and fairness to our civilian employees.

                              {time}  1830

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

[[Page 8853]]

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

[[Page 8854]]

  Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a letter 
to President Obama from myself and 15 House colleagues commending his 
decision to deploy American security experts and equipment in Nigeria 
to help locate and rescue the more than 200 Nigerian kidnapped 
schoolgirls and to work in concert with the Government of Nigeria and 
the African Union to bring Abubakar Shekau and other leaders of Boko 
Haram to justice.
  The Jackson Lee-Wilson-Lee Amendment affirms that the United States 
stands with the civilized world in solidarity with the people of 
Nigeria.
  The Jackson Lee-Wilson-Lee Amendment affirms that the United States 
is fully committed to the fundamental principle that women everywhere 
have a right to be free, to live without fear, and should not be forced 
to risk their lives to get the education they want and deserve.
  I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for including this amendment 
in En Bloc Amendment #1 and all Members to support it.

                                 Congress of the United States

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


                          list of signatories

       Marcia L. Fudge, Karen E. Bass, Donald Payne, Jr., John 
     Lewis, Yvette D. Clarke, Robin Kelly, Janice Hahn, Sheila 
     Jackson Lee, Terri A. Sewell, Corrine Brown, Frederica 
     Wilson, Gregory W. Meeks, Barbara Lee, Marc Veasey, Members 
     of Congress.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Montana (Mr. Daines), my friend and colleague.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. Chairman, ``If America is going to approach 
adversaries with a dove of peace in one hand, we must have a sword in 
the other.''
  That is what President Reagan wrote when he used U.S. military 
strength to hasten the demise of the Soviet Union.
  The nuclear triad is our country's most lethal sword. It makes the 
world safer by deterring our rivals and reassuring our allies.
  The commander coin of Montana's Malmstrom Air Force Base expresses 
why nuclear deterrence works. It says:

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

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

                              {time}  1845

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


              Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Westmoreland

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.

[[Page 8855]]


  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer my amendment to 
ensure that the C-17 aircraft stays in flight and provides our troops 
with the same reliability it has provided for the last 20 years.
  Tonight, I join my friend, Mr. Courtney from Connecticut, in offering 
this amendment. We want to ensure that this program is sustained and 
will continue in the best possible way, and right now, I seek a 
colloquy with the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, the 
gentleman from California.
  Mr. Chairman, the F-117 engine has a history of successful 
performance through a performance-based contract, and I believe that it 
is important that we keep these successful tenets available as we move 
forward in the next phase of a sustainment contract.
  While I support cost visibility in this performance-based contract, I 
believe it is important that we do no harm to the success of the 
program.
  Mr. McKEON. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. I yield to the chairman of the Armed Services 
Committee.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, and I appreciate the 
gentleman's concern. We agree that we must ensure the successful 
sustainment of this critical engine.
  I look forward to working with the gentleman as we move forward to 
conference with the Senate on this bill to ensure that we achieve both 
improved visibility and cost-efficiency for the government, as well as 
keeping a successful model for engine sustainment.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. I thank the chairman for that.
  Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the 
Westmoreland amendment to the fiscal year 2015 National Defense 
Authorization Act. It strikes section 341 which would negatively impact 
the venerable and highly effective F117 engine that powers the Air 
Force workhorse personnel and cargo transport, the C-17 aircraft. The 
existing language requires disclosure of proprietary information which 
would hamper contract negotiations, having the potential of posing a 
detrimental impact to the readiness of the fleet.
  Today, F117 engines are sustained through an award-winning 
performance-based logistics contract that minimizes life cycle costs 
with fixed fees based on flight cycles. This contract type requires 
comprehensive understanding and investment by the service provider 
along with the engineering design expertise to develop and implement 
improvements in response to actual mission experience. It is vital that 
we use every practical means of providing for the defense of this 
country and the protection of our warfighters, including the 
appropriate use of competition and any other contracting method.
  In fact, the Air Force has already taken steps to ensure these 
outcomes are achieved on the C-17 sustainment contract. Just last year, 
the Air Force held an open and transparent bidding process for the F117 
and there was only one bidder. Under the current structure, the F117 
service provider is incentivized to reduce total maintenance cost by 
improving reliability, increasing time on wing, and controlling shop 
visit cost. All of these factors have been good for the Air Force by 
minimizing operational disruption and reducing maintenance crew 
requirements and logistics infrastructure.
  Section 341 of this bill jeopardizes the efficiencies and success the 
F117 performance-based logistics contract has achieved. This language 
could be interpreted as requiring the Air Force to significantly change 
contract structure for maintenance instead of requesting a robust price 
reasonableness assessment as is already required by procurement 
regulations. Changes in the F117 maintenance structure could be less 
effective in supporting the C-17 and may result in higher sustainment 
costs and lower readiness. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to 
support this amendment.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chair, I now ask unanimous consent to withdraw 
my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Georgia?
  There was no objection.


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Shimkus

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

       Page 370, after line 23, insert the following:

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

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

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

[[Page 8856]]

of a multistakeholder Internet governance, but that structure must be 
insulated from government influence.
  We know bad actors will certainly try to interfere with whatever 
overseer takes our place, so that is why I am offering this trust but 
verify amendment today.
  My amendment will simply require the GAO to review the proposals NTIA 
receives to replace our oversight. What is the harm, Mr. Chairman, in 
taking this slow, deliberate process and making sure that we get this 
right? I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita).
  Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois and the 
gentlelady from Tennessee for allowing me to help write this important 
amendment.
  The President's unilateral handoff of key Internet functions to a 
multistakeholder community, without the consent of Congress, lacks a 
clear plan for how and what that community would look like and what 
authority it would have.
  Now, we can debate later about whether Congress would actually ever 
give such consent, but for now, we are offering this amendment because 
Americans deserve to know that due diligence has occurred and that a 
clear plan exists for such matters.
  America has proven, throughout history, that we are the vanguards of 
freedom, and we have an obligation to protect the Internet. The 
Internet is an unsurpassed vehicle for the free exchange of ideas; but 
it is more than just freedom. It is also about American interests.
  The Internet is the single greatest economic machine created in the 
last 50 years--and perhaps ever--and its full potential is yet to be 
realized. America's role in its success is a shining example of our 
American exceptionalism.
  It is not in our national interest to relinquish control of such a 
resource, especially without a clear path that will protect Internet 
freedom and American interests, but against the interest of individuals 
in the world who can't appreciate such freedom and the blessing, 
really, that this technology is.
  So pass this amendment, I urge my colleagues, so we can give this 
issue the due diligence it deserves. The self-professed ``most 
transparent administration ever'' should want nothing less when it 
comes to this important issue.
  Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Vermont is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Shimkus 
amendment. The amendment is identical to H.R. 4342, the DOTCOM Act of 
2014. It would arbitrarily delay the transition of the United States' 
role in the management of the global Internet domain name system to the 
multistakeholder community.
  It really does represent a very drastic departure from the support 
Members of this body have expressed for the multistakeholder model of 
Internet governance. In fact, despite the House of Representatives 
already voting unanimously three times in the past 2 years calling on 
the Obama administration to commit to a global Internet free from 
government control, the Shimkus amendment sends the exact opposite 
message by raising doubts about the strength and credibility of the 
multistakeholder approach.
  NTIA's recent transition announcement will complete our 16-year-long 
effort to move management of the domain name system away from 
governments and into the private sector.
  This objective has been the linchpin of U.S. policy, bipartisan 
through the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations, and the entire 
rationale for having ICANN, a private U.S.-based nonprofit organization 
created in 1998 to assume key responsibilities for Internet functions 
on behalf of the Internet's multistakeholder community.
  Some of my colleagues raise the specter of Russia or China taking 
over the Internet as a reason for supporting this amendment. These 
threats against Internet openness are real, but claiming this amendment 
does anything to address them is false.
  In fact, by creating an artificial delay in the implementation of the 
consensus transition plan produced by ICANN, the Shimkus amendment 
suggests governmental meddling in the multistakeholder process is 
entirely appropriate.
  The reverse is true. Authoritarian regimes are already using the U.S. 
Government's stewardship of technical Internet functions as evidence 
for a need to move these functions to another governmental or 
intergovernmental entity like the United Nations.
  This amendment further plays into the hands of these antidemocratic 
nations by emboldening their efforts to seize control of the Internet.
  So I would say to my colleagues to support this amendment or the 
DOTCOM Act, they either show a lack of understanding of what our 
government's role actually is or a lack of confidence in the 
multistakeholder model and its ability to resist governmental control. 
Both serve to weaken our role in the global stage, not strengthen it.
  The best defense we have against a governmental takeover of the 
domain system is to empower our allies in the multistakeholder 
community. Our diplomats, who have fought hard to preserve an Internet 
free from governmental control in global forums, tell us that having 
this transition is a critical continuation of our efforts to build upon 
the success of the multistakeholder model.
  Now is the time to continue our unwavering support of that model. I 
strongly urge my colleagues to oppose the Shimkus amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me just say, as I try to wait for a few more colleagues, I would 
ask my colleague to define multistakeholder. They can't. The Internet 
community says it is us. The international community, the Russias and 
the Chinas say it is us.
  So all we are asking is for a Government Accountability Office, the 
IG, nonpartisan, to whatever the agreement comes from NTIA, to say look 
at it. Do some due diligence. Make sure that this is in our national 
interest.
  This is the most curious debate I have ever seen. Go slow. ICANN and 
NTIA say they want to go slow. What is the harm of having additional 
eyes on this process?
  So the real debate is define multistakeholder. No one can do that 
because they don't know what that is. The Internet community says it is 
us, and we are going to have control, and all our net folks are going 
to drive this, and it is going to be okay. While our friends--or not 
friends--Vladimir Putin and China say: this is a way in.
  I would rather make sure that, when we relinquish this, we know what 
the agreement actually is.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois.
  You know, we are pretty proud of the Internet. We want to keep it 
free and nongovernmental control. Multistakeholder basically means all 
of the stakeholders who have a stake in the Internet are going to be at 
the table having a discussion about how we are going to resolve this 
situation.
  There is an apprehension that I don't think is well-founded that is 
reflected in this amendment. It is really, essentially, about delaying 
the process of these ongoing negotiations that have to occur in a very 
complicated global system which is called the Internet.
  So the House has voted on this three times before. It has indicated 
its support through the Clinton, the Bush, and the Obama 
administrations. Every one of those Presidents, I think, shares the 
concern that every one of us in this House have about maintaining a 
free and open Internet. We have got to get on with the job.
  Our view is that the Shimkus amendment would create confusion and 
delay and impede our ability to get to an end result that will make the 
Internet more secure, more free, and more open.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, the Shimkus amendment would require the

[[Page 8857]]

Government Accountability Office to look at this agreement, to make 
sure it is in our national interest.
  The Shimkus amendment would ask the Government Accountability Office 
to look at this agreement to ensure that it is in our national 
interest. That is what this amendment does.
  The world has significantly changed since our vote of last year, and 
for anyone to say it has not is not reading the paper. You have got 
Russia, you have got China, you have got Iran, you have got Turkey--all 
meddling and trying to usurp and get involved in the World Wide Web. We 
should not relinquish this unless it is in our national interest.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to the Shimkus 
amendment and efforts to undermine the continued success of the 
Internet.
  The Internet has always been driven by consensus decision-making, or 
multistakeholder governance. This model brings together industry, civil 
society, government, technical and academic experts, as well the 
general public, to tackle issues around the design and operation of the 
Internet.
  Three times in the past two years, this body has voted to reaffirm 
our commitment to the multistakeholder model, including last May when 
Democrats and Republicans joined together to unanimously pass H.R. 
1580, a bill stating that ``it is the policy of the United States to 
preserve and advance the successful multistakeholder model that governs 
the Internet.''
  So what exactly is the problem with the amendment before us today? 
It's a U-turn. The Shimkus amendment would restrict NTIA's authority to 
continue what has been U.S. policy since 1998--transitioning the 
government's role in administering the domain name system to the 
multistakeholder global community. Although supporters of the amendment 
characterize it as a stand against anti-democratic nations seeking a 
greater government role in Internet management, the amendment could 
have the opposite effect of emboldening efforts by authoritarian 
regimes to seize control of the global Internet. Specifically, 
authoritarian regimes point to the U.S. government's continued 
oversight of technical Internet functions as evidence that global 
Internet governance and management should be under the control of a 
governmental or intergovernmental entity such as the United Nations.
  The Shimkus Amendment lacks a fundamental understanding of the U.S. 
government's role in the management of the global Internet domain name 
system. Contrary to assertions that the United States ``controls'' the 
Internet through an ongoing contract that the Administration is now 
proposing to terminate, NTIA's role has always been ministerial and 
largely symbolic. Simply put, the U.S. government has never had any 
legal or statutory responsibility to manage the domain name system.
  The world is watching and now is not the time to turn our backs on a 
governance model that has enabled the Internet to flourish. I urge my 
colleagues to take a stand for a global Internet free from government 
control and vote ``no'' on the Shimkus amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois 
will be postponed.

                              {time}  1900

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


          Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Smith of Washington

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

       Strike sections 1032 and 1033 and insert the following:

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

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

[[Page 8858]]

     detained at Guantanamo'' means any individual located at 
     United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of 
     October 1, 2009, who--
       (1) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of 
     the Armed Forces of the United States; and
       (2) is--
       (A) in the custody or under the control of the Department 
     of Defense; or
       (B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval 
     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
       (h) Funding.--
       (1) Reduction.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in 
     the funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 4601 for military construction, Army, 
     as specified in the corresponding funding table in section 
     4601, for a high value detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay is 
     hereby reduced by $69,000,000.
       (2) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 4601 for military construction, 
     Defense-wide, as specified in the corresponding funding table 
     in section 4601, for planning and design for the Missile 
     Defense Agency is hereby increased by $20,000,000.
       (3) Reduction of general reductions.--Notwithstanding the 
     amounts set forth in the funding tables in division D, the 
     amount specified in section 4601 for General Reductions, as 
     specified in the corresponding funding table in section 4601, 
     is hereby reduced by $49,000,000.
       (4) Reduction in amount for guantanamo bay.--In the item 
     relating to Guantanamo Bay in the table in section 2101(b), 
     strike ``$92,800,000'' and insert ``$23,800,000''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, this is the amendment that will 
enable us to eventually close the Guantanamo Bay prison. There are 
several compelling reasons to do this.
  First of all, we have reached a point where we are now spending $2.7 
million per inmate at Guantanamo Bay. To contrast that, an inmate at a 
supermax Federal prison facility here in the U.S. costs roughly $78,000 
a year. This is only going to become more expensive as the temporary 
facility at Guantanamo Bay is forced to last longer and longer. So the 
cost alone is reason, I believe, to close it.
  Also, we have the larger issue. President George W. Bush wanted to 
close Guantanamo Bay, as did Secretary Gates, as did Senator McCain. 
Many very conservative Republicans came out in favor of closing 
Guantanamo back in 2008. Why? Because the military told them that it 
was harming our ability to effectively fight al Qaeda and affiliated 
forces, that the presence of Guantanamo Bay was recognized as an 
international eyesore that undermined U.S. credibility with our allies 
abroad as we tried to prosecute that fight. There is no need for 
Guantanamo. So argument number one is all of the problems with it.
  Argument number two is that there is no need for it, because what we 
could do would be--154 inmates who are in Guantanamo Bay, first of all, 
some number of them, I think it is roughly half, have been deemed not 
to be a threat to the United States. We just don't have anyplace to 
send them. So we can do foreign transfers, which we are beginning to 
work on. The rest of them that are a threat can be housed in supermax 
facilities in the United States of America.
  Now, we constantly hear the argument that we can't bring terrorists 
to the United States. The way that argument is stated, it is like we 
are bringing them here and setting them free. We are not. We are going 
to lock them up and hold them. In fact, there was a recent ruling of 
the courts that made it clear those inmates would not be freed in the 
United States under any set of circumstances.
  In addition to that, we have the ability in the United States of 
America to hold dangerous people. I will submit to you that if we 
didn't have that ability, we would be in a whole lot of trouble 
regardless of the people at Guantanamo Bay.
  We currently house over 300 terrorists here in the U.S., including 
Ramzi Yousef, The Blind Sheikh, and a number of others. We have been 
able to successfully hold terrorists in the United States. We also hold 
mass murderers and gang leaders and mobsters. We have the ability to 
safely hold these people in the United States of America. So there is 
no downside to doing this.
  The upside is to finally do what President George W. Bush recognized 
back in 2007 and 2008 that we needed to do, to close down Guantanamo 
Bay because of the international perception that it goes against our 
values and because of the very fact that it does go against our values 
to have people locked away in a prison that was originally set up under 
the hopes that somehow we would be able to avoid habeas corpus. Well, 
the Supreme Court said no, Guantanamo Bay is effectively under U.S. 
control, so habeas corpus applies anyway, so same amount of rights, 
same everything. It is simply an international eyesore that we keep 
open for no good reason.
  This bill has prohibitions on closing it. My amendment would put in 
place a plan to close Guantanamo Bay by the end of 2016 and enable the 
steps necessary to accomplish that.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. I yield myself 2 minutes at this time.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. The 
Guantanamo facility is safe and the most appropriate location for 
detainees to be held. Detainees at Guantanamo are held there because 
they were engaged in dangerous acts threatening the United States of 
America and its allies. Some orchestrated and celebrated the murders of 
thousands of innocent Americans.
  As in previous conflicts, it is entirely appropriate to hold 
detainees until enemy forces are defeated. In this case, it is al Qaeda 
and their associates.
  The Guantanamo facility is ideal for this purpose. It is secure. It 
is relatively distant from the United States. It is difficult to 
attack. I can promise you that the Cubans have no interest in freeing 
the prisoners there, but there are people in this world that want to do 
that. We saw it at Abu Ghraib prison last year where many members of al 
Qaeda were freed. That prison was attacked, and they were freed.
  So the Guantanamo facility is ideal for this purpose. It is secure 
and it is safe. It also provides humane conditions for the detainees. 
They have access to health care, recreational activities, cultural and 
religious materials. Also, Members of the House of Representatives 
routinely visit Guantanamo, and they have seen the humane conditions in 
which dangerous detainees are held.
  Based upon these facts and the nature of the character of those held 
at Guantanamo, the cost already incurred in accommodating them, there 
is no reason to move the Guantanamo detainees to facilities in the 
United States.
  At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time 
is remaining on each side?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Ohio, and I want to 
also thank the chairman, the gentleman from California, for his 
leadership in bringing the NDAA bill to the floor. Again, I want to 
salute Chairman McKeon on the tremendous work that he has displayed 
here and all that he has done in support of the men and women in 
uniform of our country. So I do rise today, Mr. Chairman, in support of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015.
  Mr. Chairman, regrettably, events of the past year have demonstrated 
that the forces that threaten America's national security, the 
stability of our allies, and seek to subject millions to a

[[Page 8859]]

tyranny that violates the most basic of human rights are on the rise.
  A desperate dictator in Syria has used chemical weapons, a strong man 
in Venezuela is consolidating power, and Iran is inching closer to 
nuclear weapons and funding terrorism. North Korea continues to 
threaten America and our Pacific allies, and Russia recently invaded 
Ukraine. Now is not the time for the United States to recede from the 
global arena. Now is the time to lead and to project the strength that 
has protected America's interests for over half a century.
  An America that leads is an America with military power that cannot 
be matched, because at all times we must be prepared to meet and 
confront challenges so that our homeland is protected, our allies are 
defended, and our enemies are defeated.
  On a congressional delegation I led to Asia last month, I saw 
firsthand just how important it is for America to be engaged on the 
world stage. While in Japan, we toured the aircraft carrier the USS 
George Washington. While aboard the ship, we met with its crew and 
heard directly from its Naval commanders that the U.S. needs to have a 
constant carrier presence in the region.
  America provides our allies with much-needed security and stability 
to a region that is threatened by a madman in North Korea and has seen 
China become more provocative and aggressive with its neighbors, 
particularly in the South China Sea.
  The presence of our aircraft carrier is a vital part of guaranteeing 
that security which, in turn, guarantees America's security. One of the 
admirals even stated: ``In the world we are going to be operating in, 
we simply must have the USS George Washington.'' That is why I am so 
pleased that this bill begins to fund the refuel of the USS George 
Washington. Failing to do so would leave our allies in the region and 
throughout the world feeling vulnerable and embolden our enemies.
  In hundreds of other ways, today's bill will provide our military 
with the resources it needs to remain the greatest fighting force in 
the world and keep America as a leader on the world stage.
  Since the time of the revolution, my home State of Virginia has been 
a leader in contributing to our Nation's security. In addition to the 
thousands of Virginians who wear the uniform and those members of the 
military stationed in Virginia, tens of thousands of Virginians work in 
industries directly tied to supporting our Armed Forces and our 
national defense. I am pleased that this bill recognizes their efforts.
  So today, let us stand together, pass this bill in a bipartisan 
fashion, and show the world that we are committed to being an America 
that leads.
  Again, I want to thank the gentleman from California, Chairman Buck 
McKeon, for all of his hard work on this issue, along with his members 
of the Armed Services Committee.
  I urge my colleagues in the House to support this important bill.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Nadler).
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, we are told in opposition to this amendment 
that terrorists have no constitutional rights. That is like saying 
rapists or murderers have no constitutional rights. But accused rapists 
and accused murders do have rights until it is proven that they are 
guilty, and then their rights are taken away from them. The same must 
be true of accused terrorists.
  Ever since Magna Carta, we have denied the government the power to 
imprison and punish people on mere accusation. That is tyranny. The 
government's labeling someone a terrorist doesn't make him one. The 
government must prove the accusation in court. That was always a 
bedrock American value until we opened Guantanamo. Now we imprison 
people indefinitely without trial. This must stop.
  Guantanamo should be closed, and its inmates should be tried or 
released. Our Federal courts work. They have repeatedly tried, 
convicted, and sentenced terrorists to long prison terms. Prosecuting 
and imprisoning terrorists on U.S. soil has proven to be safer, less 
expensive, and less harmful to our national security.
  I urge my colleagues to support our amendment to close the detention 
facility at Guantanamo Bay, end indefinite detention, and restore our 
national honor.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. 
Walorski).
  Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment as well.
  Transferring detainees to our homeland would require expensive new 
construction or renovation of existing facilities in the U.S. Current 
facilities at Gitmo already accommodate the detainees, their guards, 
all associated medical, recreational, and legal needs. Estimates for 
constructing or renovating similar facilities in the U.S. have ranged 
from $300 million to $500 million.
  Meanwhile, the dangers are also clear. Moving detainees to the U.S. 
would make the facility housing them a terrorist target. For example, 
in 2010, New York City estimated it would cost $200 million a year to 
provide security when it was proposed some Gitmo detainees be moved to 
New York for trial.
  In conclusion, there are no advantages of moving detainees to the 
U.S.; there are clear disadvantages.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, how much time is left in the 
debate on both sides?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington has 30 seconds 
remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining. The 
gentleman from Ohio has the right to close.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, Guantanamo is a rallying cry for extremists 
around the world. Until we transfer and try these detainees, it is 
hurting our national security, and Gitmo is expensive. We are spending 
about $2.7 million per detainee per year at Guantanamo compared to 
$34,000 per inmate at a high security prison in the United States. In 
fact, the Pentagon is going to spend $435 million this year in 
operations and personnel costs for this facility.
  The reality is we have 300 individuals convicted of crimes related to 
international terrorism that are currently incarcerated in 98 Federal 
prisons with no escapes or attacks in attempts to free them.
  When the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Afghanistan 
expires, we have no plans. What are we going to do with these prisoners 
of war?
  The Smith amendment should be passed.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman's amendment merely 
required the President to come up with a plan that Congress and the 
American people could look at on exactly what he would do and how he 
would do it to close Guantanamo, including what the costs would be, 
where he would move them, what the cost of security wherever he would 
move them would be, I might support that.
  The truth of the matter is in all the time since the President has 
been in office, he has not come up with a specific plan that has gotten 
the support of the American people or this Congress. Even when 
Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress, they were not able to 
pass any legislation to close Guantanamo.
  So if he can put a plan together that gets the support of the 
Congress, support of the American people, I think that may be a step 
forward. But to say we are going to close it and, oh, by the way, along 
the way you can tell us what you are doing and how you are doing it, 
that is putting the cart before the horse.
  The President needs to get the support of the American people. So far 
he has not done that. The American people have been clear: they are 
uncomfortable with those detainees coming here. Therefore, it is 
premature to

[[Page 8860]]

close it, and this amendment should be rejected.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chairman, I have heard Members from both sides of 
the aisle speak out against this very notion that they do not want 
these types of detainees coming to their State or territory.
  I will remind them that, as in previous conflicts, it is entirely 
appropriate and lawful to hold detainees until our enemy forces are 
defeated. I have not seen that. If al Qaeda is on the run, I think it 
is toward us, as we have seen so many actions taken by them in recent 
times.
  I ask for your support in defeating this amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington 
will be postponed.


          Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Smith of Washington

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

       Page 294, after line 21, insert the following:

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

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  This amendment would eliminate indefinite detention in the United 
States and its territories. So basically anybody who we captured who we 
suspected of terrorist activity would no longer be subject to 
indefinite detention, as is now currently the law.
  The basic reason for this is our Constitution works, and we ought to 
value it and we ought to let the Constitution work. We have gone 
through article III courts to try, convict, and incarcerate terrorists 
successfully for decades. Yet, because of the 2001 AUMF, we still have 
on the books a law that would allow the President, any President now or 
in the future, to indefinitely detain any person in the United States 
if they determine that that person is affiliated with al Qaeda or 
affiliated forces. If they are acting in support of those 
organizations, they would be subject to indefinite detention and would 
not be allowed to due process rights that are in our Constitution.
  That is an enormous amount of power to give the Executive: to take 
someone and lock them up without due process. It is not necessary. This 
President has not used the authority. President George W. Bush did not 
use it after about 2002 and then only in a couple of instances. It is 
not necessary. It is an enormous amount of power to grant the 
Executive, and I believe places liberty and freedom at risk in this 
country.
  We need to eliminate indefinite detention in the United States. This 
amendment would do that clearly and unequivocally, and I urge support.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McKeon), the distinguished chairman of the committee.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I have a great amount of respect for my colleague and friend, the 
ranking member, but I strongly oppose this amendment.
  My friend talks a lot about how we shouldn't limit the President's 
options with regard to Guantanamo. I don't think that we should be 
limiting our options in dealing with terrorists, and I can't imagine 
anything more fundamental than taking away the option to question al 
Qaeda terrorists bent on killing American citizens in whatever is the 
most effective way possible, and consistent with the law, to stop 
future attacks.
  In the fiscal year 2013 NDAA, we addressed any misconceptions about 
the detention authority provided by the Authorization for Use of 
Military Force. We included the following language in the conference 
report:

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

  The NDAA has changed nothing with regard to the laws of war, our 
values, or our traditions. Our Supreme Court has agreed that 
appropriate detention and interrogation of al Qaeda terrorists is 
entirely lawful. It is false to imply that this is not the case or to 
something not in line with our values.
  In fact, our courts have gone well beyond the traditional attachment 
of rights to our enemies and has extended the constitutional right of 
habeas corpus to foreign detainees held at Guantanamo Bay.
  This amendment would be the first time we self-imposed such a 
sweeping change to the conduct of war and our ability to gather 
intelligence.
  Despite what any of us may want, al Qaeda has not surrendered. Far 
from it. The threat is evolving, but unfortunately for all of us, it 
continues.
  We must oppose this amendment and preserve every lawful option in our 
arsenal.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  The language within the NDAA about preserving rights is very 
confusing. I think it is very clear that the President does have the 
power right now to indefinitely detain people. So arguing that rights 
are protected, they are not. Indefinite detention is the law of the 
land. The President has the power to

[[Page 8861]]

do that. Habeas corpus is one right. It is not due process. This law 
currently allows for due process to be ignored and for the Executive to 
indefinitely detain people.
  The other big problem with this is it goes on forever. We have at 
different points in our Nation's history suspended habeas corpus--
during the Civil War and other times of extreme danger. But in this 
case, al Qaeda and terrorism have been with us for a while. They are 
going to be with us for a long time to come in some form or another.
  So to grant the President the power to indefinitely detain people is 
a long, long-term issue. Again, it is not necessary. Our article III 
courts have arrested, tried, convicted, and incarcerated hundreds of 
terrorists. It works. We don't need to give the President the power to 
throw out portions of the Constitution.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment has previously been defeated in the 
House. Members have voted on it before, and I think it should be 
defeated again.
  This is the underwear bomber case. A foreign terrorist flies into the 
U.S. in order to kill as many Americans as possible. The bomb 
malfunctions, the terrorist is captured, he is immediately given under 
the amendment American constitutional rights, including the right to 
remain silent.
  Now, in fact, the underwear bomber was questioned for about 50 
minutes before the FBI gave him his Miranda rights and he quit talking. 
But meanwhile, when he knows he has the right to remain silent, he 
quits talking, we have no idea how many more bombers there are, where 
they may be, or how we may be attacked again.
  Actually, this amendment goes further than the Obama administration 
even wants to, because the administration has admitted that there are 
several dozen terrorists in Guantanamo that cannot be tried in article 
III courts and are too dangerous to release. So what happens to them 
under this amendment? If they can't be tried, they are released.
  Especially if you put this amendment with the previous amendment, 
they come here to the United States, they can't be tried in article III 
courts because it reveals too much information, so what do you do with 
them? That is part of the problem. We need this flexibility for 
indefinite detention.
  Secondly, the Supreme Court has held that this right of detention 
goes hand-in-hand with an authorization for the use of force. I believe 
probably constitutionally the President has that authority when he has 
the authority to use military force. So trying to take it away not only 
limits the options, it is impractical in this case.
  It is, of course, true that everybody detained has that right of 
habeas corpus to contest their detention in front of an article III 
court, as the gentleman said, even those foreigners held in Guantanamo. 
But to say that everybody immediately goes into the court system I 
think would be compromising our security.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of 
our time.
  First of all, Guantanamo Bay would not apply in this case. None of 
the people being held at Guantanamo Bay were captured in the United 
States, so this would have nothing to do with that. That is a vexing 
and difficult question. This applies to people captured from this point 
forward in the United States. It would not apply to Guantanamo Bay 
inmates.
  Second, I want to deal with this argument about intelligence. It is 
an argument that has been made repeatedly that does not make any sense. 
This notion that somehow under the normal judicial process, under the 
normal law enforcement model you cannot collect any intelligence. Well, 
that would be a surprise to the FBI. It would be a surprise to every 
law enforcement agency in the United States of America that has been 
giving suspects Miranda rights, investigating crimes, and gathering 
intelligence for decades. Just because you tell someone they have the 
right to remain silent doesn't mean that they will, first of all.
  Second of all, even if you don't tell them, everybody is aware of the 
fact that they don't have to talk. We have used Miranda successfully to 
gather intelligence in a variety of different ways repeatedly. You will 
not lose that ability if you go through article III courts using 
Miranda rights.
  Again, I want to emphasize, the idea that when you capture a 
terrorist, it never occurs to them that they don't have to give up 
information until you give them Miranda rights makes no sense 
whatsoever, number one.
  Number two, over and over and over again domestic law enforcement 
officials have been able to give Miranda rights and gather an enormous 
amount of intelligence. That is a red herring in this argument.
  Again, we come back to what the law does. The law gives the President 
of the United States the power to indefinitely detain people without 
due process. The Republican Party is always talking about freedom from 
government intrusion. They are concerned about the health care law, 
they are concerned about all manner of different things. This is a law 
that gives the President the power to lock you up and take away your 
basic freedom without due process. It strikes me that nothing could be 
more fundamental to those basic freedoms from government intrusion that 
we always hear about from the other side of the aisle than this issue.
  I urge Republicans and Democrats alike to support this amendment. 
Take away the President's ability to lock people up indefinitely 
without due process. That is a gross, gross violation and an individual 
right that none of us in this country should stand for any longer.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.
  Mr. Chairman, admittedly, there are some difficult issues involved in 
detention, particularly with this war against terrorists that we are 
involved in.
  But you have got to look at the bigger picture, and part of what one 
needs to look at is how one is going to deal with these situations. We 
just debated an amendment where the argument was close Guantanamo. Now 
we have an amendment on the other hand that says everybody that is 
here, including the people presumably that we would bring back from 
Guantanamo when it was closed, automatically and immediately goes to 
article III courts.
  It is not my argument that some of the people in Guantanamo cannot be 
tried in article III courts. That is what the administration tells us.

                              {time}  1930

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


           Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Heck of Washington

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

       At the end of title X, add the following:

     SEC. 1011. MILITARY COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM.

       (a) Infrastructure Program.--

[[Page 8862]]

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

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

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Heck) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Chairman, as a Member of Congress for the 
brandnew 10th Congressional District in Washington State, I have the 
privilege to represent Joint Base Lewis-McChord, which is the largest 
joint operating base in America.
  In the vicinity of Joint Base Lewis-McChord is Interstate 5, which is 
the most heavily traveled north-south freight corridor in our State. 
Nearly 80 percent of the traffic to and from JBLM relies on that 
interstate freeway.
  Local travelers in neighboring cities have absolutely no other option 
except to use I-5 as an arterial, and when incidents occur, trust me, 
it can take hours to recover.
  Around the country, military installations like JBLM are still 
adapting to base realignment and short-term growth caused by troops 
passing through before being deployed. Installation growth has had a 
significant effect on regional transportation, particularly when an 
installation is located in or near an urban area.
  Even acknowledging the potential for drawdowns on military bases, 
those reductions would not nearly come close to alleviating the 
problem--not nearly.
  Surrounding roads play an important role in preserving military 
readiness. Our Armed Forces need to instantly deploy, and we need 
functional roads in order to do that. If military personnel are caught 
in a jam and if nobody moves, efficiency goes out the window.
  The domino effect of delays due to congestion, therefore, literally 
impairs our national security. This leaves not only military activities 
on base stranded, but also commerce in the congested area, and when we 
don't have a reliable roadway, economic activity halts. Goods don't 
move, and companies can't make money.
  It is a cascading inaction, which affects our productivity and 
balance sheets, and it puts a strain on businessowners.
  To be clear, the military is not to blame for this. Bases have come 
up with innovative approaches to ease the pain, but the problem remains 
severe and unavoidable without more investment. It is a Band-Aid over a 
wound that needs stitches.
  The only existing DOD program that provides funding for public 
highway improvements is the Defense Access Roads Program. However, the 
DAR Program is limited by outdated and restrictive eligibility criteria 
and was designed when bases were only expected to be located in 
relatively undeveloped areas, which is clearly no longer the case.
  DAR needs to be replaced with a separate DOD program to fund the 
transit services necessary to meet military needs.
  I know being stuck in traffic is not something unknown to most 
Americans. We are all too familiar with the horrible feeling of 
approaching an unexpected slow crawl on the road, but when this affects 
our military's ability to get to base, to do the job, and to be ready 
for anything, that is when we can't just sit and wait for it to get 
better. We can and should do more.
  Mr. Chairman, I plan to withdraw my amendment, but I will soon 
introduce a bill that embodies its concept, entitled the ``COMMUTE 
Act,'' and it will address these issues.
  I hope, beyond hope, that I can look forward to working with the 
members and my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee on this plan 
to meet this very important need.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HECK of Washington. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I just want to quickly agree 
with Congressman Heck.
  I used to represent Joint Base Lewis-McChord. It is the worst traffic 
in the State of Washington. The base more than doubled over the course 
of 7 to 8 years. It is a significant quality of life

[[Page 8863]]

issue for our men and women and their families who are serving on Joint 
Base Lewis-McChord, and I am sure this is a situation that is repeated 
around many bases across the country.
  So I strongly support his efforts to try and deal with this. This is 
something that directly impacts our troops and their families. I thank 
him for his effort.
  Mr. McKEON. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HECK of Washington. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McKEON. I, likewise, would be interested in working with you on 
this.
  In southern California, I know a major highway runs right through 
Camp Pendleton, and there is a lot of traffic. With Congressman Smith, 
I was able to visit Lewis-McChord, and I think you would find that a 
lot of people on both sides of the aisle would be willing to work with 
you on this bill, and I hope to be able to.
  Mr. HECK of Washington. Thank you, sir.
  As is characteristic to both of you, thank you for your graciousness 
and for your positive remarks.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just conclude by saying that there are some 
estimates that the Interstate 5 corridor around Joint Base Lewis-
McChord--remember, I-5 extends from Canada to Tijuana--is the most 
congested chokepoint.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in part A of House Report 113-460.


                Amendment No. 15 Offered by Ms. Jenkins

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

       At the end of title XI, add the following:

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

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentlewoman 
from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Kansas.
  Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In 2008, Congress passed legislation to suspend public-private 
competitions at the DOD through the OMB Circular A-76. That moratorium 
remains in place today. In 2009, the OMB issued a memorandum which 
regulated the move to insourcing at the DOD.
  Today, nearly half of the Federal Government owns and operates 
thousands of activities that are commercial in nature. These functions 
are not inherent or unique to government; rather, they can be found in 
small and Main Street businesses across the Nation. Not only are these 
Federal agencies duplicating private business, but many engage in 
unfair government competition with the private sector.
  My amendment seeks to place a moratorium on the insourcing of 
previously contracted activities within the DOD. Exceptions would be 
made, number one, if the activity were inherently governmental and, 
thereby, should never have been contracted out in the first place; or, 
number two, if the DOD would employ a reverse A-76 to itemize specific 
costs saved to the taxpayer, should the DOD be able to perform the 
commercial activity more efficiently for the taxpayer.
  According to the OMB, the act of conducting the A-76 competition 
alone can generate a savings of 10 to 40 percent on average. That is 
just the average savings generated from simply going through the 
process.
  While the A-76 process is not perfect, it is the best opportunity we 
have for a cost comparison. As an accountant, I understand the 
importance of a cost comparison. This amendment is just the first step. 
Studies also show that utilizing the A-76 public-private cost 
comparisons can save up to $27 billion per year. Again, this is just by 
implementing the cost comparison tool.
  In 2011, the Department of Defense completed a report in response to 
section 325 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2010, which concluded with two 
major recommendations to Congress, the first of which is to lift the 
suspension on A-76 competitions. This is the recommendation from the 
DOD.
  This amendment will provide the DOD with the flexibility to use the 
private sector for commercial activities and save valuable taxpayer 
money. I encourage a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise this evening in strong opposition to this amendment.
  Put simply, this amendment would cost taxpayers. It would not be in 
the best interests of our military readiness, and it is not supported 
by the Department of Defense. This amendment is extreme in its 
intention.
  It overrides every other law on the books in terms of the management 
of the national defense workload by prohibiting the transfer of the 
workload from the private sector to the public sector.
  For years now, Congress and the DOD have established statutes, 
regulations, and policies for determining the correct mix of the 
workforce between military contractor and civilian.
  As the cochair of the Depot and Arsenal Caucus, I am deeply concerned 
that this amendment would put back into place a severely flawed system 
that would do significant damage to our organic industrial base, 
including to our arsenals and depots, at a time when it is critical 
that we maintain these facilities' capabilities to equip our troops.
  I proudly represent the Rock Island Arsenal, where thousands of 
highly skilled people work every day to equip our troops. Our organic 
industrial base has, time and again, shown its critical importance to 
our men and women in uniform.
  When our troops on the ground needed improved armor on their 
vehicles, it was the Rock Island Arsenal that was able to rapidly 
produce and field that lifesaving armor to protect our troops; and as a 
military parent, I am personally thankful that the workforce at Rock 
Island Arsenal and organic industrial base facilities across our 
country are there to equip our men and women in uniform.
  This amendment would starve our critical organic industrial base, 
sending it into a death spiral, undermining key elements of our 
national security infrastructure, and reducing our ability to meet our 
national security strategy.

[[Page 8864]]

  In addition to the impact on military operations, this amendment 
would also not produce the best value for the Department of Defense and 
for our servicemen and servicewomen. Again, it is not wanted by our 
Nation's military leaders.
  For these reasons, I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues 
to join me in voting against it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I would like to yield 1 
minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott).
  Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I also rise in opposition 
to the amendment of my colleague's from Kansas.
  Our military has three workforces. We have the uniformed, we have the 
civilian, and we have the contractor. All three are vital to the 
national security of this country. The defense workforce must be 
managed in what makes the most long-term sense for both the mission of 
national security and the taxpayer.
  This amendment would prohibit the insourcing of contracted services, 
even when it would make sense for the taxpayer and would save money. By 
disrupting the Department of Defense's management practice, this 
amendment would impair military readiness. The Department did not ask 
for this proposed change, and it is against this amendment.
  I believe that this amendment is bad for the long-term security of 
the Nation, and I would ask that you oppose it.
  Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I have enormous respect for my friends from 
Kansas. We usually agree, but in this case, we don't.
  I represent Tinker Air Force Base, which has 15,000 Federal civilian 
defense employees, along with thousands of private employees, working 
in contract facilities on and around the base. Usually, they work 
together, but sometimes, they compete for work. When they do, that work 
should go to whomever can do the work better and cheaper.
  This amendment overrides every other law in the book, in terms of 
managing the defense workload by prohibiting the transfer of the 
workload from the private to the public sector, even when the public 
sector can do it better and cheaper.

                              {time}  1945

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

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

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, this chart--for those with keen 
eyesight--kind of puts this in perspective.
  The blue is what we spend on the civilian workforce. The green is 
what has been spent over the last decade on military personnel. The 
yellow is on contract services. And the white is the rest of it.
  The premise of this amendment is that the blue is too big.
  There are times when competition, especially on acquisition, is 
extremely helpful. There are also times where competition on 
sustainment or maintenance has a habit of unintentionally hurting our 
readiness, at least that was the result of the GAO study in 2010.
  So the committee has wisely tried to strike a balance between those 
two, making sure that there is competition when it makes sense, all of 
which is defined in title X of our code, which demands a core workload 
be established by the military of what our needs are and what is most 
cost-effective.
  Unfortunately, the first line of the amendment which says that 
``notwithstanding any other provision of law'' simply turns all of that 
on its head. This takes precedence over the entire code, which I am 
assuming is the reason DOD communicated the Defense Department does not 
want this amendment.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is also supported by the 
TRSA, MAPPS, the Business Coalition for Fair Competition, and the 
American Conservative Union.
  Mr. Chairman, I will submit their statements in support for the 
Record.

     Submitted for the Record in Support of Jenkins Amendment #135

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

  Mr. Chair, I submit the following statements in support of Jenkins 
Amendment #15 to H.R. 4435.

