To increase, with an offset, amounts available for the procurement of wheeled vehicles for the Army and the Marine Corps and for armor for such vehicles.

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will
report S. 1042 by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (S. 1042) to authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2006 for military activities of the Department of
Defense, for military construction, and for defense
activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe
personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed
Forces, and for other purposes.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise regarding the pending bill,
provided that no other Senators seek recognition on another matter.
Seeing none, I wish to accommodate my colleagues whenever possible.
It is now my privilege to once again bring forward for consideration
by the Senate the annual Defense authorization bill. I commend my
colleagues on the Armed Services Committee. We have a magnificent
committee. All members are very active. Our attendance is good and I am
proud that this institution has such diligent and hard-working Senators
to provide their input to our work on the Armed Services Committee.
I also recognize what I view, and this may be slightly biased on my
part, as one of the finest professional staffs of any committee of the
Senate. We have had a long history of extraordinary, competent, fair-
minded, open-minded people who want to devote their careers to the men
and women of the Armed Forces and the causes for which they offer their
life and limb, and that of their families.
Their work over the past several months has resulted in this
important legislation. We completed the markup of this bill in record
time and in the spirit of true bipartisanship. In particular, I am
privileged to have the senior Senator from Michigan, Mr. Levin, a
longtime, dear, and valued friend, as my ranking member and full equal
working partner on this committee. He preceded me as the chairman of
the committee, but we will not go back into those days, nevertheless.
Mr. LEVIN. The glory days.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I have the floor.
We have served together on this committee for 27 years and we have,
once again, with the other wonderful collection of Senators on this
committee and the staff, produced a bill which clearly supports our men
and women in uniform and their families, and strengthens the national
security of our Nation.
I also want to acknowledge the strong support that we have received
from the Republican leader and the Democratic leader of the Senate.
These two individuals have teamed up in years past to assist the
managers in getting this bill through the Senate. I cannot ever recall
stronger leadership by the Senate leaders. Maybe when our distinguished
colleague from West Virginia was the leader of the Senate at the time,
I know he supported getting this bill through. His membership on this
committee for these many years has been of great help to all of us who
have been privileged to serve as chairman and ranking member.
The bill before the Senate was unanimously reported out of the
committee on May 12. It reflects the strong support for the members of
our Armed Forces. The bill provides $441.6 billion in budget authority
for defense programs for the fiscal year 2006, an increase of $21
billion, or 3.1 percent in real terms, above the amount authorized by
the Congress for fiscal year 2005.
At this juncture, I recognize the important contribution given by
Senators Stevens and Inouye, the chair and ranking member,
respectively, of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. It
has been their hope that the Senate will act on this bill. Until such
time as the Senate does act, it is not likely that they will proceed
with the continuation of their deliberations, markup, and the like to
bring their important bill to the floor. I say that because I want all
Senators to recognize it is the intention of the Senate leadership and
the managers of this bill, together with our two colleagues on the
Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, that this bill be acted upon by
the Senate prior to the scheduled recess for the month of August.
I mention that because one Senator had very politely said to me: I
would like to offer an amendment, but I think I will wait until after
the August recess. I politely informed him that it is the intention of
all parties that this bill be enacted prior to the August recess. He
appreciated my candor.
This amount is consistent with the President's budget request and
within the budget resolution adopted by the Congress. The bill also
includes authorization for $50 billion in emergency supplemental
funding for fiscal year 2006 to cover the cost of military operations
in Iraq, Afghanistan, and throughout the world, together with our
coalition partners, on the global war against terrorism.
I also acknowledge that while we put proper emphasis on Iraq,
Afghanistan, and the war on terrorism, there are innumerable other
missions undertaken night and day by the men and women of the Armed
Forces for all aspects of the diverse security needs and requirements
of this Nation. Many of them are on the far-flung outposts of the world
performing those missions beneath the sea, above the sea, or in the
air. We acknowledge with fervent gratitude their contribution, together
with all of us who proudly served in uniform, and their families.
The past 3\1/2\ years have been a time of great successes and
enormous challenges for the U.S. Armed Forces. The mission of our men
and women in uniform has never been executed with better skill and
dedication. I myself am privileged to have had modest experience in
uniform. I have had the privilege of having an association with the men
and women in uniform for 60 years. That is a long period of time.
Almost without exception, in all those years at some point in time I
have had the opportunity to either serve alongside of, or be in support
of, the men and women of our Armed Forces. I had a very brief career in
World War II, inauspicious as it was, and I had the opportunity to
serve in that historic period. I would say unequivocally that, while
our generation of World War II was referred to as ``the greatest,''
this generation is every bit as great if not greater in the complexity
of the threats posed against this Nation night and day and the
sacrifices they are

