[Pages H3278-H3288]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

The Committee resumed its sitting.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Gutknecht). It is now in order to
consider amendment No. 13 printed in House Report 106-621.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Stearns

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. Stearns:
At the end of title VII (page 247, after line 9), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 7__. STUDY ON COMPARABILITY OF COVERAGE FOR PHYSICAL,
SPEECH, AND OCCUPATIONAL THERAPIES.

(a) Study Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct
a study comparing coverage and reimbursement for covered
beneficiaries under chapter 55 of title 10, United States
Code, for physical, speech, and occupational therapies under
the TRICARE program and the Civilian Health and Medical
Program of the Uniformed Services to coverage and
reimbursement for such therapies by insurers under medicare
and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. The study
shall examine the following:
(1) Types of services covered.
(2) Whether prior authorization is required to receive such
services.
(3) Reimbursement limits for services covered.
(4) Whether services are covered on both an inpatient and
outpatient basis.
(b) Report.--Not later than March 31, 2001, the Secretary
shall submit a report on the findings of the study conducted
under this section to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 503, the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) and a Member opposed will each
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, every now and then in a debate we need an amendment
that everybody agrees on and everybody is happy about, and this is just
such an amendment. And I think it is appropriate that we have this one
after our previous debate. In addition, this amendment has been worked
out with the Committee on Armed Services.
The purpose of my amendment is to request that the Secretary of
Defense conduct a study comparing the coverage and reimbursement for
physical, speech, and occupational therapies for covered beneficiaries
under the TRICARE program to coverage and reimbursement for such same
therapies under Medicare and the Federal Employee Health Benefits
Program. So we are comparing what is provided under TRICARE with what
is provided under Medicare and the Federal Employee Health Benefits
Program.
This study examines the following: The type of services covered;
whether prior authorization is required to receive such services;
reimbursement limits for services covered; and, fourthly, whether
services are covered on both an inpatient and outpatient basis.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. STEARNS. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, we see nothing wrong with the gentleman's
amendment. As far as we are concerned, we accept it.
Mr. STEARNS. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
I will just finish my presentation for the good of the House, and I
thank the chairman for his kind acceptance.
The Secretary shall submit a report on the findings of the study
conducted to the House and Senate Committees on Armed Services no later
than March 31, 2001. So, Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment because
it has been brought to my attention that acceptance of TRICARE patients
presents a variety of problems, business concerns, to rehab providers.
Because of these concerns, rehab practices are reluctant to accept
TRICARE patients, and that is wrong.
For example, most patients with a diagnosis of a stroke, for example,
require two and sometimes three rehab disciplines, depending upon the
severity of the stroke. Therefore, the stroke patient may require
physical and occupational therapy and possibly speech therapy, if the
speech centers of the brain are involved. The concern here is that only
the physical therapy services are covered as reimbursable service
without prior written authorization, while speech therapy services
require prior written authorization.
Confusing? That is what this study will determine, the proper way to
go.
Occupational therapy would not be covered, as it can only be covered
in an institutional facility. In most cases this creates a significant
inconvenience for patients who now must receive their physical and
speech therapy in one facility and have to travel to a separate
institutional facility for occupational therapy services.
Another good example, Mr. Chairman, concerns patients who are
referred with a diagnosis of, let us say, a head trauma or upper
extremity trauma. They would have similar rehab needs as stroke
patients and, most likely, experience similar inconveniences.
Providers are also concerned about the potential for interpretation
of fraud by utilizing a physical therapy assistant in the treatment of
TRICARE patients. That should not occur. In hospitals, skilled nursing
facilities, and outpatient rehab facilities it is common for the
therapy staff to be comprised of physical therapists and physical
therapy assistants. When the rehab staffing is compromised due to
sickness, educational leave, vacation, et cetera, the rehab provider is
limited to the staff who can treat TRICARE patients. These TRICARE
patient appointments may need be canceled and the therapy interrupted
due to the compromised staffing pattern.
This situation does not occur in treating traditional Medicare
patients. Neither does it occur with Federal Employee Health Benefits.
The requirement for utilizing only registered physical therapists
serves to create a more expensive model in which to deliver rehab
services.
In Florida, for example, physical therapy assistants, by their
practice, can perform all of the therapy services rendered by a
registered physical therapist, with the exception of performing a
patient evaluation, changing a patient's plan of care or treatment, or
discharging a patient. The risks associated with a TRICARE patient
accidentally being treated by a physical therapy assistant presents a
significant concern to all these rehab providers.
So, Mr. Chairman, I think this study will try to determine how these
problems can be resolved. My district has many active duty and retired
military and their dependents who rely on this program for their health
care. By having DOD conduct such a study, we would be provided with the
necessary information to make a fair assessment about coverage of the
rehab therapies by TRICARE. I urge my colleagues to support this
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member claim time in opposition to
the amendment?
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 503, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Stearns) will be postponed.

Amendments En Bloc, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Spence

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution
503, I offer en bloc amendments consisting of the following amendments,
printed in House Report 106-621: Amendment No. 5, as modified;
amendments 6, 7, 8 and 9; amendment No. 11,

[[Page H3279]]

as modified; amendments 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25,
26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, and 35.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendments en
bloc and report the modifications.
The Clerk designated the amendments en bloc and proceeding to report
the modifications.

Amendment No. 5 As Modified

Offered by Mr. Hunter of California

The amendment as modified is as follows:
At the end of subtitle C of title I (page 27, after line
24), insert the following new section:

SEC. 125. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CERTAIN SHIPBUILDING PROGRAMS.

(a) Economic Analysis.--The Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Navy, shall conduct an
economic analysis on the potential benefits and costs
associated with full funding, and with alternative funding
mechanisms, for the procurement of large aviation-capable
naval vessels beginning in fiscal year 2002.
(b) Covered Vessel Classes.--For purposes of this section,
the term ``large aviation-capable naval vessel'' means the
following classes of vessel:
(1) The CVN(X) class aircraft carrier.
(2) The LHD and LHA replacement class amphibious assault
ships.
(c) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report detailing the
results of the economic analysis under subsection (a). The
report shall be submitted concurrently with the submission of
the President's Budget for fiscal year 2002, but in no event
later than February 5, 2001. The report shall include the
following:
(1) A detailed description of the funding mechanisms
considered.
(2) The potential savings or costs associated with each
such funding mechanism.
(3) The year-to-year effect of each such funding mechanism
on production stability of other shipbuilding programs funded
within the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, account, given
the current acquisition plan of the Navy for the large
aviation-capable ships and other shipbuilding programs
through fiscal year 2010.
(4) A description and discussion of any statutory or
regulatory restrictions that would preclude the use of any of
the funding mechanisms considered.

Amendment No. 6

Offered by Mr. Underwood of Guam

Page 40, line 14, strike ``50 States'' and insert ``United
States''.
Page 41, after line 15, insert the following:
(c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``United States'', when used in a geographic sense, means the
50 States, the District of Columbia, and any Commonwealth,
territory, or possession of the United States.

Amendment No. 7

Offered by Mr. Hansen of Utah

Page 51, line 13, strike the period at the end and insert
the following: ``for such special use airspace and the use of
such special use airspace established in such environmental
impact statements.''.
Page 51, lines 14 and 15, strike ``of Network'' and insert
``for Low-Level Flight Training''.

Amendment No. 8

Offered by Mr. McKeon of California

At the end of subtitle B of title III (page 53, after line
12), insert the following new section:

SEC. __. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OF FORMER DEFENSE
MANUFACTURING SITE, SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) A former private sector munitions plant may have
demonstratively impacted the environment of a 1,000-acre site
in Santa Clarita, California.
(2) Munitions and rocket propellant manufactured at this
site for over 60 years may have contributed to various
contaminants including, but not limited to, perchlorates and
various volatile organic compounds.
(3) The munitions plant used materials and production
methods in support of purchase orders from the Department of
Defense to meet the national security interests of the United
States at the time.
(4) The Santa Clarita site serves a unique role in the
future of the community and is the cornerstone to many public
benefits, including reduction in transportation congestion,
access to much-needed schools, future local government
centers, assurance of quality drinking water, more than 400
acres of public space, and affordable housing.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that--
(1) every effort should be made to apply all known public
and private sector innovative technologies to restore the
Santa Clarita site to productive use; and
(2) the experience gained from this site by the private and
public sector partnerships has the potential to pay dividends
many times over.

Amendment No. 9

Offered by Mrs. Fowler of Florida

Page 80, line 14, insert ``only'' after ``may be
delegated''.
Page 81, line 15, insert before the period the following:
``or to an official in the Office of the Secretary of Defense
senior to that Deputy Under Secretary''.

Amendment No. 11, as Modified

Offered by Mr. Buyer of Indiana

The amendment as modified is as follows:
Page 83, line 23, strike ``350,526'' and insert
``350,706''.
Page 85, line 11, strike ``22,974'' and insert ``23,154''.
Page 86, line 2, strike ``23,129'' and insert ``23,392''.
At the end of subtitle D of title I (page 30, after line
2), insert the following new section:

SEC. 132. KC-135E REENGINING KITS.

Of the amount provided in section 103(1) for procurement of
aircraft for the Air Force, the amount of $52,000,000
provided for two reengining kits for KC-135E modifications
shall be available for the Air Force Reserve Command.