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

  In closing, my amendment seeks to strike a balance. If the service is 
inherently governmental, it should be contracted out. If it is a 
commercial activity, the Federal Government owes it to

[[Page 8865]]

the American taxpayer to get the best value, the most efficiency, and 
the best service available.
  We owe this to our warfighters to ensure they are receiving the best 
possible services as they protect us. This cannot be assured without 
the use of a fair competitive processes. With a debt of more than $17 
trillion, calls for reductions that will erode the end strength of our 
military and a stagnant private-sector job market, we must find ways to 
reduce spending and find efficiencies at DOD while boosting job 
creation in our communities.
  This amendment is an opportunity to vote for small business, break up 
Federal monopolies, ensure more efficient services, empower the 
warfighter, and maintain funding for DOD.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Chair, due to sequester cuts, the Department of 
Defense (DoD) needs to increase efficiency and lower costs wherever it 
can, but this costly amendment prevents DoD from hiring the most cost-
efficient workforce. It also would prevent DoD from ever correcting, 
through insourcing, any contract that costs too much or is poorly 
performed, period--regardless of the increased costs to taxpayers.
  According to the Government Accountability Office, DoD reports 
savings of almost $1 trillion through insourcing in FY10 alone. In 
2013, the DoD Comptroller acknowledged in a Senate hearing that 
civilian employees are significantly cheaper than contractors, 
particularly for the performance of long-term functions. So why would 
anyone want to make it impossible for DoD to save money by correcting 
overly costly or poorly-performed contracts, especially in a time of 
shrinking defense budgets? DoD can't afford this amendment, and neither 
can American taxpayers. Please join me in opposing this costly and 
wasteful amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Kansas 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Lamborn

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

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

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

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. The United 
States should not be spending money to disarm ourselves--to 
dramatically cut our strategic nuclear deterrent under the New START 
Treaty--if the other party to the treaty is not trustworthy.
  At the moment, the Russian Federation is clearly not trustworthy.
  Let me remind us all of Russia's current record on observing treaties 
and agreements.
  In 1994, Russia, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States 
signed the Budapest Memorandum. This agreement included a commitment to 
``respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of 
Ukraine.'' But this agreement did not keep Putin from invading 
Ukrainian territory.
  Strike one.
  In January, The New York Times revealed that the Russian Federation 
was cheating on another treaty--the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces 
Treaty, or INF Treaty. According to the story, our State Department has 
been raising the INF cheating issue with the Russians for about a year 
now, with no response.
  Strike two.
  In 2007, President Putin announced that he was suspending Russian 
participation in the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, or CFE. This 
came after years of Russian violations of the CFE Treaty.
  Strike three.
  Is the Russian government trustworthy?
  The answer is clearly no.
  The question for us tonight under my amendment is whether it makes 
sense for us to spend money on reducing our nuclear deterrent when the 
other party to the New START Treaty is not trustworthy. If you trust 
Vladimir Putin and the Russian government, vote against this amendment. 
But if you, like me, don't want to put our national security in the 
hands of a serial treaty violator, please vote for this amendment.
  We should not be spending money implementing the New START Treaty, 
which reduces our nuclear forces, unless and until Russia makes it 
clear that they are a responsible actor and will abide by the 
agreements they make.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  First of all, on the trust issue, you wouldn't have to negotiate with 
people that you trusted.
  Unfortunately, regrettably, we have to negotiate with people all the 
time who are not entirely trustworthy. That is why Ronald Reagan always 
said, ``Trust but verify,'' which I think was wrong. Let's verify. 
Trust is a very difficult thing.
  Obviously, Russia has proven itself untrustworthy, but they have 
consistently reduced their nuclear weapons arsenal as a result of 
treaties that were first negotiated by Ronald Reagan, and many others.
  They have also worked cooperatively with us to contain nuclear 
material, which has been enormously important. They would be a huge 
terrorist threat if they were to ever get their hands on nuclear 
material. Outside of the United

[[Page 8866]]

States, the former Soviet Union--and now Russia--is the number one 
place where you have that nuclear material.
  So having some measure of cooperation with them to contain and reduce 
that material is enormously important. That is the goal of the START 
Treaty.
  It is not a matter of whether or not you trust Putin or Russia. I 
don't trust many people, just in general, and I certainly don't trust 
them. The question is: is the START Treaty, an effort to reduce the 
number of nuclear weapons that Russia has and to contain and control 
the fissile material that they have, is that in our best interest?
  It is. And we should negotiate that.
  Certainly, what Putin is doing in the Ukraine is reprehensible and 
violates all manner of treaties. I support the President and the 
efforts of others to condemn and sanction them as a result.
  But to walk away from an effort to contain nuclear weapons I don't 
believe is in the best interest of the U.S. It is not a matter of 
whether you trust Russia; it is a matter of what it is in our best 
interest. I believe it is in our best interest to try to contain the 
nuclear fissile material available out there in the world. START is one 
way to do that. Walking away from this just because we don't trust 
Putin--and we don't--is not sound policy.
  I urge opposition to this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I want to respond to my colleague by 
saying there is a flaw in the New START Treaty, in my opinion, in that 
it originally called for reductions in U.S. nuclear forces and allowed 
Russia to increase its nuclear forces.
  So that right there I think is a problem. But when you have serial 
violations by the Russian Federation invading Ukraine, in violation of 
the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the INF Treaty, and the CFE Treaty, they 
are not a reliable partner in these treaties.
  And so to reduce our forces, how can that be in our interest when the 
other party to the treaty is not someone who is performing on these 
other treaties? There could be questions on whether they are even fully 
complying with the New START Treaty.
  Mr. Chairman, I will enter into the Record an article from The New 
York Times dated January 29 of this year detailing some of their 
violations of the INF Treaty.

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

            U.S. Says Russia Tested Missile, Despite Treaty

                         (By Michael R. Gordon)

       Washington.--The United States informed its NATO allies 
     this month that Russia had tested a new ground-launched 
     cruise missile, raising concerns about Moscow's compliance 
     with a landmark arms control accord.
       American officials believe Russia began conducting flight 
     tests of the missile as early as 2008. Such tests are 
     prohibited by the treaty banning medium-range missiles that 
     was signed in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail S. 
     Gorbachev, the Soviet leader at the time, and that has long 
     been viewed as one of the bedrock accords that brought an end 
     to the Cold War.
       Beginning in May, Rose Gottemoeller, the State Department's 
     senior arms control official, has repeatedly raised the 
     missile tests with Russian officials, who have responded that 
     they investigated the matter and consider the case to be 
     closed. But Obama administration officials are not yet ready 
     to formally declare the tests of the missile, which has not 
     been deployed, to be a violation of the 1987 treaty.
       With President Obama pledging to seek deeper cuts in 
     nuclear arms, the State Department has been trying to find a 
     way to resolve the compliance issue, preserve the treaty and 
     keep the door open to future arms control accords.
       ``The United States never hesitates to raise treaty 
     compliance concerns with Russia, and this issue is no 
     exception,'' Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, 
     said. ``There's an ongoing review process, and we wouldn't 
     want to speculate or prejudge the outcome.''
       Other officials, who asked not to be identified because 
     they were discussing internal deliberations, said there was 
     no question the missile tests ran counter to the treaty and 
     the administration had already shown considerable patience 
     with the Russians. And some members of Congress, who have 
     been briefed on the tests on a classified basis for well over 
     a year, have been pressing the White House for a firmer 
     response.
       A public dispute over the tests could prove to be a major 
     new irritant in the already difficult relationship between 
     the United States and Russia. In recent months, that 
     relationship has been strained by differences over how to end 
     the fighting in Syria; the temporary asylum granted to Edward 
     J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor; 
     and, most recently, the turmoil in Ukraine.
       The treaty banning the testing, production and possession 
     of medium-range missiles has long been regarded as a major 
     step toward curbing the American and Russian arms race. ``The 
     importance of this treaty transcends numbers,'' Mr. Reagan 
     said during the treaty signing, adding that it underscored 
     the value of ``greater openness in military programs and 
     forces.''
       But after President Vladimir V. Putin rose to power and the 
     Russian military began to re-evaluate its strategy, the 
     Kremlin developed second thoughts about the accord. During 
     the administration of President George W. Bush, Sergei B. 
     Ivanov, the Russian defense minister, proposed that the two 
     sides drop the treaty.
       Though the Cold War was over, he argued that Russia still 
     faced threats from nations on its periphery, including China 
     and potentially Pakistan. But the Bush administration was 
     reluctant to terminate a treaty that NATO nations regarded as 
     a cornerstone of arms control and whose abrogation would have 
     enabled the Russians to increase missile forces directed at 
     the United States' allies in Asia.
       Since Mr. Obama has been in office, the Russians have 
     insisted they want to keep the agreement. But in the view of 
     American analysts, Russia has also mounted a determined 
     effort to strengthen its nuclear abilities to compensate for 
     the weakness of its conventional, nonnuclear forces.
       At the same time, in his State of the Union address last 
     year, Mr. Obama vowed to ``seek further reductions in our 
     nuclear arsenals,'' a goal American officials at one point 
     hoped might form part of Mr. Obama's legacy.
       But administration officials and experts outside government 
     say Congress is highly unlikely to approve an agreement 
     mandating more cuts unless the question of Russian compliance 
     with the medium-range treaty is resolved.
       ``If the Russian government has made a considered decision 
     to field a prohibited system,'' Franklin C. Miller, a former 
     defense official at the White House and the Pentagon, said, 
     ``then it is the strongest indication to date that they are 
     not interested in pursuing any arms control, at least through 
     the remainder of President Obama's term.''
       It took years for American intelligence to gather 
     information on Russia's new missile system, but by the end of 
     2011, officials say it was clear that there was a compliance 
     concern.
       There have been repeated rumors over the last year that 
     Russia may have violated some of the provisions of the 1987 
     treaty. But the nature of that violation has not previously 
     been disclosed, and some news reports have focused on the 
     wrong system: a new two-stage missile called the RS-26. The 
     Russians have flight-tested it at medium range, according to 
     intelligence assessments, and the prevailing view among 
     Western officials is that it is intended to help fill the gap 
     in Russia's medium-range missile capabilities that resulted 
     from the 1987 treaty. The treaty defines medium-range 
     missiles as ground-launched ballistic or cruise missiles 
     capable of flying 300 to 3,400 miles.
       But because Russia has conducted a small number of tests of 
     the RS-26 at intercontinental range, it technically qualifies 
     as a long-range system and will be counted under the treaty 
     known as New Start, which was negotiated by the Obama 
     administration. So it is generally considered by Western 
     officials to be a circumvention, but not a violation, of the 
     1987 treaty
       One member of Congress who was said to have raised concerns 
     that the suspected arms control violation might endanger 
     future arms control efforts was John Kerry. As a senator and 
     chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, he received a 
     classified briefing on the matter in November 2012 that dealt 
     with compliance concerns, according to a report in The Daily 
     Beast.
       As secretary of state, Mr. Kerry has not raised concerns 
     over the cruise missile tests with his Russian counterpart, 
     Sergey V. Lavrov, but he has emphasized the importance of 
     complying with arms accords, a State Department official 
     said.
       Republican lawmakers, however, have urged the 
     administration to be more aggressive.
       ``Briefings provided by your administration have agreed 
     with our assessment that Russian actions are serious and 
     troubling, but have failed to offer any assurance of any 
     concrete action to address these Russian actions,'' 
     Representative Howard McKeon, Republican of California and 
     chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Representative 
     Mike Rogers, the Michigan Republican who leads the 
     Intelligence Committee, said in an April letter to Mr. Obama.
       And Senator Jim Risch, Republican of Idaho, and 16 other 
     Republican senators recently proposed legislation that would 
     require the White House to report to Congress on what 
     intelligence the United States has shared with NATO allies on 
     suspected violations of the 1987 treaty.

[[Page 8867]]

       Republican members of the Senate Foreign Relations 
     Committee have also cited the issue in holding up Ms. 
     Gottemoeller's confirmation as under secretary of state for 
     arms control and international security.
       It was against this backdrop that the so-called deputies 
     committee, an interagency panel led by Antony Blinken, Mr. 
     Obama's deputy national security adviser, decided that Ms. 
     Gottemoeller should inform NATO's 28 members about the 
     compliance issue.
       On Jan. 17, Ms. Gottemoeller discussed the missile tests in 
     a closed-door meeting of NATO's Arms Control, Disarmament and 
     Non-Proliferation Committee that she led in Brussels.
       The Obama administration, she said, had not given up on 
     diplomacy. There are precedents for working out disputes over 
     arms control complaints, and Ms. Gottemoeller said American 
     officials would continue to engage the Russians to try to 
     resolve the controversy.
       But even with the best of intentions, establishing what the 
     Russians are doing may not be easy. The elaborate network of 
     verification provisions created under the medium-range 
     missile treaty is no longer in effect, since all the missiles 
     that were believed to be covered by the agreement were long 
     thought to have been destroyed by May 1991.

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

                              {time}  2000

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


                 Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Schiff

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

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

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

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Schiff) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, when Congress passed the Authorization for 
Use of Military Force just days after
9/11, it provided the President with the

[[Page 8868]]

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

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

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

       American foreign policy is in troubling disarray.

  David Brooks wrote in The New York Times:

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

  I would suggest that a substantial part of that disarray and fraying 
is the sort of wishful thinking that we can wish terrorism and other 
problems away and go along and the world is not going to bother us.
  In other words, short-term political messaging is taking precedence 
over longer-term strategic interests; so repealing the current 
authority that helps the military protect us against terrorism, without 
something to take its place, is exactly that kind of wishful thinking.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE of California. Madam Chair, let me thank Congressman Schiff 
for offering this amendment.
  As this body knows, I have been offering an amendment to repeal the 
Authorization for Use of Military Force for many, many years. 
Congressman Schiff, this is such an important--a very important 
amendment, which is critical to stopping this endless war.
  Unfortunately, the Rules Committee refused to allow my bipartisan 
amendment, taken from my bill, the War Authorization Review and 
Determination Act, to even be considered.
  For those who were not here on that sorrowful day, just 3 days after 
9/11, let me just read from that short sentence--one sentence, mind 
you--that passed the House with just 1 hour of debate, with 420 ayes 
and one no.

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

  I voted against this resolution. Of course, it was the most difficult 
vote of my career, but I knew then what I know now. It was too broad, 
and it is open-ended.
  Unfortunately, the Republican leadership has allowed a mere--what is 
it--10 minutes now to debate this serious and dangerous authorization.
  Supporting this amendment would be an important step to ensuring that 
the President does not have a blank check to conduct endless war.
  Congress must exercise its constitutional authority.

[[Page 8869]]


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

                              {time}  2015

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


               Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

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

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

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

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

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

[[Page 8870]]

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


             amendments en bloc no. 2 offered by Mr. McKeon

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


           Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Kildee of Michigan

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

     SEC. 1082. IMPROVEMENT OF FINANCIAL LITERACY.

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


           Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Rogers of Alabama

       Page 520, after line 2, insert the following:

     SEC. 1643. PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR SPECIFIED FUZES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Air Force may enter 
     into contracts for the life-of-type procurement of covered 
     parts of the intercontinental ballistic missile fuze.
       (b) Availability of Funds.--Notwithstanding section 1502(a) 
     of title 31, United

[[Page 8871]]

     States Code, of the amounts authorized to be appropriated for 
     fiscal year 2015 by section 101 and available for Missile 
     Procurement, Air Force, as specified in the funding table in 
     section 4101, $4,500,000 shall be available for the 
     procurement of covered parts pursuant to contracts entered 
     into under subsection (a).
       (c) Covered Parts Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``covered parts'' means commercial off-the-shelf items as 
     defined in section 104 of title 41, United States Code.


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

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

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

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


            amendment no. 30 offered by Mr. young of Alaska

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

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

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


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

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

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

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


             amendment no. 34 offered by mr. bishop of utah

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

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

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

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

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

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


         amendment no. 35 offered by mr. swalwell of california

       Page 72, after line 21, insert the following:

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

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


            amendment no. 36 offered by mr. conaway of texas

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

     SEC. 5__. DEFERRED RETIREMENT OF CHAPLAINS.

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


          amendment no. 37 offered by mr. griffith of virginia

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

     SEC. 514. COMPLIANCE WITH EFFICIENCIES DIRECTIVE.

       By not later than December 31, 2015, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall ensure that the

[[Page 8872]]

     number of flag officers and generals are reduced to comply 
     with the Department of Defense efficiencies directive dated 
     March 14, 2011.


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

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

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

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


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

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

     SEC. 5__. NATIONAL GUARD CYBER PROTECTION TEAMS.

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


           amendment no. 43 offered by mr. grayson of florida

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

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

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


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

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

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

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


           amendment no. 81 offered by mr. grayson of florida

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

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

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


            amendment no. 97 offered by mr. young of alaska

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

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

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


           amendment no. 105 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

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

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

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

[[Page 8873]]

       (3) Intelligence community.--The term ``intelligence 
     community'' has the meaning given the term in section 3(4) of 
     the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4)).


           amendment no. 122 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

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

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

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


          amendment no. 140 offered by mr. grayson of florida

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

     SEC. __. SPACE PROTECTION STRATEGY.

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


           amendment no. 143 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

       Page 516, after line 10, insert the following:

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

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


           amendment no. 144 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

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

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

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


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

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

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

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


           amendment no. 148 offered by mr. brooks of alabama

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

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

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

[[Page 8874]]

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


          amendment no. 161 offered by mr. kildee of michigan

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

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

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

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

                              {time}  2030

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

[[Page 8875]]

the Department of Defense or is generated from solar devices located on 
government property.
  This small change is worthy of support. The Congressional Budget 
Office has scored this proposal as costing $2 million over a 10-year 
budget window, and my amendment was not made in order because of this 
score. I understand CBO rules, but I strongly submit that this 
investment in domestic manufacturing not only strengthens our energy 
independence, but also strengthens our industrial base. I hope the 
chairman and ranking member will work with me to advance this important 
issue.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for her work in this 
area, and I appreciate her efforts to advance U.S. manufacturing and 
our industrial base, and I thank her, again, for her hard work on this 
issue. I look forward to working with you as we move forward on this.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Madam Chairman, I thank my good friend for yielding.
  Madam Chairman, I would like to address two amendments that I offered 
that are included in the en bloc amendment, one that deals with 
expanding financial resources and tools for servicemembers and one that 
funds an independent study to improve wounded warrior care.
  For too long, unscrupulous lenders have targeted servicemembers on 
military bases with financial products that could have long-term 
negative impacts on their family's financial security. Inadequate 
financial understanding or literacy training on some of these financial 
products can lead to financial difficulty for servicemembers. Many 
servicemembers often require security clearances to perform their 
duties, and financial difficulties and the loss of a clearance can have 
an enormous impact on military combat readiness.
  This first amendment that I offer would allocate $10 million to 
expand financial literacy resources for incoming and transitioning 
servicemembers to ensure that they are not unfairly targeted by 
predatory lenders.
  The other amendment that is included is an important one to fund an 
independent study to improve wounded warrior care. While the DOD is 
still confronting significant challenges and issues regarding its care 
and transition of wounded warriors, and while improvements have been 
made, it is obvious that wounded warriors are still failing to receive 
the care that they need and that they deserve. Caring for these 
individuals who have served honorably should--and I know always will 
be--one of our most solemn duties.
  For this reason, a review, a comprehensive review, an independent and 
comprehensive review and study of this type should be awarded to an 
entity that is free of any current obligation; 20 percent of its 
revenues in the last several years should not have come from contracts 
from the DOD or the VA, ensuring independence. It is really important 
that we take a close look at how we are providing services to these 
servicemembers, and this independent study would do so.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I will continue to reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).
  Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Madam Chairman, I rise today in 
support of my amendment to H.R. 4435, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015.
  It facilitates the transfer of a portion of the U.S. Air Force 
Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply Point, also known as the Norwalk Tank Farm, 
to the city of Norwalk. If enacted, it would allow 15 acres of the 51-
acre area to be designated for public purposes and transferred to city 
hands. City officials have worked tirelessly for over a decade, and 
this amendment is a reflection of the compromise reached by the U.S. 
Air Force and the city of Norwalk.
  My amendment is of significant importance for my district. Once this 
land is transferred, this currently blighted property will mean real 
opportunity for the city of Norwalk and the surrounding communities. 
This property is currently located next to an elementary school and a 
child care learning center. Once the land has been completely cleaned 
and remediated and the park is built, children will have somewhere safe 
to go after school and on weekends.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on my amendment.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Ben Ray Lujan).
  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, the ability of our 
national labs to meet their mission relies on the strength of their 
foundational capabilities. I submitted an amendment that would give the 
Directors of our national laboratories the authority to accept grant 
funding from nonprofits and foundations for scientific research that 
supports the core missions of these labs.
  After discussion with the committee staff, rather than offering this 
amendment tonight, I look forward to working with Chairman Rogers of 
the Strategic Forces Subcommittee and Chairman McKeon and Ranking 
Member Smith of the Armed Services Committee to find an acceptable 
solution on this issue.
  I also want to thank Mr. McKeon for his service and his time. It has 
really been an honor to get to know him, and I continue to look forward 
to working with him for many years to come.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. I thank the gentleman from New Mexico. I agree 
with the importance of the national labs. I look forward to working 
with you to find ways to strengthen their capabilities and meet their 
important missions. I expect we will be able to find a way to ensure 
nonprofits have access to our national laboratories without using 
defense funding to subsidize such work.
  Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, I appreciate all the 
staff's time on this.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Nolan).
  Mr. NOLAN. Madam Chairman, my amendment prohibits construction of any 
projects in Afghanistan over $500,000--unless the U.S. Government can 
conduct proper audits, inspection, and oversight.
  Up to $79 billion has been authorized for new projects in this bill, 
most of which are outside the area in which our personnel can travel 
and operate safely and therefore will most likely go uninspected and 
unaudited. To date, $60 billion of the $100 billion of these so-called 
nation-building projects are completely unaccounted for.
  The blue area here in this first chart shows where our military and 
civilian personnel were allowed to travel and operate safely in the 
year 2009. The blue area in the second chart shows how dramatically the 
safe areas have been reduced.
  Moreover, since traditional banking services do not exist in these 
non-blue, non-safe areas, contracts are financed with truckloads of 
cash. It is the perfect recipe for fraud, graft, and abuse. It is time 
to stop it. Our Nation's taxpayers and our soldiers deserve better.
  Madam Chairman, Members of the House, I urge adoption of the 
amendment.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en 
bloc amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my 
amendment to fix the

[[Page 8876]]

Department of Defense (DoD) policy with respect to military bands.
  I want to thank my friend, Congressman Patrick Meehan, for 
cosponsoring this important amendment I also want to thank Chairman 
McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for their support.
  For decades, military musical units have accepted assistance from 
community organizations to travel and perform at public events such as 
ceremonies and parades at no cost to taxpayers.
  Last April, the DoD decided to no longer accept such support, forcing 
military bands to cancel numerous public performances across the 
country.
  We learned that this new policy was issued because gifts from 
community organizations were not credited to the appropriate account.
  To combat this problem, last year Congressman Meehan and I sponsored 
an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2014 (NDAA) in order to credit these contributions to the appropriate 
accounts, and thus, allow military bands to perform at community 
events. Our amendment was adopted. A version was included as Section 
351 of NDAA, as enacted into Public Law 133-66.
  Despite the intent of the amendment, it has come to our attention 
that, although the Secretary of Defense is allowed to accept outside 
donations, his office likely will continue the status quo and prevent 
military musical units from receiving assistance from outside 
organizations.
  It is hard to believe that during a time of tight budgets DoD would 
reject assistance from community organizations to facilitate band 
performances.
  It would be in the financial interest of DoD to continue to allow 
military bands, such as the Marine bands, to travel with the assistance 
of community organizations.
  Additionally, public performances by military bands bring a sense of 
patriotism and community to our cities and towns.
  It also increases goodwill and helps to enliven community events, 
increasing attendance and economic activity.
  The intent behind Section 351 of Public Law 133-66 is clear--to allow 
bands, like the Marine Band, to perform at community events when the 
expenses are fully covered by a private organization.
  In early May, Congressman Meehan and I sent a letter to DoD 
expressing our frustration with it continuing the current policy. We 
have not yet received a response from DoD on this issue.
  Since DoD apparently is choosing not to abide by the intent of our 
original amendment, we offered this new amendment to require DoD to 
accept gifts for military bands. Our amendment removes the discretion 
of DoD.
  This simple amendment will once again allow military musical units to 
travel and perform at community events at no cost to taxpayers.
  I urge all Members to support the amendment.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Madam Chair, I rise to thank Chairman McKeon and Ranking 
Member Smith for agreeing to include three of my amendments into this 
en bloc package. Those amendments are numbered ``43'', ``81'', and 
``140'', respectively.
  Grayson Amendment No. 43 will reinsert a worthwhile provision from 
the introduced version of H.R. 4435, requested by the Department of 
Defense, that was omitted from the bill text marked up in committee.
  This amendment provides the authority and discretion necessary to 
return personal property that is retained as evidence in connection 
with an investigation into a sexual assault involving a member of the 
Armed Forces.
  After the conclusion of all legal, adverse action, and administrative 
proceedings related to an incident, should a victim desire to have 
certain personal belongings returned to him or her, our Armed Forces 
will now have the ability to fulfill that request.
  As we all know, one of the primary goals of the American judicial 
system is to produce outcomes that will ``make the victim whole.'' 
Sometimes, Madam Chair, one important thing that we can offer a victim 
is to return items that he or she may cherish, which may have been 
confiscated as evidence during the course of an investigation.
  Let me be clear--this amendment is not intended to provide any new 
privileges to any perpetrator of a sexual assault. I am offering this 
amendment today to provide victims an opportunity to reclaim those 
items that are important to them.
  It was good policy when this bill was introduced, and it is good 
policy now.
  Grayson Amendment No. 81 will prohibit the Department of Defense from 
contracting with entities convicted of using ``Made in America'' labels 
fraudulently.
  The current law governing this issue can be found at 10 U.S.C. 2410f. 
It states very clearly that if a person is convicted of intentionally 
affixing a label bearing a ``Made in America'' inscription, then the 
Secretary of Defense has the discretion not to debar that person from 
contracting with the Department of Defense.
  Madam Chair, if we are going to put laws on the books to address an 
issue, they should mean something. We, the Members of this body, should 
make our intent clear. If someone purposely misrepresents an item as 
being ``Made in America'', and he is convicted of that crime--he does 
not get the benefit of securing contracts with our Armed Forces.
  My amendment accomplishes that goal. It requires debarment of the 
entities outlined above, while at the same time allowing the Secretary 
of Defense a narrow national security exception, which should be used 
only in the most extreme circumstances.
  This amendment makes good sense. It protects American businesses, and 
appropriately punishes those who have the audacity to claim that a 
product has been ``Made in America'' when it has not.
  I'd be remiss at this time, if I did not thank my good friend, 
Representative Carol Shea-Porter from the great state of New Hampshire. 
She has been discussing the idea of this amendment with me at least 
since February, and she was integral in its drafting and securing the 
support of her colleagues on the House Armed Services Committee. For 
that I am grateful--thank you again, Representative Shea-Porter for all 
of your hard work in support of this amendment.
  Finally, Madam Chair, Grayson Amendment No. 140 will extend the 
current United States Space Protection Strategy by an additional five-
year period--until 2030.
  In the 2008 NDAA, Congress required that a greater priority be put on 
the protection of national security space systems. It directed the 
Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with the Director of National 
Intelligence, to develop a strategy for the development of capabilities 
that are necessary to ensure freedom of action in space for the United 
States.
  The strategy, which is outlined in the notes to 10 U.S.C. 2271, is 
required to cover fiscal years 2008 through 2013; 2014 through 2019; 
and 2020 through 2025. My amendment, recognizing that the first five-
year covered period has lapsed, simply requires an additional five-year 
period--2026 through 2030.
  I am proud that this amendment will still be in force when my nine-
year-old sons have grown into adults. This amendment will protect not 
just the United States' position in space, but also their physical 
well-being.
  Madam Chair, again, I thank Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith 
for agreeing to include all three of these amendments in this en bloc 
package. I believe these amendments make America not only a safer 
place, but a better place.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 26 will 
not be offered.
  The Chair understands that amendment No. 27 will not be offered.


         Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington

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

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

     SEC. 3143. BUDGET INCREASE FOR DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Hastings) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.

[[Page 8877]]

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

                              {time}  2045

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


             Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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


          amendment no. 40 offered by mr. Coffman of colorado

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

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

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


        amendment no. 42 offered by mr. thompson of pennsylvania

       Page 108, after line 17, insert the following:

     SEC. 528. PRELIMINARY MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS.

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

     ``Sec. 520d. Preliminary mental health assessments

       ``(a) Provision of Mental Health Assessment.--Before any 
     individual enlists in an

[[Page 8878]]

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

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


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

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

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

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


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

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

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

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Members of the Armed Forces and their families make 
     enormous sacrifices in defense of the United States.
       (2) Military spouses face a unique lifestyle marked by 
     frequent moves, increased family responsibility during 
     deployments, and limited career opportunities in certain 
     geographic locations.
       (3) These circumstances present significant challenges to 
     military spouses who desire to build a portable career 
     commensurate with their skills, including education and 
     experience.
       (4) According to a recent Department of Defense survey, the 
     unemployment rate for civilians married to a military member 
     is 25 percent, but the unemployment rate is 33 percent for 
     spouses of junior enlisted members. The same survey revealed 
     that 85 percent of military spouses want or need to work.
       (5) A recent Military Officers Association of American 
     (MOAA)/Institute for Veterans and Military Families' (IVMF) 
     Military Spouse Employment Report revealed that an 
     overwhelming ninety percent of female military spouses are 
     underemployed.
       (6) The Department of Defense has demonstrated its 
     commitment to helping military spouses obtain employment by 
     creating the Military Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP), 
     the Military Spouse Career Center, and the Military Spouse 
     Career Advancement Accounts (MyCAA). More than 61,000 
     military spouses have been hired as part of the Military 
     Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP) since the MSEP launch in 
     June 2011.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) the Secretary of Defense should continue to work to 
     reduce the unemployment and underemployment of spouses of 
     members of the Armed Forces (in this section referred to as 
     ``military spouses'') and support closing the wage gap 
     between military spouses and their civilian counterparts;
       (2) in this process, the Secretary should prioritize 
     efforts that assist military spouses in pursuing portable 
     careers that match their skill set, including education and 
     experience; and
       (3) in evaluating the effectiveness of military spouse 
     employment programs, the Secretary should collect information 
     that provides a comprehensive assessment of the program, 
     including whether program goals are being achieved.
       (c) Data Collection Related to Efforts to Address 
     Underemployment of Military Spouses.--
       (1) Data collection required.--In addition to monitoring 
     the number of military spouses who obtain employment through 
     military spouse employment programs, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall collect data to evaluate the effectiveness of military 
     spouse employment programs in addressing the underemployment 
     of military spouses and in closing the wage gap between 
     military spouses and their civilian counterparts. Information 
     collected shall include whether positions obtained by 
     military spouses through military spouse employment programs 
     match their education and experience.
       (2) Report required.--Not later than one year after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
     evaluating the progress of military spouse employment 
     programs in reducing military spouse unemployment, reducing 
     the wage gap between military spouses and their civilian 
     counterparts, and addressing the underemployment of military 
     spouses.
       (d) Military Spouse Employment Programs Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``military spouse employment programs'' 
     means the Military Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP).


         amendment no. 46 offered by mr. mcnerney of california

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


           amendment no. 47 offered by mr. cook of california

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

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

       (a) Program Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may carry 
     out a pilot program to enhance the efforts of the Department 
     of Defense to provide job placement assistance and related 
     employment services directly to members in the National Guard 
     and Reserves.
       (b) Administration.--The pilot program shall be offered to, 
     and administered by, the adjutants general appointed under 
     section 314 of title 32, United States Code.
       (c) Cost-sharing Requirement.--As a condition on the 
     provision of funds under this section to a State to support 
     the operation of the pilot program in the State, the State 
     must agree to contribute an amount, derived from non-Federal 
     sources, equal to at least 30 percent of the funds provided 
     by the Secretary of Defense under this section.
       (d) Direct Employment Program Model.--The pilot program 
     should follow a job placement program model that focuses on 
     working one-on-one with a member of a reserve component to 
     cost-effectively provide job placement services, including 
     services such as identifying unemployed and under employed 
     members, job matching services, resume editing, interview 
     preparation, and post-employment follow up. Development of 
     the pilot program should be informed by State direct 
     employment programs for members of the reserve components, 
     such as the programs conducted in California and South 
     Carolina.
       (e) Evaluation.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop 
     outcome measurements to evaluate the success of the pilot 
     program.
       (f) Reporting Requirements.--
       (1) Report required.--Not later than March 1, 2019, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall

[[Page 8879]]

     submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
     describing the results of the pilot program. The Secretary 
     shall prepare the report in coordination with the Chief of 
     the National Guard Bureau.
       (2) Elements of report.--A report under paragraph (1) shall 
     include the following:
       (A) A description and assessment of the effectiveness and 
     achievements of the pilot program, including the number of 
     members of the reserve components hired and the cost-per-
     placement of participating members.
       (B) An assessment of the impact of the pilot program and 
     increased reserve component employment levels on the 
     readiness of members of the reserve components.
       (C) A comparison of the pilot program to other programs 
     conducted by the Department of Defense and Department of 
     Veterans Affairs to provide unemployment and underemployment 
     support to members of the reserve components.
       (D) Any other matters considered appropriate by the 
     Secretary.
       (g) Limitation on Total Fiscal-year Obligations.--The total 
     amount obligated by the Secretary of Defense to carry out the 
     pilot program for any fiscal year may not exceed $20,000,000.
       (h) Duration of Authority.--
       (1) In general.--The authority to carry out the pilot 
     program expires September 30, 2018.
       (2) Extension.--Upon the expiration of the authority under 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense may extend the pilot 
     program for not more than two additional fiscal years.


          amendment no. 48 offered by mr. lamborn of colorado

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

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

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


           amendment no. 49 offered by ms. bonamici of oregon

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

     SEC. 553. REPORT ON TUITION ASSISTANCE.

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


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

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


        amendment no. 51 offered by mr. gerlach of pennsylvania

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

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

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


          amendment no. 52 offered by mrs. bustos of illinois

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

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

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


           amendment no. 53 offered by ms. chu of california

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

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

       (a) Comptroller General Report.--
       (1) Report required.--Not later than one year after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of 
     the United States shall submit to the designated 
     congressional committees a report on the policies to prevent 
     hazing, and systems initiated to track incidents of hazing, 
     in each of the Armed Forces, including reserve components, 
     officer candidate schools, military service academies, 
     military academy preparatory schools, and basic training and 
     professional schools for enlisted members.
       (2) Elements.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall 
     include the following:
       (A) An evaluation of the definition of hazing by the Armed 
     Forces.

[[Page 8880]]

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


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

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

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

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


         amendment no. 55 offered by mr. lamalfa of california

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

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

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


          amendment no. 56 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

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

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

       (a) Pilot Program Required.--Commencing not later than 90 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall carry out a pilot program to 
     assess the feasibility and advisability of providing the 
     information described in subsection (b) on members of the 
     Armed Forces who are separating from the Armed Forces to 
     State veterans agencies as a means of facilitating the 
     transition of members of the Armed Forces from military 
     service to civilian life.
       (b) Covered Information.--The information described in this 
     subsection with respect to a member is as follows:
       (1) Department of Defense Form DD 214.
       (2) A personal email address.
       (3) A personal telephone number.
       (4) A mailing address.
       (c) Voluntary Participation.--The participation of a member 
     in the pilot program shall be at the election of the member.
       (d) Form of Provision of Information.--Information shall be 
     provided to State veterans agencies under the pilot program 
     in digitized electronic form.
       (e) Use of Information.--Information provided to State 
     veterans agencies under the pilot program may be shared by 
     such agencies with appropriate county veterans service 
     offices in such manner and for such purposes as the Secretary 
     shall specify for purposes of the pilot program.
       (f) Report.--Not later than 15 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report on the pilot program. The report shall include a 
     description of the pilot program and such recommendations, 
     including recommendations for continuing or expanding the 
     pilot program, as the Secretary considers appropriate in 
     light of the pilot program.


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

       Page 162, after line 18, insert the following:

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

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Commencing August 26, 1946, though late February 1947 
     the United States Navy Antarctic Developments Program Task 
     Force 68, codenamed ``Operation Highjump'' initiated and 
     undertook the largest ever-to-this-date exploration of the 
     Antarctic continent.
       (2) The primary mission of the Task Force 68 organized by 
     Rear Admiral Richard E. Byrd Jr. USN, (Ret) and led by Rear 
     Admiral Richard H. Cruzen, USN, was to do the following:
       (A) Establish the Antarctic research base Little America 
     IV.
       (B) In the defense of the United States of America from 
     possible hostile aggression from abroad - to train personnel 
     test equipment, develop techniques for establishing, 
     maintaining and utilizing air bases on ice, with 
     applicability comparable to interior Greenland, where 
     conditions are similar to those of the Antarctic.
       (C) Map and photograph a full two-thirds of the Antarctic 
     Continent during the classified, hazardous duty/volunteer-
     only operation involving 4700 sailors, 23 aircraft and 13 
     ships including the first submarine the

[[Page 8881]]

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


           amendment no. 59 offered by mr. farr of california

       Page 162, after line 18, insert the following:

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

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


         amendment no. 130 offered by mr. kelly of pennsylvania

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

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

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


         amendment no. 133 offered by mr. kelly of pennsylvania

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

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

       It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) Mistral class amphibious assault warships, each of 
     which has the capacity to carry 16 helicopters, up to 700 
     soldiers, four landing craft, 60 armored vehicles, and 13 
     tanks, would significantly increase the the naval 
     capabilities of the Russian navy;
       (2) Mistral class warships would allow the Russian navy to 
     expand its naval presence in the region, thereby augmenting 
     its capabilities against Ukraine, Georgia, and Baltic member 
     states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization;
       (3) France should not proceed with its sale of two Mistral 
     class warships to the Russian Federation; and
       (4) the President, the Secretary of State, and the 
     Secretary of Defense should use diplomatic means to urge 
     their counterparts in the Government of France not to proceed 
     with its sale of two Mistral class warships to the Russian 
     Federation.


          amendment no. 139 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

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

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

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


          amendment no. 141 offered by mr. lamborn of colorado

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

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

       (a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence 
     shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives 
     and the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on 
     Armed Services of the Senate a report on the status of 
     governance and democratization in the Russian Federation.
       (b) Contents.--The report required under subsection (a) 
     shall include--
       (1) a description of the extent of political and economic 
     corruption among the senior leadership of the Russian 
     Federation; and
       (2) an analysis of the assets of the senior leadership of 
     the Russian Federation, with a particular focus on the 
     illegal attainment

[[Page 8882]]

     and movement of those assets, including the use of family or 
     friends to hide assets.
       (c) Form.--The report required under subsection (a) shall 
     be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a 
     classified annex.
       (d) Public Availability.--The Director of National 
     Intelligence shall make publicly available on the Internet 
     the unclassified portion of the report required under 
     subsection (a).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments 
en bloc, all of which have been examined by the majority and the 
minority.
  At this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Kelly).
  Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I thank the chairman.
  I rise in strong support of my amendment to H.R. 4435, the FY15 NDAA, 
to renew a 1-year ban on the Obama administration from using any 
Department of Defense funds to implement the United Nations Arms Trade 
Treaty.
  This language is identical to the version of my amendment that was 
enacted into law FY14 NDAA and reflects the consistent will of the 
American people and the unified position of Congress in opposition to 
this misguided and dangerous treaty.
  Renewal of this ban is timely and necessary. In January, the Obama 
administration, unexpectedly and without consultation, issued a new 
arms export control policy, which has not been changed since 1995.
  The administration's new policy clearly seeks to implement the ATT 
and is based on the most dangerous part of the treaty, the 
international human rights law/international humanitarian law standard, 
that can be readily politicized by bad actors to stop the U.S. from 
providing arms to our friends and allies, including Israel.
  The Obama administration has been so brazen about this that, in a 
speech to CSIS on April 23, Assistant Secretary of State Thomas 
Countryman openly stated:

       We're already implementing the treaty.

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

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

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

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

  In March, Representative Tim Ryan of Ohio, and I introduced the 
bipartisan H.R. 4305, the Medical Evaluation Parity for Service Members 
Act of 2014, which is the exact language of this amendment.
  This small but subsequent change to current law will bring mental 
health to parity with physical health during entrance screenings. A 
preliminary evaluation will also have the purpose of serving as a 
baseline to identify changes in behavioral health, including traumatic 
brain injury and/or posttraumatic stress injury throughout an 
individual's military career.
  Protecting individual privacy was taken into the utmost consideration

[[Page 8883]]

when putting this amendment together. While the MEPS Act is not a cure-
all, it will be a significant step in further understanding a well-
documented gap in behavioral health information that exists among our 
service branches; and of equal importance, it will assist with the 
mental wellness of our servicemembers and veterans.
  Since introduction, the MEPS Act has garnered over 35 bipartisan 
cosponsors and the support of over 40 major military, veteran, and 
health advocacy groups.
  I thank all those who supported this legislation and worked with me 
and my staff to put this together. I ask for your support as we pass 
this important piece of legislation.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).
  Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Chair, I want to thank Rules Committee Chairman 
Pete Sessions for making this amendment in order, and I want to thank 
Chairman McKeon for his service and for allowing this amendment to be 
part of the en bloc package.
  My amendment adds the voice of the House to those of many Americans, 
including Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who would like to see the names of 
the 74 sailors lost aboard the USS Frank E. Evans added to the Vietnam 
Memorial.
  The USS Frank Evans, a destroyer, was launched near the end of World 
War II and was recommissioned for the Korea and Vietnam conflicts. 
After participating in combat off the coast of Vietnam, the Evans was 
deployed for the Operation Sea Spirit training exercise in the South 
China Sea.
  On the morning of June 3, 1969, the Evans was training with an 
Australian navy carrier when the two ships collided.

                              {time}  2100

  The Melbourne ripped the American destroyer in two. The bow sank in 
just 3 minutes, leaving only a stern section afloat. Seventy-four 
sailors perished.
  Although they were in the South China Sea, these sailors' names have 
been excluded from the Vietnam Memorial because the Evans was outside 
the designated combat zone which determines inclusion on the wall.
  Although these men did not die in direct combat, they were 
instrumental in advancing military objectives in Vietnam and 
participated in the conflict just days before the collision.
  I thank the chairman for allowing this amendment which would 
encourage the addition of their names to the wall.
  My amendment adds the voice of this House to those of many Americans, 
including Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who would like to see the names of 
the 74 sailors lost aboard the USS Frank E. Evans added to the Vietnam 
Memorial.
  The USS Frank E. Evans, a destroyer, was launched near the end of 
World War II and was recommissioned for the Korea and Vietnam 
conflicts. After participating in combat off the coast of Vietnam, the 
Evans was deployed for the ``Operation Sea Spirit'' training exercises 
in the South China Sea.
  On the morning of June 3, 1969, the Evans was training with the 
Australian Navy carrier HMAS Melbourne, when the two ships collided. 
The Melbourne ripped the American destroyer in two. The bow sank in 
just three minutes, leaving only the stern section afloat. Seventy-four 
sailors perished.
  Although they were in the South China Sea, these sailors' names have 
been excluded from the Vietnam Veterans Memorial because the Evans was 
outside the designated combat zone which determines inclusion on the 
Wall. Although these men did not die in direct combat, they were 
instrumental in advancing American military objectives in Vietnam and 
had participated in the conflict just days before the collision. This 
happenstance should not obscure their valor, patriotism, and ultimate 
sacrifice for their country, especially as other exceptions to the 
stated policy have been made, including by Ronald Reagan, who waived 
the combat zone criteria to add 68 names of U.S. Marines who were 
killed when a ``rest and recreation'' flight to Hong Kong crashed.
  It has been nearly 45 years to the day since that June night in 1969, 
and the passage of time has made duller and less distinct, boundaries 
and criteria that may have seemed reasonable and clear back then. The 
74 sailors from the Evans belong with the other 58,000 Americans who 
gave their lives in Vietnam--on the Wall--where Americans from every 
corner of this great nation can give our silent thanks for their having 
given the ``last full measure of devotion.''
  Mr. McKEON. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Walberg), my friend and colleague.
  Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I want to thank the chairman for including 
this amendment en bloc.
  As our men and women transition out of the Armed Forces, they are 
confronted with a number of challenges as they reintegrate into 
civilian life. My amendment offers a simple change to current DOD 
policy that I believe will greatly benefit our servicemembers as they 
return home.
  Based on bipartisan legislation I have introduced, the Servicemembers 
Transition Improvement Act, this amendment would require a pilot 
program at DOD to transmit a comprehensive copy of a servicemember's 
information to State veterans agencies.
  Veterans service agencies are a powerful resource, helping veterans 
through job assistance programs and navigating the benefits they have 
earned. This legislation will enable veterans service offices to assist 
separating servicemembers who reside in their communities and confirms 
that caring for our men and women in uniform does not end when they 
leave military service.
  Also, Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of my bipartisan 
amendment with Mr. Cohen of Tennessee to prohibit new funds for the 
Afghanistan infrastructure fund and ensure American tax dollars are 
invested wisely.
  We have already spent billions of dollars toward rebuilding the 
infrastructure of Afghanistan, and Congress has appropriated over $1.2 
billion alone to the Afghanistan infrastructure fund since it was 
created in 2011.
  In their most recent report, SIGAR reported that only $229 million of 
the $1.2 billion Congress has appropriated has actually been disbursed 
for projects. More importantly, SIGAR has repeatedly found that the 
projects which are underway are behind schedule and years away from 
completion.
  Without any assurance that these projects are needed or can be 
completed, let's focus these funds on growing our economy, investing in 
American infrastructure, and paying off our debt.
  I want to thank Chairman McKeon for accepting this amendment in the 
en bloc and would encourage my colleagues to vote in support of it.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth).
  Ms. DUCKWORTH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the en bloc package, 
including my amendment which will strengthen our military families.
  Madam Chair, last Mother's Day I traveled to Afghanistan with a 
bipartisan group of Members of Congress. We heard firsthand about the 
difficult mental and physical challenges our brave servicemen and -
women must overcome. One such challenge was their maternity leave 
policy, which is not in line with the Family and Medical Leave Act.
  Currently, the Department of Defense permits Active Duty mothers to 
take 6 weeks of maternity leave. This is 6 weeks less than mandated by 
the Family and Medical Leave Act.
  My amendment, which is based on my widely supported bipartisan bill, 
the Military Opportunities for Mothers, or MOM, Act, would give 
servicemembers the option of extending leave to the same amount that is 
guaranteed to their civilian sisters. It has received widespread 
support because my colleagues have heard from female servicemembers and 
veterans on how bad this policy of just 6 weeks is for the retention of 
talented women, morale, and mental health.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and give our military 
mothers a chance at a healthier, stronger future for their families and 
our country. Extending maternity leave for these women is the least we 
can do for those who sacrifice so much for our country.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Coffman), my friend and colleague, a member of the 
Committee on Armed Services.