[[Page S8537]]

being called upon to make in the performance of their duties and those
of their families.
The rapid success, and it was a rapid success, of Operation Enduring
Freedom in Afghanistan and the rather prolonged but nevertheless
successful operation to date, Operation Iraqi Freedom, has evolved into
the hard work of reconstruction and stability operations in both
theaters, necessary to secure peace and stability in their respective
regions. Such important work brings with it new challenges associated
with an extraordinarily high operational tempo on people and equipment
and the need to counter asymmetric threats, including improvised
explosive devices and the ever increasing, tragic, tragic use of the
suicide bomber. Further, the responsibility of the Nation is to
properly care for those who volunteer to serve--active, National Guard,
reserve, retired, and their families. They deserve nothing less than
our total support. The bill, in my judgment, meets those challenges.
This bill is being considered at a time when the United States
continues to work with a coalition to defeat terrorism globally and
defend freedom and democracy. The recent tragic aftermath of terrorist
bombings in London reminds us once again, in this global war on
terrorism, of the ruthless nature of the enemy we face. When I say
``we,'' it is not only the United States, but freedom-loving people
wherever they are in the world. It is a war we must and will win.
Hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and
Coast Guardsmen--active, reserve, and National Guard--and countless
civilians who support military, diplomatic, and humanitarian operations
are serving valiantly in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations to
secure the hard-won military successes and to preserve peace and
freedom. Successful elections in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past year
are testament to the yearning of those people for a voice in their own
destiny, the willingness of the United States to assist, and the
professionalism of the brave Americans and their coalition partners who
volunteer to serve. The U.S. Armed Forces serving around the world are
truly the first line of defense in the security of our U.S. homeland.
We are all mindful of the risks members of the Armed Forces face
every day, and of the sacrifices made by the families and their
communities. I repeat, the communities are so involved with the men and
women of the Armed Forces stationed overseas, the men and women in
uniform who have been asked to do much in the past year and who
responded in the finest traditions of the generations of Americans who
preceded them. The American people are proud of their men and women in
uniform, and what they have accomplished to protect our freedom here at
home and abroad.
While recent successes have proven the value of past investment in
the people and equipment of the U.S. Armed Forces, this is no time for
any complacency. The recurring lessons of our military operations are
that national security threats are ever changing and persistent.
Victory and successes must be accomplished by vigilance and
preparation. Such vigilance takes the form of enhanced readiness for
today's Armed Forces, and preparation for future threats to the
security of the United States, its interests, and its allies.
In preparing this legislation, together with the members of our
committee, we identified seven priorities to guide our committee's work
on the national defense bill now before the Senate. The first priority
is to provide our men and women in uniform the resources they need to
win the global war on terrorism; second, to enhance the ability of the
Department of Defense to fulfill its homeland defense responsibilities;
third, to provide the resources and authorities needed to rapidly
acquire the full range of force protection capabilities for deployed
forces, particularly with regard to improvised explosive devices;
fourth, to continue the committee's commitment to improve the quality
of life for those who serve--active, reserve, National Guard, and
retired, and their families, with particular emphasis on recruiting and
retention and on the health care for those who bear the wounds of our
war; fifth, to sustain the readiness of our Armed Forces to conduct
military operations against all current and anticipated threats; sixth,
to support the Department's efforts to develop the innovative, forward-
looking capabilities necessary to modernize and transform the Armed
Forces; and, finally, to continue active committee oversight of
Department programs and operations, particularly in the areas of
acquisition reform to ensure proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars.