Amendment No. 12

Offered by Mr. Camp of Michigan

At the end of subtitle D of title VI (page 199, after line
10), insert the following new section:

SEC. 643. EFFECTIVE DATE OF DISABILITY RETIREMENT FOR MEMBERS
DYING IN CIVILIAN MEDICAL FACILITIES.

(a) In General.--(1) Chapter 61 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 1219 the
following new section:

``Sec. 1220. Members dying in civilian medical facilities:
authority for determination of later time of death to allow
disability retirement

``(a) Authority for Later Time-of-Death Determination To
Allow Disability Retirement.--In the case of a member of the
armed forces who dies in a civilian medical facility in a
State, the Secretary concerned may, solely for the purpose of
allowing retirement of the member under section 1201 or 1204
of this title and subject to subsection (b), specify a date
and time of death of the member later than the date and time
of death determined by the attending physician in that
civilian medical facility.
``(b) Limitations.--A date and time of death may be
determined by the Secretary concerned under subsection (a)
only if that date and time--
``(1) are consistent with the date and time of death that
reasonably could have been determined by an attending
physician in a military medical facility if the member had
died in a military medical facility in the same State as the
civilian medical facility; and
``(2) are not more than 48 hours later than the date and
time of death determined by the attending physician in the
civilian medical facility.
``(c) State Defined.--In this section, the term `State'
includes the District of Columbia and any Commonwealth or
possession of the United States.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter
is amended by inserting after the item relating to section
1219 the following new item:

``1220. Members dying in civilian medical facilities: authority for
determination of later time of death to allow disability
retirement.''.

(b) Effective Date.--(1) Section 1220 of title 10, United
States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with
respect to any member of the Armed Forces dying in a civilian
medical facility on or after January 1, 1998.
(2) In the case of any such member dying on or after such
date and before the date of the enactment of this Act, any
specification by the Secretary concerned under such section
with respect to the date and time of death of such member
shall be made not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

Amendment No. 14

Offered by Mr. Stenholm of Texas

At the end of title VII (page 247, after line 9), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 7__. IMPROVEMENT OF ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE UNDER THE
TRICARE PROGRAM.

(a) Waiver of Nonavailability Statement or
Preauthorization.--In the case of a covered beneficiary under
chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, who is enrolled
in TRICARE Standard, the Secretary of Defense may not require
with regard to authorized health care services (other than
mental health services) under any new contract for the
provision of health care services under such chapter that the
beneficiary--
(1) obtain a nonavailability statement or preauthorization
from a military medical treatment facility in order to
receive the services from a civilian provider; or
(2) obtain a nonavailability statement for care in
specialized treatment facilities outside the 200-mile radius
of a military medical treatment facility.
(b) Notice.--The Secretary may require that the covered
beneficiary inform the primary care manager of the
beneficiary of any health care received from a civilian
provider or in a specialized treatment facility.
(c) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if--
(1) the Secretary demonstrates significant cost avoidance
for specific procedures at the affected military medical
treatment facilities;
(2) the Secretary determines that a specific procedure must
be maintained at the affected military medical treatment
facility to

[[Page H3280]]

ensure the proficiency levels of the practitioners at the
facility; or
(3) the lack of nonavailability statement data would
significantly interfere with TRICARE contract administration.
(d) Effective Date--This section shall take effect on
October 1, 2001.

Amendment No. 15

Offered by Ms. Velazquez of New York

At the end of title VIII (page 263, after line 2), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 8__. REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT STUDY ON CONTRACT BUNDLING.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a
comprehensive study on the practice known as ``contract
bundling'' by the Department of Defense, and the effects of
such practice on small business concerns, economically and
socially disadvantaged small business concerns, and small
business concerns owned and controlled by women (as such
terms are used in the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632 et
seq.)).
(b) Deadline.--The Secretary shall submit the results of
the study to the Committees on Armed Services and Small
Business of the Senate and the House of Representatives
before submission of the budget request of the Department of
Defense for fiscal year 2002.
(c) Database.--For purposes of conducting the study
required by this section, the Secretary shall develop, in
consultation with the General Accounting Office, and maintain
a database on all contracts of the Department of Defense
(excluding contracts for the procurement of weapons systems)
for which requirements have been bundled.

Amendment No. 16

Offered by Mr. Traficant of Ohio

At the end of title VIII (page 263, after line 2), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 8__. COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMERICAN ACT.

(a) Compliance With Buy American Act.--No funds authorized
by this Act may be expended by an entity of the Department of
Defense unless the entity agrees that in expending the funds
the entity will comply with the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C.
10a et seq.).
(b) Sense of Congress Regarding Purchase of American-Made
Equipment and Products.--It is the sense of Congress that any
entity of the Department of Defense, in expending funds
authorized by this Act for the purchase of equipment or
products, should purchase only American-made equipment and
products.
(c) Debarment of Persons Convicted of Fraudulent Use of
``Made in America'' Labels.--If the Secretary of Defense
determines that a person has been convicted of intentionally
affixing a label bearing a ``Made in America'' inscription,
or another inscription with the same meaning, to any product
sold in or shipped to the United States that is not made in
the United States, the Secretary shall determine, in
accordance with section 2410f of title 10, United States
Code, whether the person should be debarred from contracting
with the Department of Defense.

Amendment No. 17

Offered by Mr. Bereuter of Nebraska

Page 292, line 5, strike the closing quotation marks and
second period.
Page 292, after line 5, insert the following:
``(f) Provisions Relating Specifically to Asia-Pacific
Center.--The Secretary of Defense may waive reimbursement of
the cost of conferences, seminars, courses of instruction, or
similar educational activities of the Asia-Pacific Center for
Security Studies for military officers and civilian officials
of foreign nations if the Secretary determines that
attendance by such personnel without reimbursement is in the
national security interest of the United States. Costs for
which reimbursement is waived pursuant to this subsection
shall be paid from appropriations available for the Asia-
Pacific Center.''.

Amendment No. 18

Offered by Mr. Coburn of Oklahoma

At the end of subtitle A of title X (page 302, after line
11), insert the following new section:

SEC. 10__. REQUIREMENT FOR PLAN TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS.

(a) In General.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall develop
a comprehensive plan to ensure compliance by the Department
of Defense, not later than October l, 2001, with all
statutory and regulatory financial management requirements
applicable to the Department. In developing such plan, the
Secretary shall give the same priority to achieving
compliance with statutory and regulatory financial management
requirements as the priority given to ensuring that the
computer systems of the Department would be fully functional
in the year 2000.
(2) Not later than January 1, 2001, the Secretary shall
submit the plan required by this subsection to the Committees
on Armed Services, the Committees on the Budget, and the
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General.
(b) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than March 1,
2001, the Comptroller General shall submit to the Committees
on Armed Services and the Committees on the Budget of the
Senate and the House of Representatives, the Committee on
Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the Committee on
Government Reform of the House of Representatives, a report
on the adequacy of the plan developed under subsection (a).

Amendment No. 19

Offered by Mr. Gilchrest of Maryland

At the end of title X (page 324, after line 11), insert the
following new section:

SEC. 1038. ADDITIONAL WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION CIVIL
SUPPORT TEAMS.

During fiscal year 2001, the Secretary of Defense may
establish up to five additional teams designated as Weapons
of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (for a total of 32
such teams), to the extent that sources of funding for such
additional teams are identified.

Amendment to No. 21

Offered by Mr. Weldon of Florida

At the end of title X (page 324, after line 11), insert the
following new section:

SEC. __. COMMISSION ON THE FUTURE OF THE UNITED STATES
AEROSPACE INDUSTRY.

(a) Establishment.--Not later than March 1, 2001, the
President shall establish a commission to be known as the
``Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace
Industry'' (in this section referred to as the
``Commission'').
(b) Duties.--The Commission shall have the following
duties:
(1) To study the issues relevant to the future of the
United States aerospace industry with respect to the economic
and national security of the United States.
(2) To assess the future importance of the United States
aerospace industry to the economic and national security of
the United States.
(3) To evaluate the effect on the United States aerospace
industry of the laws, regulations, policies, and procedures
of the Federal Government with respect to--
(A) the budget;
(B) research and development;
(C) acquisition, including financing and payment of
contracts;
(D) operation and maintenance;
(E) international trade and export of technology;
(F) taxation; and
(G) science and engineering education.
(4) To study in particular detail the adequacy of projected
budgets of Federal agencies for--
(A) aerospace research and development and procurement;
(B) maintaining the national space launch infrastructure;
and
(C) supporting aerospace science and engineering efforts at
institutions of higher education.
(5) To consider and recommend feasible actions by the
Federal Government to support the ability of the United
States aerospace industry to remain robust into the future.
(c) Composition.--(1) The Commission shall be composed of
not less than 10 and not more than 17 members appointed by
the President.
(2) Each member shall be an individual with extensive
experience and a national reputation with respect to one or
more of the following:
(A) Aerospace manufacturing.
(B) Labor organizations associated with aerospace
manufacturing.
(C) Economics or finance.
(D) National security.
(E) International trade or foreign policy.
(3) Members shall serve without pay by reason of their work
on the Commission.
(4) Each member shall receive travel expenses, including
per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with sections
5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States Code.
(5) The Chairperson of the Commission shall be designated
by the President at the time of the appointment.
(d) Powers.--(1) A number not less than 50 percent of the
total number of members of the Commission shall constitute a
quorum but a lesser number may hold hearings.
(2) The Commission shall meet at the call of the
Chairperson.
(3) The Commission may, for the purpose of carrying out
this section, hold hearings, sit and act at times and places,
take testimony, and receive evidence as the Commission
considers appropriate.
(4) Any member or agent of the Commission may, if
authorized by the Commission, take any action which the
Commission is authorized to take by this section.
(5) The Commission may secure directly from any department
or agency of the United States information necessary to
enable it to carry out this section. Upon request of the
Chairperson of the Commission, the head of that department or
agency shall furnish that information to the Commission.
(6) The Commission may use the United States mails in the
same manner and under the same conditions as other
departments and agencies of the United States.
(7) Upon the request of the Commission, the Administrator
of General Services shall provide to the Commission, on a
reimbursable basis, the administrative support services
necessary for the Commission to carry out its
responsibilities under this section.
(e) Director and Staff.--(1) The Chairperson shall appoint
and fix the pay of a Director.
(2) The Chairperson may appoint and fix the pay of
additional personnel as the Chairperson considers
appropriate.
(3) The Director and staff of the Commission may be
appointed without regard to the provisions of title 5, United
States Code, governing appointments in the competitive
service, and may be paid without regard to the provisions of
chapter 51 and subchapter