[[Page 8884]]


  Mr. COFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your service to our Nation 
as the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. As a veteran, I 
deeply appreciate all you have done and will do until the end of your 
term.
  Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this en bloc amendment to the 
National Defense Authorization Act because it contains an amendment I 
offered which provides servicemembers diagnosed with a mental health 
condition who have been discharged access to a physician with special 
mental health training to provide an additional level of expert review 
on appeal.
  According to the Congressional Research Service, from 2001 to 2011, 
well over 900,000 servicemembers were diagnosed with at least one 
mental health condition. While the majority of those diagnosed were 
able to continue serving, many were ultimately discharged from the 
military either directly for their mental health issues or for conduct 
linked to those diagnoses.
  Current law insufficiently equips servicemembers diagnosed with a 
mental health disorder during appeal of a discharge. My amendment 
corrects this injustice and ensures fairness for those suffering from 
mental health issues as a result of their service to our Nation.
  I urge my colleagues to support this en bloc amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I now yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Murphy).
  Mr. MURPHY of Florida. Madam Chair, I want to thank the gentleman 
from Washington for yielding. I want to thank the chairman for his 
efforts on this evening's work.
  I rise today in support of my amendment to improve mental health and 
suicide prevention for our Nation's veterans.
  Every day our country loses 22 of our Nation's heroes to suicide. 
This heartbreaking statistic remains a devastating reality that should 
shake every Member in this House. Truly providing our heroes with the 
respect and care they have earned means treating not only physical, but 
invisible wounds as well.
  With damning reports about the VA failing our veterans and our 
country, my amendment would insist on more accountability by requiring 
an independent third-party evaluation of existing suicide prevention 
efforts to improve coordination and integration between the DOD and the 
VA.
  Outcomes of servicemember and veteran suicide prevention programs are 
too important to be left to government agencies, particularly ones 
embroiled in scandal.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. Our Nation must not 
continue to fail those who served us so bravely.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1 minute 
remaining. The gentleman from Washington has 5 minutes remaining.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth).
  Ms. DUCKWORTH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment which 
is included in the next en bloc amendment, which will strengthen small 
business participation in government contracts.
  In my district and across the country, small businesses are the 
backbone of our economy. They innovate, know how to operate on a tight 
budget, and create good-paying jobs. My small businesses in Elgin, 
Illinois, should be able to win government contracts from the 
Department of Defense because I know they will do more with taxpayer 
dollars and provide superior products and services for our military.
  This amendment would raise the small business prime contracting goal 
from 23 percent to 25 percent and establish a subcontracting goal of 40 
percent. It would allow small businesses to reap $10 billion annually 
in new work. These steps will ensure small businesses are able to 
compete, remain a powerful employment source, and save taxpayers money.
  Small businesses are a vital part of Illinois' Eighth Congressional 
District. That is why last year I came to the House floor to speak on 
behalf of small business amendments that I offered in the past. This 
time I am happy to partner with my colleague, the chairman of the Small 
Business Committee, to fight for this critical pillar of our country.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. McKEON. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).
  Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of the en bloc 
package that is before us tonight, which includes my amendment that 
will finally recognize the valiant service of merchant mariners who 
operated domestically during World War II.
  Ensuring that individuals who sacrifice so much in service to our 
country receive the recognition they deserve is one of the most 
important jobs we have as Members of Congress.
  I am grateful for the bipartisan support my amendment has received 
from colleagues like my good friends Janice Hahn from California and 
Walter Jones from North Carolina. With support for my amendment coast 
to coast, I am proud to stand here today one step closer to correcting 
an injustice that has remained for over 70 years. Madam Chair, after 70 
long years, these mariners deserve to receive recognition for their 
service to our country.
  I thank the chairman, I thank the ranking member for including this 
amendment in the en bloc package this evening, and I ask my colleagues 
to support final passage.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I have no further speakers, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en 
bloc amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Madam Chair, I rise today in strong support of 
the McMorris Rodgers/Bishop amendment to the National Defense 
Authorization Act. As co-chairs of the Congressional Military Family 
Caucus, we are committed to supporting military families. Our amendment 
highlights a growing issue for military spouses: that of unemployment 
and underemployment.
  Military spouses face a unique lifestyle marked by frequent moves, 
increased family responsibility during deployments, and limited career 
opportunities in certain geographic locations. These circumstances make 
it especially tough for those who want to build a portable career that 
matches their skills, including their education and experience.
  According to a recent DoD survey, the unemployment rate for civilians 
married to a military member is 25 percent--and climbs to 33 percent 
for spouses of junior enlisted members. In contrast, the average 
unemployment rate for individuals 20 years and over is 6.1 percent. A 
recent Military Officers Association of America (MOAA)/Institute for 
Veterans and Military Families' (IVMF) Military Spouse Employment 
Report looked beyond unemployment, finding that 9 out of 10 female 
military spouses who are employed possess more formal education or 
experience than is needed in their current position. Many spend years 
obtaining a degree or developing an area of expertise, only to find 
that they must be relicensed or recertified each time they move across 
state lines. For medical professionals, nurses, attorneys, teachers, 
and numerous others, the financial and emotional burden is too much. 
Their circumstances make it difficult to build a retirement fund, or 
get the promotion or tenure they would obtain in civilian life.
  DoD has demonstrated its commitment to helping military spouses 
obtain employment by establishing several programs, including the 
Military Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP), a computer portal that 
connects companies with military spouses seeking employment. Since 
MSEP's launch in June 2011, more than 61,000 military spouses have 
obtained jobs through the program. DoD presently collects data on the 
number of businesses participating in MSEP and the number of military 
spouses placed in a job through the program. However, information is 
not available on the types of jobs obtained and whether they are 
commensurate with an applicant's experience or education.
  Our amendment would require DoD to begin gathering this data, which 
will equip us to better address the complex employment challenges of 
military spouses.
  I applaud DoD for its significant progress in addressing military 
spouse unemployment. Yet, we have a continuing responsibility to

[[Page 8885]]

make sure our programs are as effective as possible. I urge my 
colleagues to support our amendment to enhance efforts to address 
military spouse unemployment and underemployment.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chair, in 2011, all of New York's Chinatown 
suffered a profound loss when Private Danny Chen died in Afghanistan. 
We did not lose this young man through combat with the enemy. Rather, 
Danny passed away after enduring horrific abuse and hazing at the hands 
of others in his unit. After months of being forced to do pushups while 
holding water in his mouth, being kicked, called racial slurs and 
having rocks thrown at him, Danny died while on guard duty.
  One of the great tragedies of this case is that Danny's superiors--
both enlisted troops and officers--were either complicit with his 
hazing or turned a blind eye, allowing his abuse to continue. We have 
to wonder, if Danny Chen had somewhere to turn whether he would still 
be alive today. If someone else in Danny's unit had been able to speak 
out--without fear of repercussions--might things have ended 
differently? Would Danny's parents, Szu Chen and Yao Ten, still have 
their son?
  Unfortunately, hazing remains too common in the military--and often 
goes unreported. By requiring every branch of the military to establish 
a tip line where these incidents could be reported, this amendment 
would help create a zero-tolerance environment for hazing. Not only 
will this provide help for the servicemember suffering abuse, but it 
can serve as a powerful deterrent. When potential bullies know 
inappropriate behavior can be anonymously and safely reported, they 
will be more cautious.
  Madam Chair, no family should have to endure what the Chens have. The 
brave men and women who serve our Nation risk everything on our behalf. 
We owe it to them to ensure they operate in a professional environment 
where everyone is afforded dignity and respect, regardless of 
background. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the amendment.
  Mr. McNERNEY. Madam Chair, I want to thank Chairman McKeon and 
Ranking Member Smith for their work on this critical legislation, The 
National Defense Authorization Act.
  I believe that it is our sacred obligation to help the men and women 
who served our country find good-paying jobs in today's economy and 
transition seamlessly from active duty to the civilian labor market. 
The men and women in the U.S. Armed Forces receive first class training 
in the military and develop skills that are valuable in the civilian 
workforce. Too often, they return home and find it challenging to 
obtain employment.
  The underlying bill authorizes a pilot program to connect civilian 
employing agencies with service members who are leaving the military 
and entering the civilian workforce. I offered an amendment that 
requires the Secretary of Defense to consider how those agencies will 
work with state and county Veterans Affairs offices, as well as 
National Guard offices.
  Some of the most valuable resources and information that troops and 
veterans receive come from their local VA and National Guard offices. 
Their dedicated professionals have experience and expertise on the 
front lines and understand the unique needs of service members and 
veterans.
  By coordinating these services, we can more fully assist veterans in 
a seamless transition from military service to civilian life--and we 
can start that by helping them find good wage jobs.
  Our veterans have earned the thanks of a grateful nation when they 
return home, and employers can and will benefit from the skills, 
discipline, and professionalism veterans possess.
  I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for including my 
amendment in this en bloc package.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


             Amendments En Bloc No. 4 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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


         Amendment No. 41 Offered by Ms. Duckworth of Illinois

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

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

       Section 701(j) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as paragraphs 
     (2) and (3), respectively;
       (2) by inserting after ``(j)'' the following new paragraph 
     (1):
       ``(1) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary 
     concerned, a member of the armed forces who gives birth to a 
     child shall receive 42 days of convalescent leave to be used 
     in connection with the birth of the child. At the discretion 
     of the member, the member shall be allowed up to 42 
     additional days in a leave of absence status in connection 
     with the birth of the child upon the expiration of the 
     convalescent leave, except that--
       ``(A) a member who uses this additional leave is not 
     entitled to basic pay for any day on which such additional 
     leave is used, but shall be considered to be on active duty 
     for all other purposes; and
       ``(B) the commanding officer of the member may recall the 
     member to duty from such leave of absence status when 
     necessary to maintain unit readiness.''; and
       (3) in paragraph (3), as redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (1) and (2)''.


          Amendment No. 61 Offered by Mr. Bilirakis of Florida

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

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

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


            Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mr. Ross of Florida

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

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

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


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

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

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

       Section 2306 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i)(1) The Secretary shall make available for purchase a 
     memorial headstone or marker for the marked or unmarked grave 
     of an individual described in paragraph (2) or for the 
     purpose of commemorating such an individual whose remains are 
     unavailable.
       ``(2) An individual described in this paragraph is an 
     individual who--
       ``(A) as a member of a National Guard or Reserve component 
     performed inactive duty training or active duty for training 
     for at least six years but did not serve on active duty; and
       ``(B) is not otherwise ineligible for a memorial headstone 
     or marker on account of

[[Page 8886]]

     the nature of the individual's separation from the Armed 
     Forces or other cause.
       ``(3) A headstone or marker for the grave of an individual 
     may be purchased under this subsection by--
       ``(A) the individual;
       ``(B) the surviving spouse, child, sibling, or parent of 
     the individual; or
       ``(C) an individual other than the next of kin, as 
     determined by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
       ``(4) In establishing the prices of the headstones and 
     markers made available for purchase under this section, the 
     Secretary shall ensure the prices are sufficient to cover the 
     costs associated with the production and delivery of such 
     headstones and markers.
       ``(5) No person may receive any benefit under the laws 
     administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs solely by 
     reason of this subsection.
       ``(6) This subsection does not authorize any new burial 
     benefit for any person or create any new authority for any 
     individual to be buried in a national cemetery.
       ``(7) The Secretary shall coordinate with the Secretary of 
     Defense in establishing procedures to determine whether an 
     individual is an individual described in paragraph (2).''.


          Amendment No. 64 Offered by Mrs. Capps of California

       Page 177, after line 12, insert the following:

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

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


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

       Page 184, after line 13, insert the following:

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

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

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

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


           Amendment No. 69 Offered by Mr. Murphy of Florida

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

     SEC. ____. IMPROVEMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH CARE.

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


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

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

     SEC. 7__. PRIMARY BLAST INJURY RESEARCH.

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


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

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

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

       (a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to the congressional defense committees a report on what 
     steps the Secretary is taking to ensure that members of the 
     Armed Forces and the dependents of such members have access 
     to reproductive counseling and a full spectrum of treatments 
     for infertility, including in vitro fertilization.
       (b) Matters Included.--The report under subsection (a) 
     shall include the following:
       (1) An assessment of treatment options available at 
     military medical treatment facilities throughout the military 
     health system.
       (2) An identification of factors that might disrupt 
     treatment, including availability of options, lack of timely 
     access to treatment, change in duty station, or overseas 
     deployments.
       (3) The number of members of the Armed Forces who have used 
     specific treatment options, including in vitro fertilization.
       (4) The number of dependents of members who have used 
     specific treatment options, including in vitro fertilization.
       (5) An identification of non-Department of Defense 
     treatment options for infertility that could benefit members 
     and the dependents of members.
       (6) Any other matters the Secretary determines appropriate.


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

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

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

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

[[Page 8887]]

     contracting officer shall provide written documentation of 
     how a maximum number exceeding 5 is consistent with the 
     purposes and objectives of the two-phase selection 
     procedures.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Report.--(1) The Director of the Office of Management 
     and Budget shall require the head of each agency to appoint 
     an individual who shall provide to the Director an annual 
     compilation of each instance the agency awarded a contract 
     pursuant to this section in which--
       ``(A) more than 5 offerors were selected to submit 
     competitive proposals pursuant to subsection (c)(4); or
       ``(B) the contract was awarded without using the two-phase 
     selection procedures described in subsection (c).
       ``(2) The Director shall prepare an annual report 
     containing the information provided by each executive agency 
     under subparagraph (A). The report shall be accessible to the 
     public through electronic means, and the Director shall 
     publish a notice of availability in the Federal Register.
       ``(3) The Director shall submit to Congress the report 
     prepared under subparagraph (B) for the fiscal year during 
     which this subsection is enacted, and each of the next 4 
     fiscal years, not later than 60 days after the end of each 
     such fiscal year''.
       (c) GAO Report.--Not later than the end of fiscal year 
     2021, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     issue a report analyzing the extent to which Federal agencies 
     are in compliance with the reporting requirements in section 
     2305a(f) of title 10, United States Code, and section 3309(g) 
     of title 41, United States Code.


          Amendment No. 74 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

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

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

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


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

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

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

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


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

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

     SEC. 816. IMPROVING FEDERAL SURETY BONDS.

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

     ``SEC. 9310. INDIVIDUAL SURETIES.

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

``9310. Individual sureties''.

       (b) SBA Surety Bond Guarantee.--Section 411(c)(1) of the 
     Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 694b(c)(1)) 
     is amended by striking ``70'' and inserting ``90''.
       (c) GAO Study.--
       (1) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States 
     shall carry out a study on the following:
       (A) All instances during the 10-year period prior to the 
     date of enactment of the Act in which a surety bond proposed 
     or issued by a surety in connection with a Federal project 
     was--
       (i) rejected by a Federal contracting officer; or
       (ii) accepted by a Federal contracting officer, but was 
     later found to have been backed by insufficient collateral or 
     to be otherwise deficient or with respect to which the surety 
     did not perform.
       (B) The consequences to the Federal Government, 
     subcontractors, and suppliers of the instances described 
     under paragraph (1).
       (C) The percentages of all Federal contracts that were 
     awarded to new startup businesses (including new startup 
     businesses that are small disadvantaged businesses or 
     disadvantaged business enterprises), small disadvantaged 
     businesses, and disadvantaged business enterprises as prime 
     contractors in the 2-year period prior to and the 2-year 
     period following the date of enactment of this Act, and an 
     assessment of the impact of this Act and the amendments made 
     by this Act upon such percentages.
       (2) Report.--Not later than the end of the 3-year period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Comptroller General shall issue a report to the Committee on 
     the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs of the 
     Senate containing all findings and determinations made in 
     carrying out the study required under subsection (a).
       (3)  Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       (A) Disadvantaged business enterprise.--The term 
     ``disadvantaged business enterprise'' has the meaning given 
     that term under section 26.5 of title 49, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.
       (B) New startup business.--The term ``new startup 
     business'' means a business that was formed in the 2-year 
     period ending on the date on which the business bids on a 
     Federal contract that requires giving a surety bond.
       (C) Small disadvantaged business.--The term ``small 
     disadvantaged business'' has the meaning given that term 
     under section 124.1002(b) of title 13, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.


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

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

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

       Section 7734 of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by inserting before the period 
     the following: ``and on the performance of any regional 
     office that fails to meet its administrative goals'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new 
     paragraph (3):
       ``(3) in the case of any regional office that, for the year 
     covered by the report, did not meet the administrative goal 
     of no claim pending for more than 125 days and an accuracy 
     rating of 98 percent--
       ``(A) a signed statement prepared by the individual serving 
     as director of the regional office as of the date of the 
     submittal of the report containing--
       ``(i) an explanation for why the regional office did not 
     meet the goal;

[[Page 8888]]

       ``(ii) a description of the additional resources needed to 
     enable the regional office to reach the goal; and
       ``(iii) a description of any additional actions planned for 
     the subsequent year that are proposed to enable the regional 
     office to meet the goal; and
       ``(B) a statement prepared by the Under Secretary for 
     Benefits explaining how the failure of the regional office to 
     meet the goal affected the performance evaluation of the 
     director of the regional office; and''.


         Amendment No. 112 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

       At the end of title XI, add the following:

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

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


         Amendment No. 125 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

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

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

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


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

       Page 484, after line 12, insert the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

       (I) Health

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

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

       (M) Security force funding to train, equip, and sustain 
     Iraqi and Afghan military and police forces.
       (N) Fuel
       (i) War fuel costs and funding to ensure that logistical 
     support to combat operations is not degraded due to cash 
     losses in the Department of Defense's baseline fuel program.
       (ii) Enough of any base fuel shortfall attributable to fuel 
     price increases to maintain sufficient on-hand cash for the 
     Defense Working Capital Funds to cover seven days 
     disbursements.
       (3) Excluded items from Overseas Contingency Funding that 
     must be funded from the base budget
       (A) Training vehicles, aircraft, ammunition, and 
     simulators, but not training base stocks of specialized, 
     theater-specific equipment that is required to support combat 
     operations in the theater of operations, and support to 
     deployment-specific training described above.
       (B) Acceleration of equipment service life extension 
     programs already in the Future Years Defense Plan.
       (C) Base Realignment and Closure projects.
       (D) Family support initiatives
       (i) Construction of childcare facilities.
       (ii) Funding for private-public partisanships to expand 
     military families' access to childcare.
       (iii) Support for service members' spouses professional 
     development.
       (E) Programs to maintain industrial base capacity including 
     ``war-stoppers.''
       (F) Personnel
       (i) Recruiting and retention bonuses to maintain end-
     strength.
       (ii) Basic Pay and the Basic allowances for Housing and 
     Subsistence for permanently authorized end strength.
       (iii) Individual augmentees on a case-by-case basis.
       (G) Support for the personnel, operations, or the 
     construction or maintenance of facilities, at U.S. Offices of 
     Security Cooperation in theater.
       (H) Costs for reconfiguring prepositioned supplies and 
     equipment or for maintaining them.
       (4) Special Situations - Items proposed for increases in 
     reprogrammings or as payback for prior reprogrammings must 
     meet the criteria above.


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

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

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

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

[[Page 8889]]




         amendment no. 157 offered by mr. connolly of virginia

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

     DIVISION E--FEDERAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION REFORM

     SEC. 5001. SHORT TITLE.

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

     SEC. 5002. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this division is as follows:

     DIVISION E--FEDERAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION REFORM

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

     TITLE LI--MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WITHIN FEDERAL 
                               GOVERNMENT

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

                  TITLE LII--DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION

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

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

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

           TITLE LIV--STRENGTHENING IT ACQUISITION WORKFORCE

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

                      TITLE LV--ADDITIONAL REFORMS

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

     SEC. 5003. DEFINITIONS.

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

     TITLE LI--MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WITHIN FEDERAL 
                               GOVERNMENT

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

       (a) Presidential Appointment of CIOs of Certain Agencies.--
       (1) In general.--Section 11315 of title 40, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) by redesignating subsection (a) as subsection (e) and 
     moving such subsection to the end of the section; and
       (B) by inserting before subsection (b) the following new 
     subsection (a):
       ``(a) Presidential Appointment or Designation of Certain 
     Chief Information Officers.--
       ``(1) In general.--There shall be within each agency listed 
     in section 901(b)(1) of title 31 an agency Chief Information 
     Officer. Each agency Chief Information Officer shall--
       ``(A)(i) be appointed by the President; or
       ``(ii) be designated by the President, in consultation with 
     the head of the agency; and
       ``(B) be appointed or designated, as applicable, from among 
     individuals who possess demonstrated ability in general 
     management of, and knowledge of and extensive practical 
     experience in, information technology management practices in 
     large governmental or business entities.
       ``(2) Responsibilities.--An agency Chief Information 
     Officer appointed or designated under this section shall 
     report directly to the head of the agency and carry out, on a 
     full-time basis, responsibilities as set forth in this 
     section and in section 3506(a) of title 44 for Chief 
     Information Officers designated under paragraph (2) of such 
     section.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--Section 3506(a)(2) of title 44, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``(A) Except as provided under subparagraph 
     (B), the head of each agency'' and inserting ``The head of 
     each agency, other than an agency with a Presidentially 
     appointed or designated Chief Information Officer as provided 
     in section 11315(a)(1) of title 40,''; and
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B).
       (b) Authority Relating to Budget and Personnel.--Section 
     11315 of title 40, United States Code, is further amended by 
     inserting after subsection (c) the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Additional Authorities for Certain CIOs.--
       ``(1) Budget-related authority.--
       ``(A) Planning.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the head of each agency listed in section 901(b)(1) or 
     901(b)(2) of title 31 and in section 102 of title 5 shall 
     ensure that the Chief Information Officer of the agency has 
     the authority to participate in decisions regarding the 
     budget planning process related to information technology or 
     programs that include significant information technology 
     components.
       ``(B) Allocation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, amounts appropriated for any agency listed in section 
     901(b)(1) or 901(b)(2) of title 31 and in section 102 of 
     title 5 for any fiscal year that are available for 
     information technology shall be allocated within the agency, 
     consistent with the provisions of appropriations Acts and 
     budget guidelines and recommendations from the Director of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, in such manner as 
     specified by, or approved by, the Chief Information Officer 
     of the agency in consultation with the Chief Financial 
     Officer of the agency and budget officials.
       ``(2) Personnel-related authority.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, the head of each agency listed in 
     section 901(b)(1) or 901(b)(2) of title 31 shall ensure that 
     the Chief Information Officer of the agency has the authority 
     necessary to approve the hiring of personnel who will have 
     information technology responsibilities within the agency and 
     to require that such personnel have the obligation to report 
     to the Chief Information Officer in a manner considered 
     sufficient by the Chief Information Officer.''.
       (c) Single Chief Information Officer in Each Agency.--
       (1) Requirement.--Section 3506(a)(3) of title 44, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(3)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) Each agency shall have only one individual with the 
     title and designation of `Chief Information Officer'. Any 
     bureau, office, or subordinate organization within the agency 
     may designate one individual with the title `Deputy Chief 
     Information Officer', `Associate Chief Information Officer', 
     or `Assistant Chief Information Officer'.''.
       (2) Effective date.--Section 3506(a)(3)(B) of title 44, 
     United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), shall take 
     effect as of October 1, 2014. Any individual serving in a 
     position affected by such section before such date may 
     continue in that position if the requirements of such section 
     are fulfilled with respect to that individual.

[[Page 8890]]



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

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

     SEC. 5103. REPORTS BY GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE.