With passage of the bill before us, the Senate has the opportunity to
send a strong message in support of the men and women of the Armed
Forces serving at numerous posts at home and abroad that America values
and honors their service and that of their families.
The bill contains much-deserved pay raises and benefits for military
personnel and their families, enhanced survivor benefits for those
whose loved ones have made the ultimate sacrifice, improved health care
for both active and reserve components of personnel and their families,
and prudent investments in the equipment and technology our military
needs to address current and future threats.
I urge my colleagues to debate this bill in a constructive spirit and
to support its adoption.
There is one issue I would like to highlight: My colleagues and I on
the committee, and I think almost every member of the committee shares
this view, and many of us in the Senate--we are all concerned about the
declining state of the building of new ships for the U.S. Navy. We do
not believe the current or projected level of funding for shipbuilding
is adequate to build the numbers of ships our Navy needs to perform and
continue to perform its global missions. Always remember, the
Constitution of the United States directs this Congress to raise its
armies, but ``maintain'' a Navy. The Founding Fathers were specific in
that direction to the Congress and it is our duty to fulfill it. They
had the foresight to realize that a navy can not be quickly constituted
or reconstituted. It takes a decade or more from the concept of a new
ship through the years to prepare the plans, to test the ship, to test
the system, and to finally slip it down the ways of the shipyard, and
then for a period of time to further test it before it gains its
ability to join the fleet. That is a long time.
In many respects that was as true years ago as it is today, so we
must learn the lesson that it takes time to maintain our Navy. As a
maritime nation, that presence of our Navy is often displayed in the
form, not only of our ships, not only through ensuring open sealanes of
communication and training in international waters, but also the
inherent diplomatic mission of visiting our ports and proudly showing
Old Glory, our flag. The Navy currently has 288 ships in the active
fleet. This is the smallest number of ships in the Navy since before--I
would like to repeat this--the smallest fleet since before World War
II. That is before December 7, 1941.
I believe the shipbuilding budget must be reviewed by the
administration as a matter of utmost urgency in the coming year, and I
respectfully urge the President to establish a special shipbuilding
fund, to direct the OMB to provide a dedicated fund for the building of
ships rather than each year make the allocation--so much to the
Department of the Navy, so much to the Department of the Air Force, so
much to the Department of the Army. Keep those allocations as they are
devised each year, but superimpose on the allocation of funding for the
Navy a sum of dollars to turn around this declining curve of
shipbuilding.
America has much to be thankful for in terms of its patriotic young
Americans who volunteer to serve and who have individually and
collectively performed with such professionalism and distinction in
defense of the United States. The efforts of the U.S. Armed Forces have
been remarkable, but they are not without cost--the loss of priceless
lives that must be honored and remembered; the responsibility to care
for the survivors and their families; the cost of ongoing operations
and related refurbishment or replacement of heavily used equipment; and
the responsibility to assure that those who serve, and their families,
receive the quality of life and the benefits they need and to which
they are entitled.
I believe the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006
prudently addresses the defense needs of

[[Page S8538]]

our Nation and recognizes the service and sacrifice of our men and
women in uniform and their families, provides the resources necessary
to win the global war on terrorism, and makes the necessary investment
to provide for the security of our Nation in the years to come.
I urge my colleagues to join me in sending a strong message of
bipartisan support for our troops at home, their families, and to the
other nations in the world--America is committed to freedom.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks time? The Senator from Michigan is
recognized.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I join with the chairman of the Armed
Services Committee, Senator Warner, in bringing S. 1042, the National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006, to the Senate floor. I
do so proudly. I am always proud to stand next to Senator Warner and
with Senator Warner and our staffs in bringing this bill forward. It
has been many years that we have done this together, and we always look
forward to it because it is a time we, together with our staffs, can
spend time trying to strengthen the security of this country in a
bipartisan way.
This bill, to my memory, has always been a bipartisan bill. Our
staffs work together on a bipartisan basis. The way they have worked
together should be a role model for how we in the Senate should be
working. I congratulate Senator Warner for his leadership of our
committee. He sets the right pattern for all of us. Again, it is an
honor to be standing here with him.
The bill we bring before the Senate is the product of 3 days of
markup. I do not believe we needed a single recorded vote. There may
have been some voice votes where there were some differences, but I
don't even remember that. I think we worked out all of our differences.
Where there were differences that remained, I think we actually were
able to address them, if not resolve them, but without actually a
recorded vote, if my memory is correct. That is quite a tribute to the
leadership of Senator Warner as well.
We have a common interest in providing the support the men and women
in uniform need and deserve. We are unanimous on that, regardless of
our positions--which differ. As Members of the Senate we don't all have
the same position on events in Iraq--how we got there and how we
proceed from here. There is no unanimity on that issue. And on a number
of other issues there is not unanimity. But where there is unanimity is
that once that decision is made democratically to send our men and
women to war, in harm's way, we stand behind them. And on that there is
no dissent regardless of the positions of different Senators on the
underlying issues. The men and women in uniform deserve our support.
They are entitled to the support. During the Vietnam era, we had times
when men and women in uniform did not receive the support they
deserved. That has not been true since Vietnam. And finally, I think
our people recognize that the men and women we put in harm's way, who
are in the uniform of the United States, when the Commander in Chief,
the Congress make a decision that they go to war, they are entitled to
the full support of the people and of the Congress of the United
States.