[[Page H3281]]

III of chapter 53 of that title relating to classification
and General Schedule pay rates.
(4) With the approval of the Commission, the Chairperson
may procure temporary and intermittent services under section
3109(b) of title 5, United States Code.
(5) Upon request of the Chairperson, the head of any
Federal department or agency may detail, on a reimbursable
basis, any of the personnel of that department or agency to
the Commission to assist it in carrying out its duties under
this section.
(f) Report.--Not later than March 1, 2002, the Commission
shall transmit a report to the Congress. The report shall
contain a detailed statement of the findings and conclusions
of the Commission, the recommendations of the Commission for
legislation or administrative action, and such other
information as the Commission considers appropriate.
(g) Termination.--The Commission shall terminate 30 days
after submitting its report pursuant to subsection (f).
(h) Funding.--Funds for activities of the Commission shall
be provided from amounts appropriated for the Department of
Defense for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide
activities. Upon receipt of a written certification from the
Chairperson of the Commission specifying the funds required
for the activities of the Commission, the Secretary of
Defense shall promptly disburse to the Commission, from such
amounts, the funds required by the Commission as stated in
such certification.

Amendment No. 22

Offered by Mr. Gary Miller of California

At the end of title X (page 324, after line 11), insert the
following new section:

SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
SYSTEMS.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Department of Defense must focus on upgrading
information technology systems to allow seamless and
interoperable communications; and
(2) each Secretary of a military department must
demonstrate an unwavering commitment to achieving this goal
and must ensure that communications systems within the
active, reserve, and National Guard component of that
military department receive equal attention and funding for
information technology.

Amendment No. 23

Offered by Mr. Hall of Ohio

At the end of title XI (page 334, after line 17), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 11__. TEMPORARY AUTHORITY REGARDING VOLUNTARY SEPARATION
INCENTIVES AND EARLY RETIREMENT FOR EMPLOYEES
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE.

(a) Separation Pay.--Section 5597 of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(i)(1) In this subsection:
``(A) the term `agency' means the Department of the Air
Force;
``(B) the term `employee' means an employee (as defined by
section 2105) who is employed by the agency, is serving under
an appointment without time limitation, and has been
currently employed for a continuous period of at least 3
years, but does not include--
``(i) a reemployed annuitant under subchapter III of
chapter 83 or chapter 84, or another retirement system for
employees of the agency;
``(ii) an employee having a disability on the basis of
which such employee is or would be eligible for disability
retirement under subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84,
or another retirement system for employees of the agency;
``(iii) an employee who is in receipt of a specific notice
of involuntary separation for misconduct or unacceptable
performance;
``(iv) an employee who has previously received any
voluntary separation incentive payment by the Federal
Government under this section or any other authority and has
not repaid such payment;
``(v) an employee covered by statutory reemployment rights
who is on transfer to another organization; or
``(vi) any employee who, during the 24-month period
preceding the date of separation, has received a recruitment
or relocation bonus under section 5753 or who, within the 12-
month period preceding the date of separation, received a
retention allowance under section 5754.
``(2)(A) A voluntary separation incentive payment may be
paid under this section by the agency to any employee to
maintain continuity of skills among the agency's employees or
to adapt the skills of the agency's workforce to the emerging
technologies critical to the agency's needs and goals.
``(B) A voluntary separation incentive payment under this
subsection--
``(i) shall be paid in a lump sum after the employee's
separation;
``(ii) shall be paid from appropriations or funds available
for the payment of the basic pay of the employees;
``(iii) shall be equal to the lesser of--
``(I) an amount equal to the amount the employee would be
entitled to receive under section 5595(c); or
``(II) an amount determined by the agency head not to
exceed $25,000;
``(iv) may not be made except in the case of any qualifying
employee who voluntarily separates (whether by retirement or
resignation) before December 31, 2003;
``(v) shall not be a basis for payment, and shall not be
included in the computation, of any other type of Government
benefit; and
``(vi) shall not be taken into account in determining the
amount of any severance pay to which the employee may be
entitled under section 5595 based on any other separation.
``(3)(A) The head of the agency, prior to obligating any
resources for voluntary separation incentive payments under
this subsection, shall submit to the House and Senate
Committees on Armed Services and the Committee on
Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Government Reform of the House of Representatives a strategic
plan outlining the intended use of such incentive payments
and a proposed organizational chart for the agency once such
incentive payments have been completed.
``(B) The agency's plan shall include--
``(i) any positions and functions to be reduced or
eliminated, identified by organizational unit, geographic
location, occupational category and grade level;
``(ii) the number and amounts of voluntary separation
incentive payments to be offered;
``(iii) the steps to be taken to maintain continuity of
skills among the agency's employees or to adapt the skills of
the agency's workforce to the emerging technologies critical
to the agency's needs and goals; and
``(iv) a description of how the agency will operate without
the eliminated positions and functions.
``(4) In addition to any other payments which it is
required to make under subchapter III of chapter 83 the
agency shall remit to the Office of Personnel Management for
deposit in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of
the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund an amount
equal to be determined in accordance with paragraph (5).
``(5)(A) The amount remitted to the Treasury shall be the
sum determined as follows. First, apply the following
percentages to the final basic pay of each employee who is
covered under subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 to
whom a voluntary separation incentive has been paid under
this section and who retires on an early retirement or an
immediate annuity:
``(i) 19 percent in the case of an employee covered under
subchapter III of chapter 83 who takes an early retirement;
or
``(ii) 58 percent in the case of an employee covered under
subchapter III of chapter 83 who takes an immediate annuity.
``(B) Second, the sum of the amounts determined under
clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (A) shall be reduced,
but not below zero, by the sum determined by applying the
following percentages to the final basic pay of each employee
who is covered under chapter 84 to whom a voluntary
separation incentive has been paid under this section and who
resigns or retires on an early retirement or immediate
annuity, or an employee covered under subchapter III of
chapter 83 to whom a voluntary separation incentive has been
paid under this section and who resigns:
``(i) 419 percent in the case of an employee covered under
subchapter III of chapter 83 who resigns;
``(ii) 17 percent in the case of an employee covered under
chapter 84 who takes an early retirement;
``(iii) 8 percent in the case of an employee covered under
chapter 84 who retires on an immediate annuity; and
``(iv) 211 percent in the case of an employee covered under
chapter 84 who resigns.
``(6) Under regulations prescribed by the Office of
Personnel Management, the agency may elect to make the
remittances required under paragraph (4) in installments over
a period not to exceed 3 years. In such case, the percentages
to be applied under paragraph (5) shall be those determined
by the Office as are necessary to equalize the net present
value of retirement benefits payable to employees who retire
or resign with a separation incentive under this subsection
and the net present value of retirement benefits those
employees would have received if they had continued to work
and then retired or resigned at the standard rates observed
for the workforce.''.
(b) Retirement Under Civil Service Retirement System.--
Section 8336 of such title is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(o)(1) An employee of the Department of the Air Force who
is separated from the service voluntarily as a result of a
determination described in paragraph (2) after completing 25
years of service or after becoming 50 years of age and
completing 20 years of service is entitled to an annuity.
``(2) A determination under this paragraph is a
determination by the Secretary of the Air Force that the
separation described in paragraph (1) is necessary for the
purpose of maintaining continuity of skills among employees
of the Department of the Air Force and adapting the skills of
the workforce of the Department to emerging technologies
critical to the needs and goals of the Department.''.
(c) Retirement Under Federal Employees' Retirement
System.--Section 8414 of such title is amended by adding at
the end the following new subsection:
``(d)(1) An employee of the Department of the Air Force who
is separated from the service voluntarily as a result of a
determination described in paragraph (2) after completing 25
years of service or after becoming 50 years of age and
completing 20 years of service is entitled to an annuity.
``(2) A determination under this paragraph is a
determination by the Secretary of the Air Force that the
separation described in paragraph (1) is necessary for the
purpose of

[[Page H3282]]

maintaining continuity of skills among employees of the
Department of the Air Force and adapting the skills of the
workforce of the Department to emerging technologies critical
to the needs and goals of the Department.''.
(d) Reports.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall submit
annual reports to the House and Senate Committees on Armed
Services and the Committee on Governmental Affairs of the
Senate and the Committee on Government Reform of the House of
Representatives describing the use of the authority provided
in the amendments made by this section and the bases for
using such authority with respect to the employees chosen.
(e) Limitation of Applicability.--The authority to provide
separation pay and retirement benefits under the amendments
made by this section--
(1) may be exercised with respect to not more than 1000
civilian employees of the Department of the Air Force during
each calendar year; and
(2) shall expire on December 31, 2003.