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

                  TITLE LII--DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION

     SEC. 5201. PURPOSE.

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

     SEC. 5202. DEFINITIONS.

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

     SEC. 5203. FEDERAL DATA CENTER OPTIMIZATION INITIATIVE.

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

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

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

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

       (a) Requirement To Track Costs.--
       (1) In general.--Each covered agency shall track costs 
     resulting from implementation of the Federal Data Center 
     Optimization Initiative within the agency and submit a report 
     on those costs annually to the Federal Chief Information 
     Officer. Covered agencies shall determine the net costs from 
     data consolidation on an annual basis.
       (2) Factors.--In calculating net costs each year under 
     paragraph (1), a covered agency shall use the following 
     factors:
       (A) Energy costs.
       (B) Personnel costs.
       (C) Real estate costs.
       (D) Capital expense costs.
       (E) Maintenance and support costs such as operating 
     subsystem, database, hardware, and software license expense 
     costs.
       (F) Other appropriate costs, as determined by the agency in 
     consultation with the Federal Chief Information Officer.
       (b) Requirement To Track Savings.--
       (1) In general.--Each covered agency shall track realized 
     and projected savings resulting from implementation of the 
     Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative within the agency 
     and submit a report on those savings annually to the Federal 
     Chief Information Officer. Covered agencies shall determine 
     the net savings from data consolidation on an annual basis.
       (2) Factors.--In calculating net savings each year under 
     paragraph (1), a covered agency shall use the following 
     factors:
       (A) Energy savings.
       (B) Personnel savings.
       (C) Real estate savings.
       (D) Capital expense savings.
       (E) Maintenance and support savings such as operating 
     subsystem, database, hardware, and software license expense 
     savings.

[[Page 8891]]

       (F) Other appropriate savings, as determined by the agency 
     in consultation with the Federal Chief Information Officer.
       (3) Public availability.--The Federal Chief Information 
     Officer shall make publicly available a summary of realized 
     and projected savings for each covered agency. The Federal 
     Chief Information Officer shall identify any covered agency 
     that failed to provide the annual report required under 
     paragraph (1).
       (c) Requirement To Use Cost-Effective Measures.--Covered 
     agencies shall use the most cost-effective measures to 
     implement the Federal Data Center Optimization Initiative, 
     such as using estimation to measure or track costs and 
     savings using a methodology approved by the Federal Chief 
     Information Officer.
       (d) Government Accountability Office Review.--Not later 
     than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Comptroller General of the United States shall examine 
     methods for calculating savings from the Initiative and using 
     them for the purposes identified in subsection (d), including 
     establishment and use of a special revolving fund that 
     supports data centers and server optimization, and shall 
     submit to the Federal Chief Information Officer and Congress 
     a report on the Comptroller General's findings and 
     recommendations.

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

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

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

     SEC. 5301. INVENTORY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SOFTWARE 
                   ASSETS.

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

     SEC. 5302. WEBSITE CONSOLIDATION AND TRANSPARENCY.

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

     SEC. 5303. TRANSITION TO THE CLOUD.

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

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

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

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

       ``(a) In General.--An executive agency may not issue a 
     solicitation for a covered Governmentwide contract unless the 
     agency performs a business case analysis for the contract and 
     obtains an approval of the business case analysis from the 
     Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.
       ``(b) Review of Business Case Analysis.--
       ``(1) In general.--With respect to any covered 
     Governmentwide contract, the Administrator for Federal 
     Procurement Policy shall review the business case analysis 
     submitted for the contract and provide an approval or 
     disapproval within 60 days after the date of submission. Any 
     business case analysis not disapproved within such 60-day 
     period is deemed to be approved.
       ``(2) Basis for approval of business case.--The 
     Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy shall approve or 
     disapprove a business case analysis based on the adequacy of 
     the analysis submitted. The Administrator shall give primary 
     consideration to whether an agency has demonstrated a 
     compelling need that cannot be satisfied by existing 
     Governmentwide contract in a timely and cost-effective 
     manner.
       ``(c) Content of Business Case Analysis.--The Administrator 
     for Federal Procurement Policy shall issue guidance 
     specifying the content for a business case analysis submitted 
     pursuant to this section. At a minimum, the business case 
     analysis shall include details on the administrative 
     resources needed for such contract, including an analysis of 
     all direct and indirect costs to the Federal Government of 
     awarding and administering such contract and the impact such 
     contract will have on the ability of the Federal Government 
     to leverage its purchasing power.
       ``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Covered governmentwide contract.--The term `covered 
     Governmentwide contract' means any contract, blanket purchase 
     agreement, or other contractual instrument for acquisition of 
     information

[[Page 8892]]

     technology or other goods or services that allows for an 
     indefinite number of orders to be placed under the contract, 
     agreement, or instrument, and that is established by one 
     executive agency for use by multiple executive agencies to 
     obtain goods or services. The term does not include--
       ``(A) a multiple award schedule contract awarded by the 
     General Services Administration;
       ``(B) a Governmentwide acquisition contract for information 
     technology awarded pursuant to sections 11302(e) and 
     11314(a)(2) of title 40;
       ``(C) orders under Governmentwide contracts in existence 
     before the effective date of this section; or
       ``(D) any contract in an amount less than $10,000,000, 
     determined on an average annual basis.
       ``(2) Executive agency.--The term `executive agency' has 
     the meaning provided that term by section 105 of title 5.''.
       (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     33 of title 41, United States Code, is amended by adding 
     after the item relating to section 3311 the following new 
     item:

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

           TITLE LIV--STRENGTHENING IT ACQUISITION WORKFORCE

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

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

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

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

[[Page 8893]]

       (c) Combination With Other Cadres Plan.--The Director may 
     combine the plan required by subsection (a) with the IT 
     Acquisition Cadres Strategic Plan required under section 
     1704(j) of title 41, United States Code, as added by section 
     5411.

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

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

                      TITLE LV--ADDITIONAL REFORMS

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

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

     SEC. 5502. GOVERNMENTWIDE SOFTWARE PURCHASING PROGRAM.

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

     SEC. 5503. PROMOTING TRANSPARENCY OF BLANKET PURCHASE 
                   AGREEMENTS.

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

     SEC. 5504. ADDITIONAL SOURCE SELECTION TECHNIQUE IN 
                   SOLICITATIONS.

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

     SEC. 5505. ENHANCED TRANSPARENCY IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 
                   INVESTMENTS.

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

     SEC. 5506. ENHANCED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND 
                   INDUSTRY.

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

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

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish 
     guidance and processes to clarify that software acquisitions 
     by the Federal Government are to be made using merit-based 
     requirements development and evaluation processes that 
     promote procurement choices--
       (1) based on performance and value, including the long-term 
     value proposition to the Federal Government;
       (2) free of preconceived preferences based on how 
     technology is developed, licensed, or distributed; and
       (3) generally including the consideration of proprietary, 
     open source, and mixed source software technologies.
       (b) Technology Neutrality.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be construed to modify the Federal Government's long-standing 
     policy of following technology-neutral principles and 
     practices when selecting and acquiring information technology 
     that best fits the needs of the Federal Government.
       (c) Guidance.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Director, in consultation with 
     the Chief Information Officers Council, shall issue

[[Page 8894]]

     guidance concerning the technology-neutral procurement and 
     use of software within the Federal Government.
       (d) Matters Covered.--In issuing guidance under subsection 
     (c), the Director shall include, at a minimum, the following:
       (1) Guidance to clarify that the preference for commercial 
     items in section 3307 of title 41, United States Code, 
     includes proprietary, open source, and mixed source software 
     that meets the definition of the term ``commercial item'' in 
     section 103 of title 41, United States Code, including all 
     such software that is used for non-Government purposes and is 
     licensed to the public.
       (2) Guidance regarding the conduct of market research to 
     ensure the inclusion of proprietary, open source, and mixed 
     source software options.
       (3) Guidance to define Governmentwide standards for 
     security, redistribution, indemnity, and copyright in the 
     acquisition, use, release, and collaborative development of 
     proprietary, open source, and mixed source software.
       (4) Guidance for the adoption of available commercial 
     practices to acquire proprietary, open source, and mixed 
     source software for widespread Government use, including 
     issues such as security and redistribution rights.
       (5) Guidance to establish standard service level agreements 
     for maintenance and support for proprietary, open source, and 
     mixed source software products widely adopted by the 
     Government, as well as the development of Governmentwide 
     agreements that contain standard and widely applicable 
     contract provisions for ongoing maintenance and development 
     of software.
       (e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     issuance of the guidance required by subsection (b), the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the 
     relevant congressional committees a report containing--
       (1) an assessment of the effectiveness of the guidance;
       (2) an identification of barriers to widespread use by the 
     Federal Government of specific software technologies; and
       (3) such legislative recommendations as the Comptroller 
     General considers appropriate to further the purposes of this 
     section.

     SEC. 5508. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED.

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


         Amendment No. 160 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments 
en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the 
minority.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I agree with the chairman we should adopt the en bloc amendments.
  I did want to take a moment here--we don't have any speakers on 
this--to make a couple comments about some Rules Committee decisions 
that I have not had a chance to speak about before.
  Overall, I applaud the product that we have crated here in a 
bipartisan way. I thank the chairman for doing that.
  I do think it is unfortunate the Rules Committee ruled out of order a 
number of amendments. Two of them were mine. One was to offer a BRAC 
amendment to give Members of Congress a chance to vote on it. The other 
was to offer up the administration's proposal to lay up 14 Navy vessels 
as an effort to save money.
  There are several problems with the fact that these amendments were 
ruled out of order, and the biggest one is one of the arguments that I 
have made of concern about this bill from the very beginning, because 
even though I support the product and there are a lot of very good 
things in this bill, I think the weakness of it and the thing that we 
are going have to confront when we go to conference is the fact that it 
delays every single difficult decision.
  During the debate and during general debate yesterday, a couple of 
people commented that they liked the bill for a variety of different 
reasons and said that it made some tough choices. I asked a couple of 
times to name one. I don't believe we did make a tough choice. When you 
look at the issues that we face in terms of the budget, we ducked every 
single one of them. We have both sequestrations for another 8 years. 
Even if sequestration doesn't come, we also have substantial cuts 
coming to the defense budget as a result of sequestration in fiscal 
year 2013 and a series of CRs and a series of cuts to the defense 
budget that we did not anticipate.

                              {time}  2115

  We are going to have substantially less money over the course of the 
next 10 years for defense than we thought we were going to have.
  That is true even if sequestration goes away. If sequestration 
happens, we really face a challenge. So the question is how are we 
going to restructure our defense plans to deal with the fact that we 
are going to have substantially less money than we had going forward. 
The answer in this bill is we are not going to deal with it this year, 
and we are going to hope things get better and maybe deal with it next 
year.
  The administration confronted this problem in a number of areas. I 
will walk through them. Number one, in the very controversial and 
difficult area of personnel costs, they found savings in health care by 
expanding what servicemembers would have to pay for their health care, 
they reduced somewhat the subsidy to our commissaries, they reduced the 
housing subsidy, and they also reduced the pay raise down to 1 percent 
and got rid of it for senior officers.
  Except for the last part of that, we ducked all of those. That is $2 
billion over 5 years that the administration was able to save. Nothing 
was offered, nothing was done on our part to deal with that.
  In the Guard and Reserve, the Army has put together a plan to 
restructure their helicopters in a way that is way too complicated to 
explain, but that saves $12 billion over the course of 5 years. We put 
into our bill an amendment saying they can't do that at all in 2015. 
Also added in one of the en bloc amendments was an amendment now that 
says we are going to study it for a longer period of time even beyond 
that--that is another $12 billion--and we don't make it up anywhere 
because that is over 5 years, so we can get away with that in 2015.
  I mentioned the Navy issue: 14 ships that the Navy has said they will 
lay up in order to save money. That is roughly $3.5 billion that they 
will save. Again, we got rid of that in order to pay for it in the 
short-term. We didn't come up with more money or cut something else. We 
raided the ship modernization accounts to fund that in the short term, 
which again does not deal or address the problem. DOD also proposed 
getting rid of the A-10 and getting rid of the U-2. We stopped them 
from doing both of those things.
  We have at every turn blocked just about every single proposal the 
administration has made to save money over the long-term. In each one 
of those isolated incidents, there are strong arguments that tend to be 
mostly parochial. In other words, if it is in your

[[Page 8895]]

district or in your neighborhood then you rise up in furious anger 
against it, but there may be arguments as to why that isn't the best 
choice. But there was no alternative proposed. We simply got creative 
in our accounting to get through 2015. These are mostly 5-year savings, 
so we can sort of stagger our way through 2015 and create a massive bow 
wave down the road that we are not at all prepared to deal with.
  I am sorry I left out the big one: BRAC. It is estimated we are 
wasting $6 billion a year on facilities that we don't need. Absolutely 
the only argument that exists against doing another BRAC round, given 
how much we have drawn down our force structure and the fact that the 
military estimates that they are 25 percent over capacity in terms of 
their facilities, is that Members don't want to run the risk of having 
a base be closed in their district. I get that. There are a ton of 
bases in the State of Washington. But we have to confront these issues 
because the money is not going to magically appear.
  So the amendments that were disallowed, I was hoping to have the 
opportunity on those two amendments to have the broader debate about 
making the choices now. I don't think we should simply rubberstamp what 
the White House has done. If we don't like those cuts, let's come up 
with another one. This is the conversation I had with my adjutant 
general in the State of Washington, who was concerned about the cuts to 
the Army Guard and the Air Force Guard. He was talking about everything 
he didn't like about it. I said: Look, present me an alternative, give 
us an alternative that says here is how we are going to save $12 
billion instead, and I am happy to look at it. But just to say: We 
don't like the cuts, I get that. Nobody--well, there are some. Most 
people don't like the cuts, but they are there. We passed the Budget 
Control Act, we shut down the government, we passed the budget 
agreement last year that set the levels for FY14 and FY15, and we still 
have on the books 8 more years of sequestration.
  If Congress doesn't want the administration to wind up making all 
these choices, then we have got to step up and make the decisions now 
rationally about where we are going to be in terms of the budget.
  The final point I will make on that is that what happens when we 
don't make those decisions is that readiness gets cut. In this bill, 
readiness is cut by $1.2 billion from the President's request. Plus, 
there is another $633 billion that we take out of OCO to fund the A-10. 
That is probably readiness as well, because they use the OCO account to 
backfill some of the cuts in readiness. So that is $1.8 billion out of 
the readiness account that was already depleted because of the 
shutdowns, because of the CRs.
  Well, what is readiness? We had an interesting discussion about this 
in committee. Readiness is not the size of the force. Readiness is the 
capability of the force. Are the troops trained and equipped to perform 
the missions that we have asked them to do?
  The chairman has quite eloquently on a number of occasions pointed to 
past wars: the Korean war and World War II, where we had to ramp up in 
a hurry and we sent troops over who were not ready to fight, and many 
of them were killed and injured because they were not ready to fight.
  If we raid readiness accounts to protect personnel, to stop BRAC, to 
stop the Pentagon from cutting the U-2 or the A-10, or from shutting 
down a Guard unit, if we do that they've got to raid readiness, because 
that is the easiest thing to do. You spend less on fuel, you don't 
repair some equipment that is out there, you fly less, you drive less, 
you train less. What we wind up with is the hollow force that nobody 
wants.
  So as we go into conference and as we go forward, it is an obligation 
of this Congress to say: What is our plan? Right now our plan is hope. 
I didn't serve in the military, but I heard very early on in my time on 
the Armed Services Committee one of the sayings in the military is 
``hope is not a strategy.'' We are hoping that the money will appear, 
we are hoping that somehow we magically won't have to make those 
decisions.
  I think we are past that point. The decisions are going to get made. 
They are either going to get made poorly if we ignore them, or 
preferably they will get made well so that we do our best to put 
together a force that no matter the size is at least capable and ready 
to perform the missions that we might ask of them.
  So ruling those amendments out of order I think was most 
unfortunate--that we weren't able to have that debate. But rest 
assured, as the chairman has pointed out, this is his last term, so I 
would say there is no ducking this, but I guess you can retire. You 
won't be here. But the country will have to deal with those decisions 
one way or the other, and we thus far have not made them.
  So I would urge us to start looking at this and saying if we are not 
going to do a BRAC, then what are we going to do. If we are not going 
to shrink the Guard this way, then what are we going to do.
  Let's get some concrete proposals on the table that are something 
other than, don't cut anything in my backyard, and closing our eyes and 
hoping that the problem will go away.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlelady from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski), my friend and colleague, a 
member of the Armed Services Committee.
  Mrs. WALORSKI. Madam Chair, I want to thank Chairman McKeon for 
including this amendment that I cosponsor with Congressman Roskam.
  Israel and the United States face common threats in the Middle East, 
from the ongoing civil war in Syria, continued rocket fire from 
terrorist organizations in the Gaza Strip, and the looming threat of a 
nuclear-armed Iran.
  In particular, Iran's brazen quest for nuclear weapons poses an 
existential threat to our ally Israel. A nuclear Iran would trigger an 
arms race in the Middle East, further destabilizing a region plagued by 
persistent volatility and, in the process, threatening U.S. national 
security and international stability.
  Military action against Iran is an absolute last resort, only after 
we exhaust all peaceful options. However, it would be irresponsible not 
to prepare for a worst-case scenario.
  This amendment would require the administration to certify that 
Israel maintains an independent capability to remove existential 
threats to its own security. Specifically, this report would ensure the 
smooth transfer to Israel of aerial refueling tankers, advanced bunker-
buster munitions, and other capabilities and platforms critical to 
Israel's self-defense.
  This is an important amendment for the security of both the U.S. as 
well as our ally Israel.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en 
bloc amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PIERLUISI. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to 
enable DOD to remove unexploded ordnance from certain areas on the 
island of Culebra, Puerto Rico, which was used as a military training 
range for decades.
  Under the FUDS program, the Army Corps of Engineers is 
decontaminating limited areas of Culebra. However, DOD asserts that a 
1974 law prohibits the use of Federal funds to decontaminate land that 
constituted the bombardment zone. Approximately 400 acres of this land 
were conveyed to the government of Puerto Rico in 1982 for use as a 
public park. DOD contends that the 1974 law has not been superseded by 
Federal cleanup authorities enacted in 1986.
  As a result of this rigid interpretation, Culebra is the only former 
defense site of several thousand across the United States that DOD 
claims it is barred by statute from decontaminating. The resulting 
state of affairs poses a direct threat to public safety, since this 
land encompasses popular beaches, campgrounds and a trail. In a 
congressionally-required study, DOD reported that there have been many 
incidents where members of the public encountered unexploded munitions 
that could have caused serious harm.
  My amendment would authorize the Corps of Engineers to decontaminate 
those areas

[[Page 8896]]

within the 400-acre parcel where the risk to public safety is the 
greatest. It will ensure that the 1974 Act ceases to serve as an 
obstacle to implementation of current Federal policy, which provides 
that the federal government is responsible for cleaning lands that were 
contaminated as a result of its actions. The amendment ensures that 
Culebra will be treated the same--no better and no worse--than other 
formerly used defense sites.
  The U.S. citizens living in Culebra sacrificed so that our military 
could receive the training it required. Congress, in turn, should now 
take this small step to enable DOD to remove unexploded munitions from 
the island.
  I thank the Committee leadership and, in particular, the gentleman 
from Virginia, Mr. Wittman, for working with me on this issue.
  Mr. CONNELLY. Madam Chair, I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking 
Member of the Armed Services Committee and their staff for working with 
me on a number of amendments to this bill.
  In particular, I am proud to have worked with the Chairman of the 
Oversight Committee, Mr. Issa, to co-author the Federal Information 
Technology Acquisition Reform Act, or FITARA.
  In the 21st century, effective governance is inextricably linked with 
how well government leverages technology to serve its citizens.
  Yet current laws governing Federal IT procurement are antiquated and 
cumbersome.
  Our bipartisan amendment would comprehensively streamline and 
strengthen the process.
  It enhances CIO authorities to ensure agency heads have talented 
leaders to recruit and retain talented IT staff and to oversee critical 
IT investments.
  It accelerates data center optimization and strengthens the 
accountability and transparency of Federal IT programs.
  If enacted, 80 percent of the approximately $80 billion spent 
annually on Federal IT investment would be posted online for public 
review, compared to the 50 percent or less today.
  Again, I thank the Chair and Ranking Member for their support.
  Mr. ISSA. Madam Chair, this amendment is a modified version of 
language that was incorporated in the House-passed NDAA authorization 
bill last year, and that was adopted again by the House earlier this 
year as a standalone bill, H.R. 1232, the Federal Information 
Technology Acquisition Reform Act.
  The amendment reforms--Government-wide--the process by which federal 
information technology is acquired and deployed.
  It takes a streamlined and precise approach to solving a huge problem 
in Federal IT--the broken system by which the government procures and 
deploys critical IT infrastructure.
  President Barack Obama, on Nov. 14, 2013, stated ``One of the things 
[the federal government] does not do well is information technology 
procurement This is kind of a systematic problem that we have across 
the board.'' I agree.
  I commend the Administrations' recent steps to strengthen IT 
management by strengthening the eGov office and focusing on 
duplications via what is called PortfolioStat reviews.
  In its annual reports to Congress, GAO has identified duplicative IT 
investments as a significant problem. Our oversight hearings confirmed 
that despite spending more than $600 billion over the past decade, too 
often Federal IT investments run over budget, become behind schedule, 
or never deliver on the promised solution or functionality.
  Indeed, industry experts have estimated that as much as 25 percent of 
the annual $80 billion spent on IT is attributable to mismanaged or 
duplicative IT investments.
  In terms of potential cost savings, some in the industry have 
estimated that more than one trillion dollars could be saved over the 
next ten years if the government adopted the ``proven'' IT best 
practices currently in use by the private sector.
  We need to enhance the best value to the taxpayer by aligning the 
cumbersome federal acquisition process to major trends in the IT 
industry.
  FITARA accomplishes this by--
  1. Creating a clear line of responsibility, authority, and 
accountability over IT investment and management decisions by 
empowering agency CIOs;
  2. Accelerating the consolidation and optimization of the Federal 
Government's proliferating data centers;
  3. Increasing the accuracy and transparency of IT investment 
scorecards by requiring 80 percent of Government-wide IT spending be 
covered by a public website called the IT Dashboard; and
  4. Ensuring procurement decisions give due consideration to all 
technologies--including open source--and that contracts are awarded 
based on long-term best value proposition.
  This is a significant and timely reform that will enhance both 
defense and non-defense procurement. I urge all members to support this 
amendment.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Chair, I rise today to discuss an important issue 
facing our troops--primary blast injury and its connection to traumatic 
brain injury.
  TBI has become the ``signature wound'' of the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, with 20% soldiers deployed are estimated to have 
experienced a brain injury. I would like to thank Chairman McKeon and 
Ranking Member Smith for their commitment to this issue in recent 
authorizations.
  As Co-Chair and Co-Founder of the Congressional Brain Injury Task 
Force, I have spent the last thirteen years fighting for patients with 
brain injuries, both on and off the battlefield. We all know that 
traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the signature wound of the conflicts in 
Iraq and Afghanistan, and while we made great progress on ensuring our 
soldiers have the best care, there is still more work to be done.
  The high rate of TBI and blast-related concussion events resulting 
from current combat operations directly impacts the health and safety 
of individual service members, and subsequently the level of unit 
readiness and troop retention. The Department of Defense (DoD) is 
actively seeking strategies to prevent, mitigate, and treat blast-
related injuries, including TBI.
  Since I began working on this issue, our knowledge of the brain has 
expanded at an incredible pace. In recent years, we have made strong 
investments in TBI research. The DoD's Peer-Reviewed Psychological 
Health and TBI Research Program conducts extensive research on TBI; 
however, little is known about primary blast injury and its connection 
to TBI. Primary blast injury occurs when an explosion generates a blast 
wave traveling faster than sound and creating a surge of high pressure 
immediately followed by a vacuum. Studies show that the blast wave 
shoots through armor and soldiers' skulls and brains, even if it 
doesn't draw blood. Researchers still do not know the exact mechanisms 
by which primary blast injuries damages the brain's cells and circuits. 
However, the blast wave's pressure has been shown to compress the 
torso, impacting blood vessels, which then send damaging energy pulses 
into the brain. The pressure can also be transferred partially through 
the skull, interacting with the brain.
  My amendment would direct the Department of Defense to conduct a 
study on blast injury mechanics covering a wide range of primary blast 
injury conditions, including TBI. Understanding how a primary blast 
injury affects the brain is imperative to developing appropriate 
prevention measures, including ensuring proper equipment. I was glad to 
see this amendment pass the House last night, and I hope that it will 
be adopted in the final bill after negotiations with the Senate.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment, 
which would allow disabled veterans with service connected permanent 
disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft on a space-
available basis.
  The Space-Available program is administered by the Department of 
Defense (DOD), which allows active duty service members, their 
families, retirees and certain other individuals to fill empty seats on 
DOD flights.
  Unfortunately, veterans who are 100 percent disabled do not qualify 
to participate in this program. My amendment will correct this 
unintentional oversight and provide equality to service members who 
were severely injured while serving their country honorably.
  Had they not been medically discharged with a service connected 
disability in the line of duty, these veterans were likely to have 
served until retirement. At no fault of their own, these deserving 
individuals did not have the opportunity to continue their military 
careers. It is an injustice that they would be penalized from this 
benefit due to their bravery and valor.
  I would also like to note that under current DOD guidelines for Air 
Transportation Eligibility, it states, ``Every effort shall be made to 
transport passengers with disabilities who are otherwise eligible to 
travel. Passenger service personnel and crew members shall provide 
assistance in loading, seating, and unloading the disabled passenger.'' 
There is already guidance in place to address passengers with 
disabilities, and my amendment will codify our commitment for their 
sacrifice.
  This initiative has strong bi-partisan support, which has over 230 
current cosponsors to the stand alone bill I introduced, H.R. 164. 
Moreover, this initiative has support in the Senate with the companion 
bill S. 346 offered by Senator Jon Tester from Montana.
  While I was very pleased to see my amendment accepted in last year's 
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2014,