We are proud of these troops. Senator Warner and I have done many
things together in the Senate, and one of them has been to travel to
visit our troops. We have seen some of the most amazing men and women
this country can produce who are in uniform, some of the most
professional, dedicated, committed, patriotic people you will ever find
representing the United States in uniform. We have been to far-flung
places of the world. We have traveled long distances, but whenever we
arrived where we were going, we have had that kind of feeling that
whatever the thousands of miles were that we traveled to get there, it
was worth it just to be inspired literally by the men and women who
represent this country and take the risks for all of us.
The bill that is reported by the Armed Services Committee will
improve the quality of life of the men and women in uniform, provide
funding needed to continue ongoing military operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan, make needed improvements to the management of the
Department of Defense, and authorize critical investments that are
needed to reduce the risks the United States will face in the 21st
century.
First and foremost, the bill before us continues the increases in
compensation, in the quality of life our service men and women and
their families deserve as they face the hardships that are imposed by
continuing military operations around the world. Those demands have
increased significantly over the years, and we have tried to respond to
those demands and to those increased hazards which the men and women
face.
In particular, the bill would authorize a 3.1-percent across-the-
board pay raise for military personnel, authorize a $70 million
increase in childcare and family assistance, services for military
families, and authorize additional funds for supplemental education aid
to local school districts affected by the assignment or location of
military families.
We have increased the death gratuity to $100,000 for survivors and
military members who die in a combat zone, and we are going to have an
amendment which will broaden that further. We have increased from
$250,000 to $400,000 the maximum amount of coverage available under the
Service Members Group Life Insurance Program.
Second, the bill would provide funding needed to continue ongoing
military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and help address the
challenges our military faces around the world. For instance, the bill
would authorize a $50 billion supplemental to cover part of the cost of
ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan over the coming
years. We know that supplemental is going to be needed. We on the Armed
Services Committee asked the Budget Committee to add this money for our
authorization bill because we have to plan on this expenditure. We know
it is going to take place, and we should authorize it as part of a
regular budget process and not just simply leave it to supplemental
funding.
So we are authorizing a $50 billion supplemental for 2006 to cover
ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is far more
realistic budgeting than we have too frequently not done in the past.
Our bill authorizes an increase in the Army's active-duty end
strength by 20,000 people to a total of 52,400 soldiers for fiscal year
2006. It is going to be a challenge to meet that new end strength just
in terms of recruitment, but we are determined that we are going to try
to respond to the demand of our members of the military by increasing
the size of the Army's active-duty end strength. We have added 20,000
to that and added $1.4 billion over the President's request for force
protection gear for our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. We authorize
almost $350 million for up-armored vehicles to provide additional force
protection for our troops in the field. That represents an increase of
$120 million over the President's budget request.
We direct that $500 million be dedicated to the joint improvised
explosive device, IED, task force to facilitate the rapid development
of technology to counter the top threat to our men and women in Iraq
and Afghanistan. The chairman of our committee described the threat in
terms of those IEDs and what we are doing to respond to that threat,
which is everything we possibly can do given its nature and the fact
that threat is really, if not the top threat, one of the top threats to
our service personnel.
Our bill authorizes up to $500 million for the continuation of the
Commanders Emergency Response Program. This program enables our
military commanders in the field to respond quickly and flexibly to
urgent requirements in fiscal years 2006 and 2007. They have told us
that this authorization and appropriation which follows is one of the
most effective actions we can take to increase their capability in the
field, and that Commanders Emergency Response Program continued at $500
million for these 2 years is provided.
Third, the bill contains a number of important provisions to improve
the efficiency and the transparency of the Department's operations. For
instance, the bill contains provisions that would prohibit the
inappropriate use of contracting techniques that result in the
heightened risk of fraud and abuse by