Amendment No. 24

Offered by Mr. Hunter of California

At the end of the title XII (page 338, after line 13),
insert the following new section:

SEC. 1205. NATO FAIR BURDENSHARING.

(a) Report on Costs of Operation Allied Force.--The
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed
Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of
the House of Representatives a report on the costs to the
United States of the 78-day air campaign known as Operation
Allied Force conducted against the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia during the period from March 24 through June 9,
1999. The report shall include the following:
(1) The costs of ordnance expended, fuel consumed, and
personnel.
(2) The estimated cost of the reduced service life of
United States aircraft and other systems participating in the
operation.
(3) Whether and how the United States is being compensated
by other North Atlantic Treaty Organization member nations
for the costs of Operation Allied Force, including a detailed
accounting of the estimated monetary value of peacekeeping
and reconstruction activities undertaken by those member
nations to partially or wholly compensate the United States
for the costs of such operation.
(b) Report on Cost Sharing of Future NATO Operations.--
Whenever the North Atlantic Treaty Organization undertakes a
military operation with the participation of the United
States, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report
describing--
(1) how the costs of that operation are to be equitably
distributed among the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
member nations; or
(2) if the costs of the operation are not equitably
distributed, but are to be borne disproportionately by the
United States, how the United States is to be compensated by
other North Atlantic Treaty Organization member nations.
(c) Time for Submission of Report.--A report under
subsection (b) shall be submitted not later than 30 days
after the beginning of the military operation, except that
the Secretary of Defense may submit the report at a later
time if the Secretary determines that such a delay is
necessary to avoid an undue burden to ongoing operations.
(d) Applicability.--Subsection (b) shall apply only with
respect to military operations begun after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

Amendment No. 25

Offered by Mr. Skelton of Missouri

At the end of title XII (page 338, after line 13), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 1205. GAO STUDY ON VALUE OF UNITED STATES MILITARY
ENGAGEMENT IN EUROPE.

(a) Comptroller General Study.--The Comptroller General
shall conduct a study assessing the value to the United
States and its national security interests gained from the
engagement of United States forces in Europe and from
military strategies used to shape the international security
environment in Europe.
(b) Matters To Be Included.--The study shall include an
assessment of the following matters:
(1) The value to United States security interests from
having forces stationed in Europe and assigned to areas of
regional conflict such as Bosnia and Kosovo.
(2) The value in sharing the risks, responsibilities, and
costs of deploying United States forces with the forces of
European allies.
(3) The costs associated with stationing United States
forces in Europe and with assigning them to areas of regional
conflict.
(4) The value of the following kinds of contributions made
by European allies:
(A) Financial contributions.
(B) Contributions of military personnel and units.
(C) Contributions of nonmilitary personnel, such as medical
personnel, police officers, judicial officers, and other
civic officials.
(D) Contributions in kind that may be used for
infrastructure building or activities that contribute to
regional stability, whether in lieu of or in addition to
military-related contributions.
(5) The value of a forward United States military presence
in compensating for existing shortfalls of air and sea lift
capability in the event of further regional conflict in
Europe or the Middle East.
(6) The value of humanitarian and reconstruction assistance
provided by European countries and by the United States in
maintaining or improving regional stability.
(c) Report.--The Comptroller General shall submit a report
on the results of the study to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives not later
than March 1, 2001.

Amendment No. 26

Offered by Mrs. Fowler of Florida

At the end of title XII (page 338, after line 13), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 1205. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING NONCOMPLIANCE WITH LAW
REGARDING OVERSIGHT OF COMMUNIST CHINESE
MILITARY COMPANIES OPERATING IN THE UNITED
STATES.

It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense
has not complied with the requirements of section 1237(b) of
the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization for Fiscal
Year 1999 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note) to publish and update a list
of Communist Chinese military companies operating in the
United States. Congress expects that the Secretary, working
with such other executive branch officials as necessary to
comply fully with such section, will immediately comply with
the provisions of that section. Furthermore, Congress notes
that any requirement to assess information within the purview
of other Federal departments and agencies in order to comply
with that section was expressly anticipated by the
requirement for interagency consultation provided in
paragraph (3) of that section and that such consultation
process ought to have been completed well before the mid-
January 1999 deadline specified for the initial publication
under that section.

Amendment No. 28

Offered by Mr. Ryun of Kansas

At the end of part I of subtitle C of title XXVIII (page
412, after line 24), insert the following new section:

SEC. __. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT RILEY MILITARY RESERVATION,
KANSAS.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may
convey, without consideration, to the State of Kansas, all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a
parcel of real property, including any improvements thereon,
consisting of approximately 70 acres at Fort Riley Military
Reservation, Fort Riley, Kansas. The preferred site is
adjacent to the Fort Riley Military Reservation boundary,
along the north side of Huebner Road across from the First
Territorial Capitol of Kansas Historical Site Museum.
(b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary of the Army and the Director of the Kansas
Commission on Veterans Affairs.
(c) Exception From Screening Requirement.--The Secretary
may make the conveyance required by subsection (a) without
regard to the requirement under section 2696 of title 10,
United States Code, that the property be screened for further
Federal use in accordance with the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 471 et seq.).
(d) Conditions of Conveyance.--The conveyance required by
subsection (a) shall be subject to the conditions that--
(1) the State of Kansas use the property conveyed solely
for purposes of establishing and maintaining a State-operated
veterans cemetery; and
(2) all costs associated with the conveyance, including the
cost of relocating water and electric utilities should such
relocation be determined necessary based on the survey
described in subsection (b), shall be borne by the State of
Kansas.
(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary of the
Army may require such additional terms and conditions in
connection with the conveyance required by subsection (a) as
the Secretary of the Army determines appropriate to protect
the interests of the United States.

Amendment No. 29

Offered by Mr. Baird of Washington

At the end of subtitle A of title XXVIII (page 412, after
line 24), insert the following new section:

SEC. 2840. LAND CONVEYANCES, FORT VANCOUVER BARRACKS,
VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON.

(a) Conveyance of West Barracks.--The Secretary of the Army
may convey, without consideration, to the City of Vancouver,
Washington (in this section referred to as the ``City''), all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a
parcel of real property encompassing 19 structures at
Vancouver Barracks, Washington, which are identified by the
Army using numbers between 602 and 676 and are known as the
west barracks.
(b) Conveyance of East Barracks.--Upon vacation, or
agreement to vacate, by the Army Reserve and the Army
National Guard of the parcel of real property at Vancouver
Barracks encompassing 10 structures, which are identified by
the Army using numbers between 704 and 786 and the numbers
987, 989, 991, and 993, and are known as the east barracks,
the Secretary may convey, without

[[Page H3283]]

consideration, to the City all right, title, and interest of
the United States in and to the parcel.
(c) Modification and Conveyance of Reversionary Interest.--
(1) The Secretary may modify the reversionary interest that
was retained by the United States when a parcel of real
property at Vancouver Barracks was conveyed to the Washington
State Department of Transportation to remove the condition
that the real property be used only for highway-related
purposes.
(2) The Secretary may convey, without consideration, to the
City the reversionary interest referred to in paragraph (1),
modified as provided by such paragraph. Upon conveyance, the
Secretary shall execute and file in the appropriate office an
amended deed or other appropriate instrument effectuating the
modification and conveyance of the reversionary interest.
(d) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property authorized to be conveyed
under subsections (a) and (b) shall be determined by surveys
satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army. The cost of any
such survey shall be borne by the City.
(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary of the
Army may require such additional terms and conditions in
connection with a conveyance under this section as the
Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests of
the United States.

Amendment No. 30

Offered by Mr. Hefley of Colorado

At the end of part III of subtitle C of title XXVIII (page
430, after line 15), insert the following new section:

SEC. __. LAND CONVEYANCE, LOWRY AIR FORCE BASE, COLORADO.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Air Force
may convey, without consideration, or lease upon such terms
as the Secretary considers appropriate, to the Lowry
Redevelopment Authority (in this section referred to as the
``Authority'') all right, title, and interest of the United
States in and to seven parcels of real property, including
improvements thereon, consisting of approximately 23 acres at
the former Lowry Air Force Base, Colorado, for the purpose of
permitting the Authority to use the property in furtherance
of economic development and other public purposes.
(b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of real property to be conveyed or leased under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by
the Authority.
(c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with a conveyance or lease under subsection (a) as the
Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests of
the United States.

Amendment No. 31

Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington

In section 3131 of the bill (page 462, lines 4 through 6),
amend the heading of such section to read as follows:

SEC. 3131. FUNDING FOR TERMINATION COSTS FOR RIVER PROTECTION
PROJECT, RICHLAND, WASHINGTON.