[[Page 8897]]

it was unfortunate it was not accepted in the Senate process during 
consideration for the bill's passage.
  The National Federation of the Blind has been very active in both the 
House and the Senate in its advocacy for our nations' disabled 
veterans. I submit a support letter for this amendment by the National 
Federation of the Blind (NFB).
  While active duty members and their families will remain the primary 
beneficiaries of this program in order to assist them with the rigors 
of military life, my amendment simply allows these veterans the 
opportunity to fill available seats, a benefit I believe they have 
earned through their personal sacrifice.
  Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to end the inequality for our 
nation's wounded warriors by voting in favor of my amendment. I thank 
the committees and their staff for their assistance through this 
process

                             National Federation of the Blind,

                                      Baltimore, MD, May 19, 2014.
     Subject: Support for H.R. 164

     Hon. Gus M. Bilirakis,
     House of Representatives, 2313 Rayburn House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Bilirakis: The National Federation of the 
     Blind is the Nation's oldest and largest consumer group of 
     blind Americans. We are composed of blind individuals who 
     come from many different backgrounds, and we work to ensure 
     that the concerns of all blind Americans are met.
       Included in our organization is the National Association of 
     Blinded Veterans. Recently these men and women who served our 
     country brought to our attention a policy that we believe 
     needs to be changed. The Space Available program is a program 
     that allows a number of military personnel to fly on military 
     transport planes if there is space remaining. This may 
     include members of the Active Military, Family members of the 
     Active Military, some components of Reserve Forces, 
     individuals who are responding to emergency situations, such 
     as the Red Cross, and retirees. We believe that individuals 
     who have become disabled in the service of our country should 
     be allowed to participate in this program.
       Shortly after being made aware of this issue by blinded 
     veterans, we learned that you introduced legislation to solve 
     this problem in the last Congress. We are pleased that you 
     reintroduced this legislation, H.R. 164, early in this 
     session of Congress. The National Federation of the Blind 
     stands firmly in support of this legislation, and will 
     dedicate our support and our efforts to ensure its passage in 
     this session of Congress.
       Last June, thanks to your leadership, the United States 
     House of Representatives voted to include this language in 
     the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. Unfortunately 
     our Senate companion amendment was not allowed to be 
     considered during Senate consideration in December. We 
     appreciate the support shown by the House of Representatives, 
     and urge the House to continue to fight for Service Disabled 
     Veterans, by joining with you to include this language in the 
     2015 National Defense Authorization Act.
       We thank you for your leadership to support these men and 
     women who have given service to defend our rights, and we now 
     join with you to defend their rights to participate in the 
     Space Available program.

                                            John G. Pare, Jr.,

                                            Executive Director for
                                              Advocacy and Policy.

  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


             Amendments En Bloc No. 5 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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


           Amendment No. 77 Offered by Mr. Graves of Missouri

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

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

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


         Amendment No. 78 Offered by Mr. Cardenas of California

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

     SEC. 817. SMALL BUSINESS CYBER EDUCATION.

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


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

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

     SEC. 827. INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.

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

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

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

       ``(I) a description of innovative approaches to technology 
     transfer, technology development, and commercial readiness 
     that have the potential to increase or accelerate technology 
     transfer outcomes and can be adopted by other qualifying 
     institutions, or a demonstration of proven technology 
     transfer and commercialization strategies, or a plan to 
     implement proven technology transfer and commercialization 
     strategies, that can

[[Page 8898]]

     achieve greater commercialization of federally funded 
     research and technologies with program funding;
       ``(II) a description of how the qualifying institution will 
     contribute to local and regional economic development 
     efforts; and
       ``(III) a plan for sustainability beyond the duration of 
     the funding award.

       ``(iv) Program oversight boards.--

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

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

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

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

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

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


              Amendment No. 80 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

       Page 370, after line 23, insert the following:

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

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


         Amendment No. 83 Offered by Mr. Thompson of California

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

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

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


        Amendment No. 84 Offered by Mr. Fortenberry of Nebraska

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

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

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


           Amendment No. 85 Offered by Mr. Nugent of Florida

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

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

       (a) Designation of Officer.--Section 1501(a) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Personnel'' 
     and inserting ``Persons'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (2);
       (3) by designating the second sentence of paragraph (1) as 
     paragraph (2); and
       (4) by striking the first sentence of paragraph (1) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(A) The Secretary of Defense shall designate a single 
     organization within the Department of Defense to have 
     responsibility for Department of Defense matters relating

[[Page 8899]]

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

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

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


            Amendment No. 87 Offered by Mr. Burgess of Texas

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

     SEC. 1005. REPORT ON AUDITABLE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

       Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees a report ranking all 
     military departments and Defense Agencies in order of how 
     advanced they are in achieving auditable financial statements 
     as required by law. The report should not include information 
     otherwise available in other reports to Congress.


          Amendment No. 88 Offered by Mr. Takano of California

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

     SEC. 1005. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTING AUDIT REPORTING 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

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


           Amendment No. 89 Offered by Mr. Miller of Florida

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

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

       None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act 
     may be used to issue a regulation for permitting activities 
     set forth

[[Page 8900]]

     in section 1403 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375; 
     118 Stat. 2907; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).


            Amendment No. 90 Offered by Mr. Ross of Florida

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

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

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


        Amendment No. 91 Offered by Mr. Bridenstine of Oklahoma

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


             Amendment No. 98 Offered by Mr. Braley of Iowa

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

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

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


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

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

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

       (a) In General.--For the purposes of verifying that an 
     individual performed service under honorable conditions that 
     satisfies the requirements of a coastwise merchant seaman who 
     is recognized pursuant to section 401 of the GI Bill 
     Improvement Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-202; 38 U.S.C. 106 
     note) as having performed active duty service for the 
     purposes described in subsection (c)(1), the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security shall accept the following:
       (1) In the case of an individual who served on a coastwise 
     merchant vessel seeking such recognition for whom no 
     applicable Coast Guard shipping or discharge form, ship 
     logbook, merchant mariner's document or Z-

[[Page 8901]]

     card, or other official employment record is available, the 
     Secretary shall provide such recognition on the basis of 
     applicable Social Security Administration records submitted 
     for or by the individual, together with validated testimony 
     given by the individual or the primary next of kin of the 
     individual that the individual performed such service during 
     the period beginning on December 7, 1941, and ending on 
     December 31, 1946.
       (2) In the case of an individual who served on a coastwise 
     merchant vessel seeking such recognition for whom the 
     applicable Coast Guard shipping or discharge form, ship 
     logbook, merchant mariner's document or Z-card, or other 
     official employment record has been destroyed or otherwise 
     become unavailable by reason of any action committed by a 
     person responsible for the control and maintenance of such 
     form, logbook, or record, the Secretary shall accept other 
     official documentation demonstrating that the individual 
     performed such service during period beginning on December 7, 
     1941, and ending on December 31, 1946.
       (3) For the purpose of determining whether to recognize 
     service allegedly performed during the period beginning on 
     December 7, 1941, and ending on December 31, 1946, the 
     Secretary shall recognize masters of seagoing vessels or 
     other officers in command of similarly organized groups as 
     agents of the United States who were authorized to document 
     any individual for purposes of hiring the individual to 
     perform service in the merchant marine or discharging an 
     individual from such service.
       (b) Treatment of Other Documentation.--Other documentation 
     accepted by the Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to 
     subsection (a)(2) shall satisfy all requirements for 
     eligibility of service during the period beginning on 
     December 7, 1941, and ending on December 31, 1946.
       (c) Benefits Allowed.--
       (1) Burial benefits eligibility.--Service of an individual 
     that is considered active duty pursuant to subsection (a) 
     shall be considered as active duty service with respect to 
     providing burial benefits under chapters 23 and 24 of title 
     38, United States Code, to the individual.
       (2) Medals, ribbons, and decorations.--An individual whose 
     service is recognized as active duty pursuant to subsection 
     (a) may be awarded an appropriate medal, ribbon, or other 
     military decoration based on such service.
       (3) Status of veteran.--An individual whose service is 
     recognized as active duty pursuant to subsection (a) shall be 
     honored as a veteran but shall not be entitled by reason of 
     such recognized service to any benefit that is not described 
     in this subsection.
       (d) Determination of Coastwise Merchant Seaman.--The 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall verify that an 
     individual performed service under honorable conditions that 
     satisfies the requirements of a coastwise merchant seaman 
     pursuant to this section without regard to the sex, age, or 
     disability of the individual during the period in which the 
     individual served as such a coastwise merchant seaman.
       (e) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``coastwise merchant seaman'' means a mariner 
     that served on a tug boat, towboat, or seagoing barge that 
     transported war materials to and from ports located in the 
     territorial seas of the United States in support of the war 
     effort during the period beginning December 7, 1941, and 
     ending December 31, 1946.
       (2) The term ``primary next of kin'' with respect to an 
     individual seeking recognition for service under this section 
     means the closest living relative of the individual who was 
     alive during the period of such service.
       (f) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 90 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.


           Amendment No. 108 Offered by Mr. Lewis of Georgia

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

     SEC. 10__. COST OF WARS.

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


        Amendment No. 109 Offered by Mr. Lynch of Massachusetts

       At the end of title X, insert the following:

     SEC. 1046. OBSERVANCE OF VETERANS DAY.

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

     ``Sec. 145. Veterans Day

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

``145. Veterans Day.''.


         Amendment No. 111 Offered by Mr. Schiff of California

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

     SEC. 10_. FINDINGS; SENSE OF CONGRESS.

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


             Amendment No. 116 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

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

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

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

[[Page 8902]]

       (3) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
     Representatives.


        Amendment No. 135 Offered by Mr. Bridenstine of Oklahoma

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

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

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

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


             Amendments En Bloc No. 6 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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

[[Page 8903]]




          AMENDMENT NO. 92 OFFERED BY MR. NUNES OF CALIFORNIA

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


           AMENDMENT NO. 93 OFFERED BY MR. SESSIONS OF TEXAS

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

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

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


            AMENDMENT NO. 94 OFFERED BY MR. BROUN OF GEORGIA

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

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

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


         AMENDMENT NO. 95 OFFERED BY MR. PALAZZO OF MISSISSIPPI

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

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

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


         AMENDMENT NO. 96 OFFERED BY MR. SCHWEIKERT OF ARIZONA

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

     SEC. 1065. REPORT ON THERMAL INJURY PREVENTION.

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


            AMENDMENT NO. 99 OFFERED BY MR. COLE OF OKLAHOMA

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


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

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

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

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


             AMENDMENT NO. 102 OFFERED BY MR. LATTA OF OHIO

       At the end of title X, add the following:

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

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

[[Page 8904]]

       (1) recognizes the 70th anniversary of the Allied 
     amphibious landing on D-Day, June 6, 1944, at Normandy, 
     France, during World War II;
       (2) expresses gratitude and appreciation to the members of 
     the United States Armed Forces who participated in the D-Day 
     operations;
       (3) thanks the young people of Normandy and the United 
     States for their involvement in recognizing and celebrating 
     the 70th Anniversary of the Normandy landings with the aim of 
     making future generations aware of the acts of heroism and 
     sacrifice performed by the Allied forces;
       (4) recognizes the efforts of the Government of France and 
     the people of Normandy to preserve, for future generations, 
     the unique world heritage represented by the Normandy beaches 
     and the sunken material remains of the Normandy landing, by 
     inscribing them on the United Nations Educational, 
     Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage 
     List; and
       (5) requests the President to issue a proclamation calling 
     on the people of the United States to observe the anniversary 
     with appropriate ceremonies and programs to honor the 
     sacrifices of their fellow countrymen to liberate Europe.


           AMENDMENT NO. 103 OFFERED BY MR. POSEY OF FLORIDA

       At the end of title X, add the following:

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

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

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

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

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


           AMENDMENT NO. 104 OFFERED BY MR. POSEY OF FLORIDA

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

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

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


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

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


         AMENDMENT NO. 118 OFFERED BY MRS. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA

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

     SEC. _. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

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


          AMENDMENT NO. 119 OFFERED BY MR. JOHNSON OF GEORGIA

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

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

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


          AMENDMENT NO. 120 OFFERED BY MR. NOLAN OF MINNESOTA

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

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

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

[[Page 8905]]




       AMENDMENT NO. 121 OFFERED BY MS. TSONGAS OF MASSACHUSETTS

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

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

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


        amendment no. 123 offered by ms. delauro of connecticut

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

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

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


             amendment 124 offered by mr. engel of new york

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

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

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

[[Page 8906]]




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

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

     SEC. _. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

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


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

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

     SEC. 1266. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS.

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


            amendment no. 145 offered by mr. turner of ohio

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

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

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


         amendment no. 155 offered by mr. larsen of washington

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

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

       (a) Plan.--The President, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary 
     of Energy, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the 
     Director of National Intelligence, shall develop an 
     interagency plan for verification and monitoring relating to 
     the potential proliferation of nuclear weapons, components of 
     such weapons, and fissile material.
       (b) Elements.--The plan developed under subsection (a) 
     shall include the following:
       (1) An interagency plan and road map for verification and 
     monitoring, with respect to policy, operations, and research, 
     development, testing, and evaluation, including--
       (A) identifying requirements (including funding 
     requirements) for such verification and monitoring; and
       (B) identifying and integrating roles, responsibilities, 
     and planning for such verification and monitoring.

[[Page 8907]]

       (2) An engagement plan for building cooperation and 
     transparency to improve inspections and monitoring.
       (3) A research and development program to--
       (A) improve monitoring, detection, and in-field inspection 
     and analysis capabilities, including persistent surveillance, 
     remote monitoring, rapid analysis of large data sets, 
     including open-source data; and
       (B) coordinate technical and operational requirements early 
     in the process.
       (4) Engagement of relevant departments and agencies of the 
     Federal Government and the military departments (including 
     the Open Source Center and the U.S. Atomic Energy Detection 
     System), national laboratories, industry, and academia.
       (c) Submission.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than September 1, 2015, the 
     President shall submit to the appropriate congressional 
     committees the plan developed under subsection (a).
       (2) Appropriate congressional committees defined.--In this 
     subsection, the term appropriate congressional committees 
     means the following:
       (A) The congressional defense committees.
       (B) The Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and 
     the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House 
     of Representatives.
       (C) The Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (D) The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Homeland Security 
     of the House of Representatives.
       (E) The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
     of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the 
     House of Representatives.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

                              {time}  2130

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


             Amendments En Bloc No. 7 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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


           amendment no. 57 offered by mr. gingrey of georgia

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

[[Page 8908]]



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

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution 
     provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms 
     shall not be infringed.
       (2) Approximately 40,000 servicemen and women across all 
     branches of the Armed Forces either live in or are stationed 
     on active duty within the Washington, D.C., metropolitan 
     area. Unless these individuals are granted a waiver as 
     serving in a law enforcement role, they are subject to the 
     District of Columbia's onerous and highly restrictive laws on 
     the possession of firearms.
       (3) Military personnel, despite being extensively trained 
     in the proper and safe use of firearms, are therefore 
     deprived by the laws of the District of Columbia of handguns, 
     rifles, and shotguns that are commonly kept by law-abiding 
     persons throughout the United States for sporting use and for 
     lawful defense of their persons, homes, businesses, and 
     families.
       (4) The District of Columbia has one of the highest per 
     capita murder rates in the Nation, which may be attributed in 
     part to previous local laws prohibiting possession of 
     firearms by law-abiding persons who would have otherwise been 
     able to defend themselves and their loved ones in their own 
     homes and businesses.
       (5) The Gun Control Act of 1968 (as amended by the Firearms 
     Owners' Protection Act) and the Brady Handgun Violence 
     Prevention Act provide comprehensive Federal regulations 
     applicable in the District of Columbia as elsewhere. In 
     addition, existing District of Columbia criminal laws punish 
     possession and illegal use of firearms by violent criminals 
     and felons. Consequently, there is no need for local laws 
     that only affect and disarm law-abiding citizens.
       (6) On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court of the United 
     States in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller held 
     that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to 
     possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, and thus 
     ruled that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and 
     requirements that rifles and shotguns in the home be kept 
     unloaded and disassembled or outfitted with a trigger lock to 
     be unconstitutional.
       (7) On July 16, 2008, the District of Columbia enacted the 
     Firearms Control Emergency Amendment Act of 2008 (D.C. Act 
     17-422; 55 DCR 8237), which places onerous restrictions on 
     the ability of law-abiding citizens from possessing firearms, 
     thus violating the spirit by which the Supreme Court of the 
     United States ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller.
       (8) On February 26, 2009, the United States Senate adopted 
     an amendment on a bipartisan vote of 62-36 by Senator John 
     Ensign to S. 160, the District of Columbia House Voting 
     Rights Act of 2009, which would fully restore Second 
     Amendment rights to the citizens of the District of Columbia.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     active duty military personnel who are stationed or residing 
     in the District of Columbia should be permitted to exercise 
     fully their rights under the Second Amendment to the 
     Constitution of the United States and therefore should be 
     exempt from the District of Columbia's restrictions on the 
     possession of firearms.


         amendment no. 65 offered by mr. larson of connecticut

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

[[Page 8909]]

     duty members of the Armed Forces for traumatic brain injury 
     and post-traumatic stress disorder if--
       (A) such treatment is prescribed by a military medical 
     doctor; and
       (B) a hyperbaric chamber that is owned by the Department of 
     Defense and cleared for clinical use is locally available; 
     and
       (2) the Secretary of Defense should increase awareness 
     among members of the Armed Forces, including military medical 
     doctors, of hyperbaric oxygen therapy to treat traumatic 
     brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder.


         AMENDMENT NO. 106 OFFERED BY MR. WHITFIELD OF KENTUCKY

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

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

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


       AMENDMENT NO. 114 OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA

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


       AMENDMENT NO. 117 OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA

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

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

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


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

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

     SEC. 1259. COMBATING CRIME THROUGH INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES.

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


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

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

     SEC. _. STATEMENT OF POLICY.