[[Page S8539]]

limiting the Government's insight into contractor cost and performance
in the acquisition of major weapons systems.
It addresses continuing awareness of interagency contracts by
requiring the inspector general to review major interagency contracts
which have been used by the Department of Defense. There have been real
abuses in these interagency contracts, and we have, indeed, had a
number of hearings over the years into some of these abuses where one
agency uses the contract of another agency in order to carry out some
function, but there is no transparency. Nobody knows it is done. You
can do it noncompetitively. There is too much opaqueness in that
process, and we are trying to make sure the abuses in the interagency
contract area are addressed, and so we require the inspector general to
review the major interagency contracts the Department of Defense is
using or has used.
Our bill strengthens the defense ethics oversight by requiring major
defense contractors to identify former Department of Defense officials
on their payrolls and by requiring a review of ethics rules that are
raised by the increased use of contractors to perform Government
acquisition functions, and we establish a contract fraud risk
assessment team to assess the vulnerability of Department of Defense
contract fraud, waste, and abuse and require the Secretary of Defense
to develop an action plan to address these areas of vulnerability.
Finally, the bill contains a number of critical provisions that
should help reduce some of the risks our country will face in the
coming century. We are particularly pleased that the bill authorizes
the budget request for the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat
Reduction Program and related Department of Energy nonproliferation
programs. The greatest probable threat we face as a nation would be if
a terrorist or terrorist group could get their hands on a nuclear
weapon or weapon of mass destruction.
There are too many loose nukes in this world. We have to do more to
address the proliferation threat. I don't believe the funding in this
bill is adequate. I hope we can find a way to increase the amount of
funding that goes into this threat reduction program and the other
nonproliferation programs that are funded in this bill. Other than
giving all the support we possibly can to our troops, there is probably
nothing in this bill that directly addresses the greatest threat we
face, which is the threat of a nuclear weapon in the hands of a
terrorist, than this threat reduction program and the nonproliferation
programs which are aimed at securing nuclear weapons and other weapons
of mass destruction.
Our bill provides the President permanent authority to waive on an
annual basis the condition that must be met before the Cooperative
Threat Reduction Program money can be provided to countries of the
former Soviet Union. This is an authority which the administration has
requested. Instead of having to come to us each year for this
authority, we believe it should be made permanent. Our bill enhances
the authority of the Secretary of Defense to use cooperative threat
reduction funds to address risks of proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction outside the countries of the former Soviet Union. We not
only have nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction inside those
countries, we have those risks outside, and we ought to use this
program to address again what is surely the most, or one of the most,
serious risks any nation can face.
We in our bill earmark $100 million of missile defense money
specifically for enhanced ground and flight testing to require
objective testing and evaluation of the operational suitability of each
block of missile defense that is produced.
There hasn't been enough testing in this program. There has been too
much buying before we fly, and we are trying to see if we can't take
some of the risk out of this program, to see, if we are going to
proceed, whether we can't proceed in a way which would guarantee a
system which is effective and workable and useful rather than just
plowing billions of dollars into a system procuring missiles that may
never be usable. So we take some of this money, specifically $100
million of that program, and we address it specifically to ground and
flight testing in addition to what was previously planned.
We add $20 million to the President's budget to accelerate chemical
demilitarization activity and to enable the United States to meet
obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention.
While this bill takes many important steps to fund the national
defense and support our men and women in uniform, there is more that we
can and should do. I would like to just mention a few areas that I hope
we can revisit as our bill is considered in the Chamber.
First, the bill contains a provision that would increase the military
death gratuity from $12,000 to $100,000, but it is restricted to
combat-related deaths. That means that the families of soldiers,
sailors, airmen and marines who die in the line of duty outside of the
combat area will still receive only $12,000. Our top military officers
have uniformly testified that the amount of the death gratuity should
not be dependent on the circumstances of somebody who is on active
duty. The death of a family member in an accident, for instance, while
on active duty can be every bit as hard on a family as a death in Iraq
or Afghanistan. Somebody who is killed while being trained for duty in
Iraq or Afghanistan should surely have his or her family provided with
the same kind of benefit as somebody who is killed in combat. From the
family perspective and I think morally, there is no significant
difference. They are on active duty, they are taking risks, and they
are killed while taking those risks on active duty.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified before our
committee the following:

When you join the military, you join the military. You go
where they send you. It's happenstance that you are in a
combat zone or at home. And I think we in the past held
treating people universally foremost and consistently and
that's how I come down on that.

So our top uniform folks support the uniform application of that
benefit to $100,000 for people who are on active duty.
Earlier this year, the Senate adopted that position. We adopted an
amendment to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act which would
have made the families of all soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines
who die in the line of duty eligible for the full death benefit. The
appropriations amendment was dropped in conference, but we should try
again. I hope the Senate will stand strong on this issue and adopt a
similar amendment to our bill.
Second, while the bill takes many positive steps to improve
compensation and benefits for our men and women in uniform and their
families, we have to do more for Guard and Reserve forces who are
bearing so much of the burden in our current military operations.
Never before have we relied so heavily on the Guard and Reserve to
serve on active duty over such an extended period of time. All members,
representing different States, understand that. The families of the men
and women who are in our Guard and Reserve forces have reminded us
about how overly stretched those forces are. We do not get many
complaints from the men and women themselves. They are too professional
to do the complaining. We hear from families. We hear from employers.
Again, we have never before relied as heavily on our Guard and
Reserve forces to serve on active duty for extended periods of times as
we do now. Studies have shown that 40 percent of our junior enlisted
members in the Reserve components nonetheless have no health insurance
except when they are on active duty. I hope we can develop an approach
to this problem that uses the military's TRICARE health care program to
ensure that members of the Reserve component have adequate health
insurance and are medically ready when called upon to serve.
Third, the bill earmarks $100 million of missile defense money
specifically for enhanced ground and flight testing and requires
objective testing and evaluation of the operational capability of each
block of missile defense which is produced. Those are positive steps,
as I have said, which will move us in the direction of the ``fly before
you buy'' approach that we insist on with other major acquisitions.
However, the bill also authorizes more than $60 million in long-lead

[[Page S8540]]

funding for more interceptors on top of the 30 we already are buying,
even though those interceptors are not subject to operational testing
and evaluation. If we want a missile defense that works, rather than
one that sits on the ground and soaks up money, we should insist on
testing the missiles that we already have before we go out and buy
more.
Finally, the administration requested $8.5 million for research and
development of the robust nuclear earth penetrator, even though
Congress canceled this program last year. Although the bill does cut
$4.5 million of the Air Force money from this program, it authorizes
the Department of Energy to spend $4 million to resume the feasibility
study. Instead of being a leader in the effort to prevent the
proliferation of nuclear weapons, we, ourselves, pursue the development
of a new nuclear weapon. It is exactly the wrong message to send to the
rest of the world.
We are trying to persuade the rest of the world, don't go nuclear. We
are telling some of those countries, if you do go nuclear, we may take
very serious action to prevent you from crossing certain red lines. Yet
we, ourselves, again are on the verge of putting in money to resume a
feasibility study for a new nuclear weapon to be developed. I know it
is only a study, but it is a message. It is a loud message. It is a
dramatic message. It is a compelling message. It is a persuasive
message, and it is used against us when we go to other countries and
say: Don't go down that nuclear road.
They say: Wait a minute. You are considering the possibility of going
further and you already have thousands of nuclears and you are trying
to persuade us that we should not be using nuclear weapons to defend
ourselves when you are studying an additional use or additional weapon
yourself? It weakens our argument and it weakens the argument that we
must make against the most serious threat we face, which is the
proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Finally, as our chairman has said, as we begin consideration of this
bill, the men and women of our Armed Forces, both Active and Reserve,
are deployed in harm's way in many areas of the globe that are
subjected to daily armed attack in Iraq and Afghanistan. We joined
together in standing behind our troops in expressing pride the
extraordinary accomplishments on the battlefield. This bill will do
much to provide them with the equipment they need and the compensation
and benefits they deserve. If we can do more, we ought to do more. They
deserve it, and their families deserve it.
We have important issues to debate. Again, I conclude by thanking
Chairman Warner for his leadership, bringing this bill to the floor and
having this bill in the fairly complete shape it is in coming to the
Senate. I thank him for his leadership of our staffs. We have wonderful
staff, as he mentioned, and we have a wonderful committee.
We are blessed to have members on our committee who all contribute in
such important ways to the production of the bill. One of those members
just walked off the floor. I, as Senator Warner did, want to recognize
Senator Byrd although he is not here. He is stalwart in his commitment
to this Senate and to this Nation. There are times when his plate is so
overly full and his heart is so heavy, but nonetheless he performs his
duty, and he is an inspiration to all members. All members of our
committee deserve praise for the contribution they made to the bill.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I certainly concur in those observations
about our highly esteemed colleague from West Virginia. I thank the
Senator for his kind remarks.
I think this is No. 27 for us--a quarter of a century. It is a pretty
good record.
I am quite anxious, as I know the Senator is, that Senators bring
forth amendments.
I will propose an amendment for deliberation. Moments ago, I notified
your staff about it. I am perfectly willing to procedurally take it up
because I know two colleagues on that side of the aisle are interested
in the same subject. We notified our offices this amendment would be
brought up. They may have some views on it. I hope they will address
their views.