In section 3131 of the bill (page 462, lines 9 through 11),
strike ``relating to'' and all that follows through
``Richland, Washington'' and insert the following: ``relating
to the River Protection Project, Richland, Washington (as
designated by section 3135)''.
At the end of title XXXI (page 467, after line 11), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 3135. DESIGNATION OF RIVER PROTECTION PROJECT, RICHLAND,
WASHINGTON.

The tank waste remediation system environmental project,
Richland, Washington, shall be known and designated as the
``River Protection Project''. Any reference to that project
in any law, regulation, map, document, record, or other paper
of the United States shall be considered to be a reference to
the River Protection Project.

Amendment No. 32

Offered by Mr. Hayes of North Carolina

At the end of title XXXI (page 467, after line 12), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 3135. ADJUSTMENT OF COMPOSITE THEORETICAL PERFORMANCE
LEVELS FOR POST-SHIPMENT VERIFICATION REPORTS
ON ADVANCED SUPERCOMPUTERS SALES TO CERTAIN
FOREIGN NATIONS.

Section 3157 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1998 (50 U.S.C. App. 2404 note) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) Adjustment of Performance Levels.--Whenever a new
composite theoretical performance level is established under
section 1211(d), that level shall apply for the purposes of
subsection (a) of this section in lieu of the level set forth
in subsection (a).''.

Amendment No. 33

Offered by Mr. Udall of Colorado

At the end of title XXXI (page 467, after line 11), insert
the following new section:

SEC. __. EMPLOYEE INCENTIVES FOR EMPLOYEES AT CLOSURE PROJECT
FACILITIES.

(a) Authority To Provide Incentives.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, the Secretary of Energy may provide
to any eligible employee of the Department of Energy one or
more of the incentives described in subsection (d).
(b) Eligible Employees.--An individual is an eligible
employee of the Department of Energy for purposes of this
section if the individual--
(1) has worked continuously at a closure facility for at
least two years;
(2) is an employee (as that term is defined in section
2105(a) of title 5, United States Code);
(3) has a fully satisfactory or equivalent performance
rating during the most recent performance period and is not
subject to an adverse notice regarding conduct; and
(4) meets any other requirement or condition under
subsection (d) for the incentive which is provided the
employee under this section.
(c) Closure Facility Defined.--For purposes of this
section, the term ``closure facility'' means a Department of
Energy facility at which the Secretary is carrying out a
closure project selected under section 3143 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (42 U.S.C.
7274n).
(d) Incentives.--The incentives that the Secretary may
provide under this section are the following:
(1) The right to accumulate annual leave provided by
section 6303 of title 5, United States Code, for use in
succeeding years until it totals not more than 90 days, or
not more than 720 hours based on a standard work week, at the
beginning of the first full biweekly pay period, or
corresponding period for an employee who is not paid on the
basis of biweekly pay periods, occurring in a year, except
that--
(A) any annual leave that remains unused when an employee
transfers to a position in a department or agency of the
Federal Government shall be liquidated upon the transfer by
payment to the employee of a lump sum for leave in excess of
30 days, or in excess of 240 hours based on a standard work
week; and
(B) upon separation from service, annual leave accumulated
under this paragraph shall be treated as any other
accumulated annual leave is treated.
(2) The right to be paid a retention allowance in a lump
sum in compliance with paragraphs (1) and (2) of section
5754(b) of title 5, United States Code, if the employee meets
the requirements of section 5754(a) of that title, except
that the retention allowance may exceed 25 percent, but may
not be more than 30 percent, of the employee's rate of basic
pay.
(e) Agreement.--An eligible employee of the Department of
Energy provided an incentive under this section shall enter
into an agreement with the Secretary to remain employed at
the closure facility at which the employee is employed as of
the date of the agreement until a specific date or for a
specific period of time.
(f) Violation of Agreement.--(1) Except as provided under
paragraph (3), an eligible employee of the Department of
Energy who violates an agreement under subsection (e), or is
dismissed for cause, shall forfeit eligibility for any
incentives under this section as of the date of the violation
or dismissal, as the case may be.
(2) Except as provided under paragraph (3), an eligible
employee of the Department of Energy who is paid a retention
allowance under subsection (d)(2) and who violates an
agreement under subsection (e), or is dismissed for cause,
before the end of the period or date of employment agreed
upon under such agreement shall refund to the United States
an amount that bears the same ratio to the aggregate amount
so paid to or received by the employee as the unserved part
of such employment bears to the total period of employment
agreed upon under such agreement.
(3) The Secretary may waive the applicability of paragraph
(1) or (2) to an employee otherwise covered by such paragraph
if the Secretary determines that there is good and sufficient
reason for the waiver.
(g) Report.--The Secretary shall include in each report on
a closure project under section 3143(h) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 a report on
the incentives, if any, provided under this section with
respect to the project for the period covered by such report.
(h) Authority With Respect to Health Coverage.--Section
8905a(d)(5)(A) of title 5, United States Code (as added by
section 1106 of the Veterans Millennium Health Care and
Benefits Act (Public Law 106-117; 113 Stat. 1598)), is
amended by inserting after ``readjustment'' the following:
``, or a voluntary or involuntary separation from a
Department of Energy position at a Department of Energy
facility at which the Secretary is carrying out a closure
project selected under section 3143 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (42 U.S.C. 7274n)''.
(i) Authority With Respect to Voluntary Separations.--(1)
The Secretary of Energy may--
(A) separate from service any employee at a Department of
Energy facility at which the Secretary is carrying out a
closure project selected under section 3143 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (42 U.S.C.
7274n) who volunteers to be separated under this subparagraph
even though the employee is not otherwise subject to
separation due to a reduction in force; and
(B) for each employee voluntarily separated under
subparagraph (A), retain an employee in a similar position
who would otherwise be separated due to a reduction in force.
(2) The separation of an employee under paragraph (1)(A)
shall be treated as an involuntary separation due to a
reduction in force.
(3) An employee with critical knowledge and skills (as
defined by the Secretary) may

[[Page H3284]]

not participate in a voluntary separation under paragraph
(1)(A) if the Secretary determines that such participation
would impair the performance of the mission of the Department
of Energy.

Amendment No. 34

Offered by Mr. Lampson of Texas

At the end of title XXXIV (page 474, after line 8), add the
following new section:

SEC. 3404. AUTHORITY TO CONVEY OFFSHORE DRILL RIG OCEAN STAR.

(a) Authority To Convey.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation (referred
to in this section as the ``Secretary'') may, without
consideration, convey all right, title, and interest of the
United States Government in and to the offshore drill rig
OCEAN STAR, to the Offshore Rig Museum, Inc., a nonprofit
corporation established under the laws of the State of Texas
and doing business as the Offshore Energy Center (in this
section referred to as ``the recipient'').
(2) Release of associated interests.--As part of the
conveyance, the Secretary shall release any encumbrance and
forgive any promissory note or loan held by the United States
with respect to the drill rig.
(b) Conditions.--Any conveyance, release, or forgiveness
under subsection (a) shall be subject to the following
conditions:
(1) The recipient must have at least 3 consecutive years
experience in operating a drill rig as a nonprofit museum.
(2) Before the effective date of the conveyance, release,
and forgiveness, the recipient must agree--
(A) to continue to use the drill rig as part of a museum to
demonstrate to the public the recovery of offshore energy
resources;
(B) to make the drill rig available to the Government if
the Secretary requires use of the drill rig for a national
emergency;
(C) that if the recipient no longer requires the drill rig
for use as a museum dedicated to demonstrating to the public
the recovery of offshore energy resources, the recipient
shall, at the discretion of the Secretary, convey the drill
rig to the Government; and
(D) to any other conditions the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(3) The drill rig may not be used for commercial
transportation or commercial drilling and production of
offshore energy resources.

Amendment No. 35

Offered by Mr. Bryant of Tennessee

Strike section 554 (page 148, line 20, and all that follows
through page 149, line 12) and insert the following:

SEC. 554. CLARIFICATION AND REAFFIRMATION OF THE INTENT OF
CONGRESS REGARDING THE COURT-MARTIAL SENTENCE
OF CONFINEMENT FOR LIFE WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR
PAROLE.

(a) Clarification of Effect of Sentence.--(1) Section
856a(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 56a of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended--
(1) by striking ``unless--'' and inserting ``unless the
sentence (or a portion of the sentence including that part of
the sentence providing for confinement for life without
eligibility for parole)--'';
(2) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) is set aside or otherwise modified as a result of--
``(A) action taken under section 860 of this title (article
60) by the convening authority or another person authorized
to act under that section; or
``(B) any other action taken during post-trial procedure
and review under any other provision of subchapter IX;
(3) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the sentence''; and
(4) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) a reprieve or pardon by the President.''.
(b) Officers Sentenced to Dismissal.--Subsection (b) of
section 871 of such title (article 71) is amended by
inserting after the second sentence the following new
sentence: ``However, if the sentence extends to confinement
for life without eligibility for parole, that part of the
sentence providing for confinement for life without
eligibility for parole may not be commuted, remitted, or
suspended.''.
(c) Action By Convening Authority After Sentence Ordered
Executed.--Subsection (d) of that section is amended by
adding at the end the following new sentence: ``In the case
of a sentence that extends to confinement for life without
eligibility for parole, that part of the sentence extending
to confinement for life without eligibility for parole may
not be suspended after it is ordered executed.''.
(d) Secretarial Authority To Remit or Suspend Sentence.--
Section 874(a) of such title (article 74(a)) is amended by
inserting before the period at the end the following: ``or,
in the case of a sentence that extends to confinement for
life without eligibility for parole, that part of the
sentence that extends to confinement for life without
eligibility for parole''.
(e) Parole.--Section 952 of that title is amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Parole may not be granted for an offender serving a
sentence of confinement for life without eligibility for
parole.''.
(f) Remission or Suspension of Sentence.--Section 953 of
such title is amended by inserting in paragraph (1) after
``selected offenders'' the following: ``other than offenders
serving a sentence of confinement for life without
eligibility for parole''.