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


           AMENDMENT NO. 129 OFFERED BY MR. GOSAR OF ARIZONA

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

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

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


          AMENDMENT NO. 131 OFFERED BY MR. ROSKAM OF ILLINOIS

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

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

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation 
     Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) established the policy 
     of the United States to support the inherent right of Israel 
     to self-defense.
       (2) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation 
     Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) expressed the sense of 
     Congress that the Government of the United States should 
     transfer to the Government of Israel defense articles and 
     defense services such as air refueling tankers, missile 
     defense capabilities, and specialized munitions.
       (3) The inherent right of Israel to self-defense 
     necessarily includes the possession and maintenance by Israel 
     of an independent capability to remove existential threats to 
     its security and defend its vital national interests.
       (b) Policy of the United States.--It is the policy of the 
     United States to take all necessary steps to ensure that 
     Israel possesses and maintains an independent capability to 
     remove existential threats to its security and defend its 
     vital national interests.
       (c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     air refueling tankers and advanced bunker-buster munitions 
     should immediately be transferred to Israel to ensure our 
     democratic ally has an independent capability to remove any 
     existential threat

[[Page 8910]]

     posed by the Iranian nuclear program and defend its vital 
     national interests.
       (d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and every 180 days thereafter for a 
     period not to exceed four years, the President shall submit 
     to the House and Senate Armed Services committees, the House 
     Foreign Affairs Committee, the Senate Foreign Relations 
     Committee, and the House and Senate Appropriations committees 
     a report that--
       (1) identifies all aerial refueling platforms, bunker-
     buster munitions, and other capabilities and platforms that 
     would contribute significantly to the maintenance by Israel 
     of a robust independent capability to remove existential 
     security threats, including nuclear and ballistic missile 
     facilities in Iran, and defend its vital national interests;
       (2) assesses the availability for sale or transfer of items 
     necessary to acquire the capabilities and platforms described 
     in paragraph (1) as well as the legal authorities available 
     for making such transfers; and
       (3) describes the steps the President is taking to 
     immediately transfer the items described in paragraph (1) 
     pursuant to the policy described in subsection (b).


           amendment no. 132 offered by mr. franks of arizona

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

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

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


          amendment no. 134 offered by mr. shimkus of illinois

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

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

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


           amendment no. 137 offered by ms. kelly of illinois

       At the end of title XII, insert the following:

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

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


           amendment no. 142 offered by mr. pompeo of kansas

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

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

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


          amendment no. 149 offered by mr. foster of illinois

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


[[Page 8911]]

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

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


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

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

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

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


           amendment no. 151 offered by ms. castor of florida

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

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

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


           amendment no. 152 offered by ms. bordallo of guam

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

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

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


        amendment no. 153 offered by mr. hastings of washington

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

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

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


        amendment no. 154 offered by mr. hastings of washington

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

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


          amendment no. 158 offered by mr. graves of missouri

       At the end of title X, add the following:

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

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

       (a) Establishment.--There is established the National 
     Commission on the Future of the Army (in this subtitle 
     referred to as the ``Commission'').
       (b) Membership.--
       (1) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of eight 
     members, of whom--
       (A) four shall be appointed by the President;
       (B) one shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee 
     on Armed Services of the Senate;
       (C) one shall be appointed by the Ranking Member of the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
       (D) one shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Committee 
     on Armed Services of the House of Representatives; and
       (E) one shall be appointed by the Ranking Member of the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
       (2) Appointment date.--The appointments of the members of 
     the Commission shall be made not later than 90 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       (3) Effect of lack of appointment by appointment date.--If 
     one or more appointments under subparagraph (A) of paragraph 
     (1) is not made by the appointment date specified in 
     paragraph (2), the authority to make such appointment or 
     appointments shall expire, and the number of members of the 
     Commission shall be reduced by the number equal to the number 
     of appointments so not made. If an appointment under 
     subparagraph (B), (C), (D), or (E) of paragraph (1) is not 
     made by the appointment date specified in paragraph (2), the 
     authority to make an appointment under such subparagraph 
     shall expire, and the number of members of the Commission 
     shall be reduced by the number equal to the number otherwise 
     appointable under such subparagraph.
       (4) Expertise.--In making appointments under this 
     subsection, consideration should

[[Page 8912]]

     be given to individuals with expertise in reserve forces 
     policy.
       (c) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be 
     appointed for the life of the Commission. Any vacancy in the 
     Commission shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled 
     in the same manner as the original appointment.
       (d) Chair and Vice Chair.--The Commission shall select a 
     Chair and Vice Chair from among its members.
       (e) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 30 days after the date 
     on which all members of the Commission have been appointed, 
     the Commission shall hold its initial meeting.
       (f) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet at the call of the 
     Chair.
       (g) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission 
     shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may 
     hold hearings.
       (h) Administrative and Procedural Authorities.--The 
     following provisions of law do not apply to the Commission:
       (1) Section 3161 of title 5, United States Code.
       (2) The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).

     SEC. 1092. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.

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

     SEC. 1093. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.

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

     SEC. 1094. COMMISSION PERSONNEL MATTERS.

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

     SEC. 1095. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.

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

     SEC. 1096. FUNDING.

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


           amendment no. 159 offered by mr. franks of arizona

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

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

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


           amendment no. 162 offered by mr. young of indiana

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

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

       Section 330(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 2687 
     note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``paragraph (3)'' and inserting ``paragraph 
     (4)''; and
       (B) by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph 
     (3)'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively;
       (3) in paragraph (4), as redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (2) contributed to any such release or threatened 
     release, paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``paragraph (3) 
     contributed to any such release or threatened release, 
     paragraph (1) or (2)''; and
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):

[[Page 8913]]

       ``(2) The responsibility of the Secretary of Defense to 
     hold harmless, defend, and indemnify in full certain persons 
     and entities described in paragraph (3) also applies with 
     respect to any military installation (or portion thereof) 
     that--
       ``(A) was closed during the period beginning on October 24, 
     1988, and ending on the date of the enactment of this 
     paragraph, other than pursuant to a base closure law; and
       ``(B) remains under the jurisdiction of the Department of 
     Defense as of the date of the enactment of this paragraph.''.

        Modification to Amendment No. 134 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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

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

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

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

  Mr. McKEON (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
that the reading of the modification be dispensed with.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the modification?
  There was no objection.


        Modification to Amendment No. 159 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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

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

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

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

  Mr. McKEON (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
that the reading of the modification be dispensed with.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the modification?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 590, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments 
en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the 
minority.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Again, I concur in support for the en bloc amendments. This is the 
last amendment, and I just want to say thank you again to Chairman 
McKeon. I think it is right that this bill is named after him. As I 
have said, he has done a fabulous job on our committee. I appreciate 
his hard work and for, once again, putting together this product.
  I also want to thank the staff. This is a very large bill. Lots of 
amendments are offered both on the committee level and on the House 
level. Staff has to pour through all of that and make sense of it and 
keep us informed. They do an incredible job and an incredible service 
to our country and to the men and women who serve in the military by 
making sure that this bill gets done every year, so I very much 
appreciate that.
  I want to particularly recognize Debra Wada from the HASC staff, who 
will soon be leaving us. She has been promoted to be the Assistant 
Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. Debra has 
served for 15 years as staff on this committee and as an invaluable 
source of knowledge on personnel and on many, many other issues. It has 
been great working with her. We congratulate her on her appointment and 
wish her the best. Again, she is but one example of an absolutely 
fantastic staff and of the great work that they do to put this product 
together every single year.
  So we thank you.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Young), my friend and colleague.
  Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my 
simple amendment to ensure fairness in how we treat military 
installations after they are closed.
  Most military installations are closed through the BRAC process. As 
such, they are granted certain legal protections, including 
indemnification from claims arising from environmental hazards created 
by previous DOD operations. However, some installations can be closed 
unilaterally by the Defense Secretary outside of the normal BRAC 
process. In these instances, the facilities are not granted

[[Page 8914]]

the same protections. As it turns out, many former Army ammunition 
plants were closed outside the normal procedure. As you might imagine, 
facilities where chemicals for ammunition production were once mixed 
and discarded tend to pose some risk to the environment, and yet, 
merely because of the way they were closed down, cities and towns which 
later try to redevelop that property must assume the risk for any 
lingering environmental hazards.
  My amendment would simply extend the same protection enjoyed by most 
closed installations to all closed installations.
  Two years ago, I offered a similar amendment that was added to the 
House-passed NDAA, but it was not included in the Senate-passed version 
nor was it included in the conference report. That version would have 
retroactively applied this protection to properties which have already 
been transferred.
  I have heard the concerns from the DOD and from others about adding 
this benefit on top of previously negotiated contracts. I am sensitive 
to those concerns, so this updated language only applies to those 
properties which are still under DOD's control today. I think this 
adequately addresses those concerns, and it still ensures that there is 
equity in how we handle these properties in the future.
  I would like to thank the gentleman from California, Chairman McKeon, 
for his work once again in putting together this NDAA. I would also 
like to thank him and his staff for working with our office to draft 
this amendment and include it as part of this amendment package.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry), my friend and colleague.
  Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, I would like to thank Mr. Graves from 
Missouri for taking the lead on this amendment, and I would like to 
thank Chairman McKeon for including this amendment in this en bloc 
package.
  After 12 years of combat coming to a close and shifting security 
priorities, a commission to evaluate Army force structure is, indeed, 
appropriate. The Pentagon is still operating with assumptions, metrics 
and policies from the early 2000s. What we need to be doing is looking 
at shaping the force of the future. What the future missions and force 
mixture between active-guard-reserve should be is a question that 
should be thoroughly assessed.
  To determine how the future of our total Army will be shaped for 
decades to come, we should select the more comprehensive commission and 
take the additional few months to do a comprehensive analysis with the 
best personnel and minds available.
  Madam Chairman, the security of the Nation depends upon it.
  Mr. McKEON. Madam Chair, I think we are about done.
  At this time, I would like to thank my partner. For 4 years, we have 
had the opportunity of leading this committee, and I could not have had 
a better person to be working with than Mr. Smith from Washington. He 
is straightforward; he is honest; he is hardworking, and we just, I 
think, have had a really good working relationship. I consider him--and 
I will always consider him--a friend.
  Likewise, I want to echo the things he said about the committee. I 
want to thank them. We get all of the plaudits. People get up and thank 
us and say we have done a great job, but it is these people behind us--
our committee, our staff--that make it easy to do this. I mean, we 
could have been here until 1 or 2 o'clock this morning, but to make it 
look kind of easy, kind of smooth, they have been working on it for 
hours, for days, for weeks, and for months leading up to this point.
  I don't know much more to say other than ``thank you.'' You are great 
Americans.
  People like to beat up on government workers. All I can say is that 
they are not paid enough for what they do. They can't be paid enough. 
They are patriots. They are dedicated to this work and to our men and 
women in uniform and their families, and I thank them for that.
  With that, Madam Chair, I encourage our colleagues to support the en 
bloc amendments, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my 
amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which 
requires a report to Congress on the prevalence of black mold in 
buildings located on military installations. Additionally, once the 
report is complete, buildings identified as containing black mold shall 
be added to the appropriate branch's construction priority list for 
building replacement or renovations. I would like to thank Mr. Nugent 
and Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for their support and 
agreeing to include my language in an en bloc amendment.
  Taking care of our troops is one of our country's top priorities. 
After these brave men and women have put themselves in harm's way on 
the battlefield, it is essential that we ensure once they are back on 
base they are living and working in a safe nonhazardous environment. We 
must root out dangerous health hazards--like black mold--on military 
installations to protect the health of military personnel on base.
  One example of where this is an issue is at MacDill Air Force Base in 
Tampa, Florida. MacDill is home to the 6th Air Mobility Wing and 39 
Mission Teammates, including the United States Central Command, United 
States Special Operations Command. MacDill is home to over 13,000 
military and civilian personnel and approximately 170,000 retirees live 
in the Tampa area and depend on the base for many necessary services. 
Black mold has been found on the first floor of the Mission Support 
Facility located on base. This building houses the mission support 
squadron and the ID services. Employees working in the Mission Support 
Facility supply all employees--military, civilian and contractor--and 
veterans with their ID credentialing and they assist veterans with 
additional paperwork that will help them obtain the benefits they have 
earned during service. Imagine how many of our active duty personnel, 
military retirees and civilians have visited this facility over the 
years. The Defense Department must keep a critical eye out not only for 
this facility at MacDill, but on all bases so we can maintain a high 
standard for our military men and women.
  In addition to being a health hazard, the mold in the Mission Support 
Facility takes up valuable workspace and is cordoned off. Base 
personnel are doing the best they can and they have found a way to 
ensure that no service member or their family member has suffered, but 
they should not have to.
  As you may know, black mold thrives in indoor spaces where there is 
moisture and humidity. As any tourist or native Floridian, like me, can 
tell you, Florida is well known for its humidity. It likely is 
happening at other bases located in humid areas. If we do not maintain 
these facilities defense-wide, issues like black mold can lead to 
expensive and harmful consequences down the road. We have seen examples 
over the years of black mold being found in homes where military 
families live and the horrendous stories centered around mold that came 
out of Walter Reed less than 10 years ago. We need to make certain our 
servicemembers, veterans, their families and civilians live and work in 
a healthy environment and that is why I have introduced my amendment to 
NDAA.
  I would like to thank my friend and fellow Tampa Bay member, 
Representative Rich Nugent, for his partnership on this amendment. His 
tireless dedication to the men and women serving in the Armed Forces at 
MacDill and around the globe are laudable. Active duty personnel and 
veterans throughout the Tampa Bay area are fortunate to have such a 
strong leader serving on the House Armed Services Committee and I am 
fortunate to call him a colleague.
  Madam Chair, again, I would like to thank Mr. Nugent, Chairman McKeon 
and Ranking Member Smith for their hard work on this legislation and 
for including my amendment en bloc. Protecting the health of our 
servicemembers and all individuals who work, live or visit any military 
installations is imperative. I urge my colleagues to support my 
amendment.
  Mr. BARLETTA. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the Graves Amendment 
to the National Defense Authorization bill.
  My home state of Pennsylvania is proud of its National Guard--the 
fourth largest in the country and part of the fabric of our community.
  We need the Guard--particularly in times of disaster.
  After Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee in 2011, many of our 
citizens simply would not have made it without the help of our National 
Guard.

[[Page 8915]]

  I support ensuring that the National Guard is appropriately protected 
in any force restructuring.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment number 
129 as part of en-bloc package 7. The overall intent of this amendment 
is to address potential legal impediment of allowing a surface danger 
zone (SDZ) over the Ritidian unit of the Guam National Wildlife Refuge. 
My amendment would allow the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of 
Interior to enter into agreement over the establishment of an SDZ over 
the refuge. It would also outline areas that would need to be mitigated 
if an SDZ were located over the Ritidian Unit. The amendment is similar 
to compromise language developed by Navy and Fish and Wildlife Service 
following an April 29, 2014 hearing in the House Committee on Natural 
Resources on this bill.
  I believe this amendment will keep the Navy and the Fish and Wildlife 
Service talking about the potential impacts of a firing range on 
Northwest Field. In fact, I believe this amendment is important to keep 
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process on track so that 
these two agencies can discuss potential mitigations should this 
location ultimately be chosen as the location for a firing range on 
Guam. The Navy has just commenced the draft supplemental environmental 
impact statement hearings (SEIS) so there is ample time to review all 
alternatives. The amendment does not prejudge the outcome of this NEPA 
process, indeed it is intended to keep the process on track so we do 
not suffer any unnecessary delays in the realignment of Marines from 
Okinawa, Japan to Guam. As the Navy has testified and stated publicly, 
without H.R. 4402 in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2015 the military build-up would likely suffer significant delays 
and could significant consequences for our bilateral relationship with 
Japan.
  I fully respect and appreciate the Guam community's close engagement 
on these issues and their participation during the draft SEIS public 
meetings this past week. I was able to hear directly from our community 
on this amendment over the past week, and community feedback is 
absolutely critical to the process. It provides the Navy and other 
stakeholders with important viewpoints to consider when final decisions 
are made for the Record of Decision.
  I would also like to underscore the importance of training to the 
overall readiness of Marines in the Asia-Pacific region. This 
importance is highlighted by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel in a 
letter to Congress, stating a live-fire training range is critical to, 
``maintain the military training and readiness of Marine Corps 
personnel relocating to the island''. I have been and remain a staunch 
advocate for the military build-up on Guam. I believe that this bill 
keeps the process moving forward and ensures that we have no further 
unnecessary delays. The bottom line and undeniable fact is that without 
a live-fire training range on Guam, we will not have a military build-
up.
  I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for agreeing to put this 
amendment in en-bloc package 7 and urge its immediate adoption.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Chair, I rise to speak in favor of 
my amendment, which directs the Department of the Interior to provide 
the American public with reasonable motorized, non-motorized, and 
pedestrian access to the summit of Rattlesnake Mountain, located in the 
Hanford Reach National Monument. This 195,000-acre monument, designated 
by President Clinton in 2000, is near the Hanford Nuclear Site and is 
the only one in the continental United States managed by the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service. Although administered by the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, the site itself remains under the ownership of the 
Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management.
  At 3,600 feet, Rattlesnake Mountain is the highest point in the 
region, and it provides unparalleled views for miles around the 
monument, including the Hanford Site, the Snake River, the Columbia 
River, and the Yakima River. Unfortunately, it took the Fish and 
Wildlife Service eight years to write a management plan that 
effectively closed Rattlesnake Mountain to public access, despite the 
vast majority of public comments favoring just the opposite.
  After I first introduced this bill in 2010, the Fish and Wildlife 
Service offered two public tours for selected individuals and then 
suddenly reneged on the offer just days before the tours were to occur. 
During a 2011 committee hearing on the bill, the Interior Department's 
testimony suggested that the Fish and Wildlife Service supports tours 
of Rattlesnake, but very carefully didn't go the extra step of ensuring 
the Service would allow public access to the summit.
  Finally, last summer, the Fish and Wildlife Service granted a few 
dozen people the opportunity to access the Rattlesnake Mountain summit 
over two tours. These were the first two public tours offered since the 
monument was designated. The seats for the 2013 tours were snapped up 
online in just 21 seconds of being made available.
  This year, the Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing tours on six 
days, and used a lottery system to distribute the tickets. While I 
appreciate the Interior Department's tentative steps in recent years 
toward allowing the public access to this area, it's clearly not 
enough, and even the limited opportunities being offered now can be 
reversed at any time.
  My amendment is necessary to ensure reasonable and regular public 
access can be guaranteed by law to the citizens of that area. This 
language is supported by many stakeholders in the local area including 
the Benton County Commissioners, the Tri-Cities Development Council 
(TRIDEC), the Tri-City Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Tri-Cities 
Visitor and Convention Bureau, and the Back Country Horsemen of 
Washington.
  I would also note that this amendment has passed this chamber 
previously as stand-alone legislation. Last year, and in the previous 
Congress, this body approved this language on strong bipartisan votes 
with no votes in opposition.
  I appreciate the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services 
Committee and their staff for allowing this amendment to be adopted en 
bloc today. Hopefully, this will move us closer to ensuring the 
American people have access to special places on their public lands, 
like Rattlesnake Mountain.
  Mr. RAHALL. Madam Chair, I strongly support the passage of the Graves 
amendment, of which I am a cosponsor, to establish a National 
Commission on the Future of the Army.
  Last December, I joined with 142 of my colleagues in expressing to 
Defense Secretary Hagel my deep concerns about Army cost-saving 
proposals that would impose draconian cuts on the Army National Guard. 
Congress rightly rejected similar proposals that would have reduced end 
strength and force structure for the Air National Guard, and I am 
pleased that the Armed Services Committee chose to reject such 
proposals for the Army National Guard too.
  I question the wisdom of making such cuts, considering the cost-
effectiveness of the Army National Guard as a dual use force, and cost-
savings that could be achieved in the Total Army by better leveraging 
the Operational Reserve. Blending Active and Reserve Component Army 
units, as the Air Force is doing, could ensure long-term budgetary 
savings to maintain a robust Total Army. As the Reserve Forces Policy 
Board (RFPB) has noted, a blended Total Army composition means more 
combat capability at about one-third the cost.
  I believe we need to take a harder look at the future force structure 
of the Army, which is why a Commission is absolutely necessary. The 
House should fully consider and be fully informed about how the Army's 
proposed cuts fit into a long-term national security strategy.
  With the operational reserve being rebuilt since September 11, 2001, 
this generation of Army National Guardsmen and Reservists has proven 
every bit as effective, committed, and capable as their active 
counterparts. These men and women have served with distinction and 
honor overseas, and our Nation cannot afford to lose their service. We 
must not go blindly down a path that would inhibit our Army's ability 
to respond to world events and domestic emergencies.
  Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise today to urge my colleagues 
to support my commonsense amendment included in En Bloc Amendment #7 
that would express the Sense of Congress that active duty military 
personnel who live in or are stationed in Washington, DC should be 
exempt from existing District of Columbia firearms restrictions.
  It is no secret that the District of Columbia has historically had 
some of the most restrictive firearm regulations in the nation even 
after the victory for Second Amendment rights in the 2008 ruling by the 
Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller. With approximately 
40,000 service men and women across all branches of the Armed Forces 
either living in or stationed on active duty within the Washington, DC 
metropolitan area, these individuals are subject to the very laws of 
the District of Columbia that make the lawful possession of firearms 
nearly impossible.
  Mr. Chair, my amendment would recognize that the DC handgun law, 
especially in regard to trained service men and women, punishes 
individuals well-equipped to protect themselves and others while 
emboldening perpetrators of violent crime. I urge my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to support this amendment.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chair, I rise today to thank Chairman 
McKeon and Ranking Member Smith for including an

[[Page 8916]]

amendment that I offered with Rep. Tom Rooney in en bloc amendment #7 
and I urge my colleagues to support its passage.
  Mr. Speaker, Mr. Rooney and I, along with other colleagues like Rep. 
Walter Jones have been engaged in an effort for several years now to 
ensure that children with developmental disabilities that are covered 
by TRICARE, can access the behavioral health treatment that they 
require. It was an issue that was brought to my attention by a 
constituent whose husband is in the military and who has a child with a 
developmental disability. The challenges her family faces however, are 
also unfortunately experienced by numerous military families across the 
country.
  While TRICARE does provide access to a multitude of services for 
families, there are limitations on them from fully accessing the 
appropriate level of care for their children for a behavioral health 
treatment known as applied behavior analysis (ABA). Currently families 
must navigate a complicated web of programs within TRICARE, each with 
eligibility or coverage limitations, in order to get access to 
treatment. In addition, children with developmental disabilities do not 
have access. Our amendment simply seeks to streamline coverage for 
these services as a medical benefit under TRICARE Basic, which would 
ensure access to these services for the dependents of both active duty 
and non-active duty beneficiaries.
  These are families that have sacrificed a great deal in the service 
of our nation, and it is our obligation to make sure that their 
children get the health care services that they need. This amendment is 
designed to do just that. Many children with developmental disabilities 
require other types of treatment such as habilitative and 
rehabilitative services like speech, occupational, and physical therapy 
that are already covered by TRICARE. However, because of the current 
restrictions, there are cases where some of these children are not able 
to access the prescribed level of ABA treatment. I want to make it 
clear that this amendment will not, nor is intended to, alter any 
services that a child's team of health providers deem necessary and are 
currently covered, like those already mentioned, but simply ensures 
that they can get the ABA services that they've been prescribed. In 
addition, as mentioned in the amendment we believe that amounts should 
be appropriated to ensure that all TRICARE beneficiaries have 
appropriate and equitable access to behavioral health treatment, 
including ABA.
  This is just simply the right thing to do for our military families 
who have sacrificed so much in the service of our country. Once again, 
I thank my colleagues for their support on this important issue on 
behalf of military families across this country.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc, as 
modified, offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
  The en bloc amendments, as modified, were agreed to.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Perry) having assumed the chair, Ms. Foxx, Acting Chair of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4435) to 
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities 
of the Department of Defense and for military construction, to 
prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for 
other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________