Amendment No. 1314

I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Virginia, [Mr. Warner], proposes an
amendment numbered 1314.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To increase amounts available for the procurement of wheeled
vehicles for the Army and the Marine Corps and for armor for such
vehicles)

On page 303, strike line 3 and all that follows through
page 304, line 24, and insert the following:
(3) For other procurement $376,700,000.
(b) Availability of Certain Amounts.--
(1) Availability.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated by subsection (a)(3), $225,000,000 shall be
available for purposes as follows:
(A) Procurement of up-armored high mobility multipurpose
wheeled vehicles (UAHs).
(B) Procurement of wheeled vehicle add-on armor protection,
including armor for M1151/M1152 high mobility multipurpose
wheeled vehicles.
(C) Procurement of M1151/M1152 high mobility multipurpose
wheeled vehicles.
(2) Allocation of funds.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary
of the Army shall allocate the manner in which amounts
available under paragraph (1) shall be available for the
purposes specified in that paragraph.
(B) Limitation.--Amounts available under paragraph (1) may
not be allocated under subparagraph (A) until the Secretary
certifies to the congressional defense committees that the
Army has a validated requirement for procurement for a
purpose specified in paragraph (1) based on a statement of
urgent needs from a commander of a combatant command.
(C) Reports.--Not later than 15 days after an allocation of
funds is made under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report
describing such allocation of funds.

SEC. 1404. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS PROCUREMENT.

(a) Navy.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal year 2006 for the procurement accounts of the Navy
in amounts as follows:
(1) For aircraft, $183,800,000.
(2) For weapons, including missiles and torpedoes,
$165,500,000.
(3) For other procurement, $30,800,000.
(b) Marine Corps.--Funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2006 for the procurement account
for the Marine Corps in the amount of $429,600,000.
(c) Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2006 for the
procurement account for ammunition for the Navy and the
Marine Corps in the amount of $104,500,000.
(d) Availability of Certain Amounts.--
(1) Availability.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated by subsection (b), $340,400,000 shall be
available for purposes as follows:
(A) Procurement of up-armored high mobility multipurpose
wheeled vehicles (UAHs).
(B) Procurement of wheeled vehicle add-on armor protection,
including armor for M1151/M1152 high mobility multipurpose
wheeled vehicles.
(C) Procurement of M1151/M1152 high mobility multipurpose
wheeled vehicles.
(2) Allocation of funds.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary
of the Navy shall allocate the manner in which amounts
available under paragraph (1) shall be available for the
purposes specified in that paragraph.
(B) Limitation.--Amounts available under paragraph (1) may
not be allocated under subparagraph (A) until the Secretary
certifies to the congressional defense committees that the
Marine Corps has a validated requirement for procurement for
a purpose specified in paragraph (1) based on a statement of
urgent needs from a commander of a combatant command.
(C) Reports.--Not later than 15 days after an allocation of
funds is made under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report
describing such allocation of funds.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there has been tremendous effort of our
committee on both sides of the aisle with respect to the equipment
being used, primarily in Iraq at this time, but could well be used
elsewhere. We refer to them as the up-armored high mobility
multipurpose wheeled vehicles; humvees are part of that. There is a
range of these vehicles.
The purpose of this amendment is to add $105 million to the Army and
$340 million to the Marine Corps for emerging up-armored HMMWV
requirements that the United States Central Command, under General
Abizaid, has established.