Mr. SPENCE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the modifications be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 503, the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Skelton) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence).
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter) for the purposes of a colloquy.
Mr. VITTER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to discuss with the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Bateman) whether the committee was able to consider
the issue of the Information Technology Center located in New Orleans,
Louisiana.
Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. VITTER. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman, the mission of the Information Technology
Center has recently been brought to my attention. This Center plays an
important role in the development of information technology systems for
the Navy and for the Department of Defense. For the last several years,
the committee has been urging the Department of Defense to move away
from military service specific, or stovepipe computer systems. The
Information Technology Center, or ITC, is an example of new and
innovative thinking on the part of the Navy.
Currently, ITC is examining military personnel information technology
systems and is bringing an enterprise-wide approach to the development
of Navy Systems Integrated Personnel Systems as well as the Defense
Integrated Military Human Resources Systems. These major undertakings
require innovative acquisition techniques, modular contracting,
commercial off-the-shelf technology, as well as the consolidation and
integration of existing manpower and personnel information systems.
I understand that to assist the Navy in proceeding with this
worthwhile project additional funding is required. Unfortunately, no
funds were authorized in the bill before us. It is my understanding
that the other body has recognized the importance of ITC and has
included additional funding.
I would say to the gentleman from Louisiana that I will do everything
I can to ensure that the conference committee on this bill endorses
this important program.
Mr. VITTER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman
very much, and I also want to pass along the thanks of the gentleman
from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) and that of the gentleman from Louisiana
(Mr. Jefferson). We all appreciate the gentleman's speaking on behalf
of the Information Technology Center and pledging his support, and we
all look forward to working with him and other members of the
committee.

{time} 1715

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York (Ms. Velazquez).
(Ms. VELAZQUEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment in
cooperation with the gentleman from Missouri (Chairman Talent) to
protect and support our Nation's small businesses.
Mr. Chairman, we all talk about what a strong economy we have; and no
one disputes the fact that small businesses are, in large part,
responsible for this. It is almost cliche to say that small businesses
are the backbone not just of our economy, but they also help to form
the foundation of the cities and towns we call home.
America looks to small businesses to be the innovators and problem
solvers everywhere, everywhere except in the case of the Federal
Government. We are currently seeing a disturbing downward trend in the
number of Federal prime contracts awarded to small businesses.

[[Page H3285]]

As an example, from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 1999 the
number of prime contracts awarded to small businesses by the Department
of Defense has decreased by over 34 percent; the number of contracts
awarded to minority-owned firms has decreased by over 25 percent; and
most dramatically, the number of contracts awarded to woman-owned
businesses have decreased by over 38 percent.
These trends have been so alarming that the gentleman from Missouri
(Chairman Talent) and I have held two hearings on this issue in the
first half of this Congress alone. During these hearings, we have found
that the move by the Federal Government to streamline and reduce costs
has resulted not in saving money, but in the unintended consequence of
harming small businesses.
There is no truth, as far as businesses are concerned, that bigger is
necessarily better. The Department of Defense, the largest purchaser of
goods and services in the entire U.S. Government, has increasingly
relied on the practice of contract bundling to the exclusion of small
businesses. It has struggled with the dual roles of supporting the war
fighter and awarding prime contracts to small businesses.
To solve this problem, the Velazquez-Talent amendment will direct the
Secretary to conduct a comprehensive study of contract bundling and its
effect on small businesses. To assist in this study, the Secretary,
working with the General Accounting Office, is to develop a database
containing information on all bundled contracts.
In a hearing before the Committee on Small Business in November of
last year, the Department agreed to commission a study of contract
bundling. Within 2 months it became evident that the Department has no
data to conduct an accurate and comprehensive bundling study. This
amendment helps the Department keep its promise.
Mr. Chairman, we are all aware that Federal agencies are operating in
a do-more-with-less environment. We must ensure that the Federal
marketplace is efficient. However, we must also provide for a Federal
marketplace that includes the small business community. This amendment
will go a long way to begin to level the playing field for small
businesses.
I would like to thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman
Spence) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking
Democratic member, for their support of this amendment and our Nation's
small businesses.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak very briefly on an amendment that
is en bloc that I have offered, No. 25, which requests a GAO study of
the value of the United States' military engagement in Europe.
Mr. Chairman, much has been said about burdensharing. Much has been
said about American interests and troops being stationed in Europe. In
an effort to understand where we are today, were we to look back in
history, and had American and allied forces formed together as we have
today in the NATO alliance, the Second World War would never have come
to pass.
I think that a full study explaining the definitions and all the
ramifications and include our Armed Forces and our strategies and the
attempt to shape the international environment, a study such as this
should be included.
I urge the adoption of the en block, which, of course, includes No.
25.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) for the purposes of a colloquy.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I speak in reference to Amendment No. 11
that makes technical corrections regarding the Army National Guard
Selective Reserve, the Active Guard and Reserve, which are referred to
as the AGR and the dual status military technicians regarding the end
strengths for fiscal year 2001. Those technical corrections will be
made.
I would like to enter into a colloquy with the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter), chairman of the Subcommittee on Military
Procurement.
As co-chair of the Guard and Reserve Caucus, along with the gentleman
from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), the chairman of the committee, along
with the ranking member and the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter)
it permits the caucus to work with Members to put together their
concerns regarding funding the Reserve excepts along with the Guard.
They permit us to put together these packages and then deliver to their
committee.
We extend to our colleagues great compliments for accepting the first
$250 million of the NGRE list. NGRE stands for the National Guard
Reserve Equipment List. We worked very hard this year, working with the
committee, to address the proportionality questions.
In this amendment, we have a technical correction with regard to what
came out of the full committee regarding some of the funding, whether
it was $52 million that goes directly to the Air Guard or was that
really meant for the Army Reserve.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman, first for
working with us here on the floor, but, secondly, for chairing this
caucus, along with the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), who
have put in a lot of long hours working with the Guard and the Reserve
trying to develop requirements and ultimately coming up with
recommendations for the Subcommittee for Military Procurement.
Let me tell my colleagues what we worked for this year. We worked for
parity. We did not have a lot of money. We had right at $300 million to
spend on Guard and Reserve elements. The request we got from the
gentleman and lots of our colleagues was let us have parity, let us
have an even distribution of this money between the Guard and the
Reserve, let us not have it all for the Guard or the Reserve.
I agreed to do that. I gave my word on it. And the gentleman put
together, along with the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), a
package of $250 million. We added the $50 million that we had available
to that. So we came to a total of about $300 million.
We split it down the middle. In fact, we gave a little bit more to
the Guard, about $158 million to the Guard, $153 million to the
Reserve, but right down the middle between the two.
When we were putting the elements together in putting our bill
together, our office made a mistake and we put the KC-135 reengining
kits on the Guard side even though we had them in the reserve side when
we put the bill together. That would have made the bill very lopsided
for the Guard. It would have then gone to $218 million for the Guard,
only $93 million to the Reserve.
I represented to the committee and to the subcommittee and to the
gentleman that we were doing an even split. I gave him my word. And, of
course, when we tell somebody that we are going to do something and we
have a very thick bill, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) relied
on my giving him that representation.
So, in this technical amendment, we are moving that item, the KC-135
reengining, the $52 million, back into the air reserve account, which
is where we started out.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, as I understand, that is
two KC-135 engine kits at $52 million.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield,
that is right. It is two KC-135 reengining kits. So if some folks that
thought they were going to get those and not are not going to get them,
give me a phone call. Our office made a mistake on that. We put the
items in the wrong column. But we fixed it now.
For people who are proponents of both the Guard and Reserve, what we
did again this year was try to give parity. We tried to give an even
split on the few dollars that we have. We have lots more requirements.
We are going to have to wait for another budget to get to those.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I want to thank the
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) again for working with us. He is
absolutely correct with regard to parity. We have enjoyed our working
relationship with the Guard and Reserve components. I look forward to
working with the gentleman in conference.

[[Page H3286]]

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Hill).
(Mr. HILL of Indiana asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. HILL of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this en block
package and urge my colleagues to support it as well.
This package includes a couple of amendments that will help free up
money for economic development in towns with old military
installations. All communities should be able to use closed facilities
as engines of economic growth. This is simply a matter of fairness.
I, too, have a closed military installation in my district. It is
called the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant.
Unfortunately, under current law, some communities that lose military
installations are treated differently than others.
Yesterday, I testified before the Committee on Rules about an
amendment that I believe levels the playing field. My amendment would
authorize the Secretary of Defense to convey former military
installations in property communities free of charge. Of course, I hope
that my amendment will be made in order. But I am pleased that we are
helping the communities in this bill, and I urge my colleagues to
support it.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) for the purpose of a colloquy.
(Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the
chairman for including my amendment regarding the Office of River
Protection in the en bloc amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence)
for yielding me the time.
Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) is aware,
the Office of River Protection at the Hanford site in my district is
currently engaged in the world's largest and most pressing
environmental cleanup project.
I would like to first thank the gentleman for his leadership on this
project through the creation of the Office of River Protection in the
Fiscal Year 1999 National Defense Authorization Act.
As the gentleman is aware, the Office of River Protection was created
to manage the retrieval and treatment of waste at Hanford by removing
the many layers of bureaucracy that impede cleanup and transfer
authority back to the site. This model has proven itself to be an
effective initiative because local experts have the knowledge and the
authority to ensure the timely treatment of this waste.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is correct to point out the
very excellent model that was created by his amendment to transfer
authority back to the site. Since its inception, the Office of River
Protection has effectively managed the complex problems without layers
of bureaucracy that very often stymie what we are looking for, and that
is cleanup.
I am committed to the success of the Office of River Protection and
congressional intent that the manager of the Office report directly to
the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.
I would also like to commend the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Hastings) on his tireless efforts on behalf of his constituents
impacted by the Hanford site. The committee values his input on how
best to proceed with this cleanup project.
If I might, also, I just want to thank the chairman of the full
committee, too, for his support in passing the football off to us and
letting us run with it and put together the best program we could. That
is kind of the trademark of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spence), whose quiet strength has led us through this markup and floor
process. But I thank the gentleman for everything he has done.
There has been a lot of confusion at Hanford with the contractor that
is now leaving rather abruptly from this project. There is some
confusion in the Department of Energy. But there is one guy whose
steady hand on the helm of this ship has been moving it steadily
forward and will continue to move the Hanford site forward to
successful cleanup, and that is the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Hastings). I thank the gentleman for what he is doing.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I, too, want to thank the
chairman for his work on this.
Mr. Chairman, as my colleagues know, under the President's fiscal
year 2000 budget request, the privatization account that we were
alluding to at Hanford would receive $450 million. However, due to the
recent developments that the gentleman mentioned with the lead
contractor, privatization, unfortunately, is no longer a viable option
at this time.
In light of these developments, the Department of Energy has
identified a new path forward to ensure the timely cleanup of the
waste. As a result of this new path forward, the Department identified
and updated funding requirement of $370 million for fiscal year 2001 to
fully fund the necessary design and long-lead procurement to keep the
project on schedule.
Mr. Chairman, I ask the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter)
whether he concurs with this.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would continue to yield,
yes. Over the last 2 weeks, largely as a result of his leadership, the
Department of Energy has identified a need of $370 million in required
work to keep the project on schedule in fiscal year 2001.

{time} 1730

What the gentleman from Washington basically asked us to do was to
keep this thing going and make sure that the design and engineering
work continued, that the procurement that was necessary was allowed to
take place and that we had a contingency fund available so that we
could keep the project moving forward and keep the commitments that the
Federal Government has made to Washington State. As a result of the
gentleman's leadership and direction, we put those numbers together and
indeed did come up with the $370 million requirement that is going to
be needed to keep the project going for the next 12 months.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for his remarks.
This issue is not confined just to my district in central Washington.
In fact it is the whole Pacific Northwest. I would like to ask the
gentleman if he will continue to work on the fiscal year 2001 funding
level when we go to conference with the other body for the necessary
$370 million of design and long-lead procurement needs for this
project.
Mr. HUNTER. If the gentleman will continue to yield, absolutely we
will continue to press for that figure, make sure that that amount of
money is available. As the gentleman knows, there is money that is in
the first $491 million that was a tranche of money that was approved
initially for the BNFL contractor and that contract is now no longer
with us. So there is some question in DOE as to how much is carryover
and how much is not carryover, but we do agree because of the
gentleman's leadership that $370 million is needed. I will work in the
conference to make sure that we get that.
As the gentleman knows, the Department is currently unable to give us
a firm funding requirement for 2001 due to the fact that they have
ongoing contract negotiations right now that resulted from this new
path that they are taking. I just want to assure the gentleman I will
continue to work with him in conference and we will make sure that we
fully fund that $370 million required for this work. So under the
steady leadership of the gentleman from Washington, these other
problems notwithstanding, we are going to continue to move the Hanford
cleanup forward.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for that
commitment.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, section 3131 of the legislation provides a
waiver of the requirement to accumulate a reserve for termination
liability funding. Will the gentleman work with my office and with the
Department of Energy in conference to assure that this

[[Page H3287]]

section is clarified to meet the needs that we are talking about
within the River Protection Project in the future?
Mr. HUNTER. I will be very happy to work with the gentleman on this
issue and make sure the section is carried out as intended. Again, the
gentleman from Washington's guidance and advice is very important to
our committee and our subcommittee. We thank him for his leadership on
this issue.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman very much for his
commitment. I thank the chairman for his commitment, also, on that.
Their assurances to my constituents in central Washington and to all of
us in the Pacific Northwest that the final legislation will contain
full funding that has been identified for the work required this year
is appreciated.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
For the benefit of those who do not understand the purpose of the en
bloc amendments, I might briefly explain that we had about 101
amendments offered to our bill. Many of these were noncontroversial,
did not require a vote, and so we put them into the en bloc category.
Others, we offered some suggestions as to how they could amend their
amendment and they were accepted and we were able then to accept these
without controversy and without vote, all of this with consultation
with our ranking member the gentleman from Missouri. This has been
agreed upon by both sides.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I am in strong support of the amendment
to H.R. 4205 offered by the Ranking Minority Member on the Committee on
Small Business, Nydia Velazquez. It has come to my attention, as a
member of the Committee on Small Business, that the Department of
Defense, to the exclusion of the growing number of small business
owners in our nation, has relied on the practice of contract bundling.
Furthermore, the Department has no objective criteria to justify the
use of this mechanism. The result of this bundling is nothing less than
devastating to small business, and additionally translates into higher
costs to taxpayers due to the decreased competition.
The amendment offered by Ms. Velazquez expands the contract bundling
study proposed in H.R. 4205 to require a Department-wide study on
contract bundling. It further requires the Department to develop with
GAO a database to monitor the effects of contract bundling. I am
confident that this amendment will assist small business in combating
the many problems relating to contract bundling.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this Member rises in strong support of
the enbloc amendment to H.R. 4205, and in particular thanks to the
Chairman for incorporating this Member's amendment addressing the Asia-
Pacific Center for Security Studies.
H.R. 4205 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to operate regional
centers for security studies. Among those centers are the Marshall
Center in Garmish, Germany, and the Asia-Pacific Center in Hawaii.
H.R. 4205 provides the Marshall Center with a waiver authority for
reimbursement of the costs of conferences, seminars, courses or
instruction, or similar educational activities for certain military
officers and civilian officials within the European theater. It does
not provide such a waiver authority for military officers and civilian
officials in the Asia-Pacific region.
Countries in the Asia-Pacific region, even perhaps more than those in
Europe, represent the entire economic spectrum. Many countries in the
Asia-Pacific region that would greatly benefit from such education can
not afford to send their officers or civilian officials. Bangladesh
comes to mind, a country that provides peacekeepers as a major source
of revenue can not afford to send their military officers or civilian
officials to the Center where they would be exposed to our way of
integrated security. We lose a national security objective by not being
able to interact with these officers or civilian officials in an
educational open forum. It is important that all our allies, regardless
of their economic ability to do so, can attend and interact with not
only our own forces, but with our other allies and friendly countries.
This Member would observe there is no mandated additional costs
associated with this amendment. While the Secretary has the authority
to waive these costs, as such, the costs must be absorbed within the
Centers' budget. It provides for a management decision by the
Secretary, not a budgetary burden on the American taxpayers.
It is important to stress here that countries that are prohibited by
statute from receiving assistance funds will not be allowed to attend
the Asia-Pacific Center. Military personnel of Cambodia and Burma, for
instance, where direct government-to-government assistance of any kind
is prohibited, would not be allowed to attend, much less receive any
such waiver. Military personnel of the People's Republic of China,
under the Tiananmen sanctions would not be allowed to attend. There are
real safeguards in place to ensure such countries do not have the
opportunity to attend the Center.
Mr. Chairman, this Member urges adoption of the Managers En Bloc
amendment.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hall-Hobson
amendment offered as part of the Chairman's en bloc amendment. The
amendment creates a 3-year program permitting the Air Force to offer
early outs and retirement incentives of up to $25,000 for as many as
1,000 civilian employees each year for the purpose of maintaining
continuity of skills among employees and to hire workers with
critically needed technical skills. The early out and retirement
incentive authority established in this amendment is similar to the
authority already in the law for personnel reductions.
As The Washington Post pointed out in a week-long series last week,
the Federal work force faces a crises. In the next five years, more
than 50 percent of civil servants will be eligible to retire. The
situation is even worse in the Department of Defense, where that figure
is almost 60 percent. Unless personnel practices are changed, the
Pentagon will lurch from a predominantly senior work force to one that
is largely inexperienced.
At the same time, rapid advances in defense-related technology make
it more critical now than ever before to maintain a defense work force
with cutting edge technological skills.
Unfortunately, existing personnel laws do not give Defense Department
managers the flexibility they need to keep up with rapidly changing
personnel needs, especially in the scientific and technical fields.
After more than ten years of much needed draw down and virtually no new
hiring, the military services have been stymied in their efforts to
acquire such personnel.
This problem is particularly acute for the Air Force because of its
historically heavy reliance on science and technology. The preservation
and advancement of our Air Force's high tech advantage is particularly
important as new and uncertain threats to our country develop. Solving
this problem is the Air Force's top civilian work force priority.
Moreover, this experimental pilot program will provide valuable
information that can be used to address similar work force problems in
the other services and non-defense federal agencies.
The amendment I seek to offer is similar to an amendment Mr. Hobson
offered last year to the National Defense Authorization Act which was
adopted by the House, but which was not accepted in conference.
It is my intention that the Air Force will use the personnel slots
created under the authority of this amendment to hire new workers and
that the authority will not be used to reduce overall levels of
civilian employment.
I thank the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Spence, and
the ranking minority member, Mr. Skelton, for their support of my
amendment. I also thank Mr. Scarborough, chairman of the Subcommittee
on Civil Service, and Mr. Cummings, the ranking minority member, as
well as their staffs, for their assistance.
And finally, I offer a special thanks to the amendment's cosponsor,
Mr. Hobson, and to his staff, for their critical help.
Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R.
4205, the Fiscal Year 2001 National Defense Authorization Act.
I would like to thank Chairman Spence and Chairman Hefley for
including my amendment as part of the en bloc amendments, scheduled for
discussion and vote later today.
Mr. Chairman, over one thousand World War II veterans die every day.
A final honor bestowed upon these veterans and their families is burial
at a military or veterans cemetery.
My amendment will enable the Secretary of the Army and the Kansas
Commission on Veterans Affairs to agree to a transfer of property at
Fort Riley, Kansas for the purpose of establishing a State-constructed,
operated and maintained veterans cemetery.
Mr. Chairman, Congress is here to work for the people of the United
States. The veterans organizations of the 2nd District of Kansas have
worked hard to establish support both within the state and here in
Washington, D.C. to support veterans that have sacrificed for our
freedoms.
I ask my colleagues to support the passage of the en bloc amendments
and continued support for final passage of H.R. 4205.
Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to the
H.R. 4205, The National Defense Authorization Act.
This amendment is designed to urge the Secretary of Defense to add
five additional Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team (WMD-
CST) to the fiscal year 2001 defense bill.
At the direction of Congress, the Department of Defense recently
expanded this program to embrace a total of 27 teams, known as WMD
Civil Support Teams.

[[Page H3288]]

The WMD Civil Support Teams were established to deploy rapidly to
assist a local incident commander in determining the nature and extent
of an attack or incident; provide expert technical advice on WMD
response operations; and help identify and support the arrival of
follow-on state and federal military response assets. Each team
consists of 22 highly-skilled, full-time members of the Army and Air
National Guard.
The first 10 teams have completed their individual and unit
collective training and are in the process of receiving highly
sophisticated equipment. Each team has two large pieces of equipment: a
mobile analytical laboratory for field analysis of chemical or
biological agents and a unified command suite that has the ability to
provide communications interoperability among the various responders
who may be on scene. The first 10 teams will be certified as fully
mission-capable later this spring, with the remaining 17 expected to
come on line in early 2001.
The first 10 teams are based in Colorado, Georgia, Illinois,
California, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas and
Washington. The remaining 17 teams, announced in January, will be based
in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma,
South Carolina and Virginia.
Surprisingly, our Nation's capital does not currently have a National
Guard civil support team. The closest team is in rural Virginia or the
center of Pennsylvania. These locations are too far away to provide
comfort that my state, Maryland, will have adequate protection and
civil support in the event a terrorist uses poison gas or germs in the
Washington, DC or Maryland area.
Having a team available to deploy rapidly, assess the situation, and
coordinate assistance with local first-responders is extremely
important.
The WMD Civil Support Teams are unique because of their federal-state
relationship. They are federally resourced, federally trained and
federally evaluated, and they operate under federal doctrine. But they
will perform their mission primarily under the command and control of
the governors of the states in which they are located.
They will be, first and foremost, state assets.
Operationally, they fall under the command and control of the
adjutant generals of those states. As a result, they will be available
to respond to an incident as part of a state response, well before
federal response assets would be called upon to provide assistance.
If the situation were to evolve into an event that overwhelmed state
and local response assets, the governor could request the president to
issue a declaration of national disaster and to provide federal
assistance. At that point, the team would continue to support local
officials in their state status, but would also assist in channeling
additional military and other federal assets in support of the local
commander.
It is essential to note that these teams are in no way connected with
counter-terrorism activities. They are involved exclusively in
consequence management activities. The civil support teams will link
with the consequence managers in their jurisdictions. The WMD-CST will
have robust planning and command and control capabilities and the
ability to mobilize a military task force quickly in support of FEMA
requests. It will also have rapid access to military forces and quick
reach-back capability to subject matter experts, labs and medical
support.
If terrorists release bacteria, chemicals or viruses to harm
Americans, we must have the ability to identify the pathogens or
substances with speed and certainty. The technology to accomplish that
is still evolving, and current technology is very expensive,
technically challenging to maintain, and largely unaffordable to most
states and localities.
In this regard, my goal is to support America's fire, police and
emergency medical personnel as rapidly as possible with capabilities
and tools that complement and enhance their response, not duplicate it.
It is better to have these teams be funded, fielded and idle than to
have no team at all. Every Governor should, and must, have the
flexibility to call on a WMD-CST Team if the situation warrants.
My amendment to this year's defense bill will increase the number of
WMD-CSTs to 32, providing greater coverage to the American population.
I support the efforts Congress and the Defense Department have made
to establish state-controlled WMD Civil Support Teams, which leverage
the best military technology and expertise available, to achieve that
goal.
I thank you for the opportunity.
Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. I offer it to
ensure that Section 3157 of the National Defense Authorization Act of
FY'98 is consistent with Section 1211 of that same Act. In 1998, the
Congress adopted to its defense authorization legislation provisions to
establish export control thresholds for computer technology to tier III
countries. We established those provisions in two places of the '98
legislation, Section 1211 and Section 3157. Since then, Congress has
revisited Sec. 1211 and updated the threshold level to better reflect
technological advancements. In modernizing the law, however, a slight
oversight has been made.
While Congress made adjustments to Section 1211 to raise export
control thresholds, it did not make the same necessary adjustments to
Section 3157. My amendment ensures the MTOP level (millions of
theoretical operations per second) included in Section 1211 is
consistent with the levels included in Section 3157.
By no means do I intend to reopen the debate on MTOP levels and
verification requirements. In fact, the gentlemen from California, the
Chairman of the Rules Committee has ably engaged that very policy
debate in this chamber today. Instead, I only wish to correct an
inconsistency in our legislation that calls for two different
standards.
Mr. BRYANT. Mr. Chairman, as many of my colleagues may recall, the
FY98-99 Defense Authorization bill included my provision establishing a
life without parole sentencing option in the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.
What prompted me to push for a life without parole sentence involved
the case of Sgt. Michael Teeter. Sgt. Teeter was sentenced to life in
prison on June 10, 1980, by a military court for the brutal rape and
murder of Eva Hicks-Ransom. The murder occurred in my district in
Clarksville, Tennessee. After serving only 15 years of his life
sentence, Teeter was granted parole.
Because the only alternative to a life sentence was the death
penalty, I felt a new, life without parole sentence would provide a
jury with a broader range of options depending on the severity of the
crime. In cases where the death penalty was too harsh, but the
possibility of an offender eventually re-entering society was
unconscionable, life without parole would give the jury a reasonable
alternative.
Since the creation of the life without parole sentence, however, the
Department of Defense has issued an Instruction which states that a
person sentenced to life without parole will still be eligible for
clemency. Under clemency, a prisoner sentenced to life without parole
can see his sentence reduced for good behavior and/or successful
treatment after only 10 years. In theory, a person sentenced to life
without parole could be released after serving just 15 years.
Mr. Chairman, Section 544 of H.R. 4205 does attempt to address my
concerns about clemency by increasing the time before clemency can be
considered from 10 to 20 years. While I appreciate the lengths to which
full committee Chairman Spence and subcommittee Chairman Buyer have
gone to address this issue, it was always my intent that a person
sentenced to life without parole would spend the rest of their life in
prison unless they were pardoned by the President. Clemency was not
meant to apply. I strongly believe that the Defense Department
misinterpreted the language establishing a life without parole
sentence, and my amendment would replace the language in Section 544
with language which would clarify and reaffirm the intent of Congress
that life without parole means life and that clemency does not apply.
I urge my colleagues to support this clarifying amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Gutknecht). The question is on the
amendments en bloc, as modified, offered by the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Spence).
The amendments en bloc, as modified, were agreed to.
Mr. SPENCE. 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.
Hayes) having assumed the chair, Mr. Gutknecht, Chairman pro tempore 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.
4205) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for military
activities of the Department of Defense and for military construction,
to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2001, and for
other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

____________________