[[Page S8541]]

In the last few days, I was down at Quantico where they have a
magnificent research and development and forward-looking contingent. I
looked on the parade grounds at a series of vehicles being modified in
certain ways to provide a greater degree of protection to the
occupants--namely, our soldiers or Marines--who must use these vehicles
in the face of this insidious, frightful threat of suicide bombers,
implanted bombs which are activated by different devices, even a simple
cell phone. This is tough going.
I commend a number of Senators--Senator Kennedy, Senator Bayh, a
number of Senators on my side--who have been working this issue for
some years. The hour and the time has come to add significant sums of
money.
At some point in this debate on the amendment I will go into further
detail, but the Committee on the Budget allocated to the Committee on
Armed Services a very significant amount of money to be authorized at
our discretion for the purposes of the immediate requirements of the
military in connection with their missions today, primarily in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
The Army's current global war on terror requirement for up-armored
HMMWVs is 10,000 vehicles. The Marine Corps current global war on
terrorism requirement for up-armored HMMWVs is approximately 500
vehicles.
The markup of the fiscal year 2006 Defense bill, the one we are on,
recommends that $120 million be provided to the Secretary of the Army
to address the emerging up-armored HMMWV requirements toward its
10,000-unit requirement. The Secretary of the Army was provided the
authority and flexibility to procure up-armored HMMWV's tactical wheel
add-on armor, the M1151, the M1152 HMMWVs, once the Army received a
validated requirement from a combatant commander. The amendment is
funded for 11,693 up-armored HMMWVs, and the Marine Corps is funded for
498 up-armored HMMWVs through December 2005.
Since the markup of the fiscal year 2006 authorization bill, the
committee has received new information that justifies, in our judgment,
the increase of the Army and the Marine Corps requirement for dollars
to meet the up-armored HMMWV goals. The Army has an emerging
requirement for up-armored HMMWVs for Afghanistan which may increase
the overall requirement by 300 up-armored HMMWVs.
The Marines Expeditionary Force Forward Commander recently requested
that all HMMWVs in his area of operation be upgraded to the up-armored
HMMWV variant. This could potentially increase the Marine Corps
requirement to 2,814 up-armored HMMWVs, of which 988 are now funded.
In keeping with the commitment of the Committee on Armed Services to
meet all force protection requirements, this amendment proposes to add
$105 million to the Army budget authorized and $340 million to the
Marines Corps to allow the Department to respond quickly to the
commander's request. It is there.
This is quite a complicated amendment. A number of Senators have
expressed an interest in this amendment. I would like to debate this
tonight. I request the leadership consider having a record vote in due
course. I urge Senators who have an interest in this matter to
communicate with me or Senator Levin.
I would like to have Senators' views. I propose to put it to one
side; thereby giving a full opportunity for all members to express
their views. Again, I will seek the authority of the leadership to have
a record vote on this. Each Senator will want to vote on this
amendment. I cannot think of any equipment issue more important to the
men and women from your States than this.
I want to accommodate my colleagues, and I will yield the floor so my
distinguished colleague, Senator Levin, can make such comments as he
wishes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, first, this amendment addresses a very
significant issue, which took up a lot of time of the committee. We
have, in the bill itself, added some additional money to what the
administration requested because their request was so inadequate to the
threat. We have found over the period of time we have been in Iraq and
Afghanistan a totally inadequate response to our armor needs.
We have had I don't know how many hearings in the Armed Services
Committee--the chairman says about five; and that would be about my
recollection, too--where we have pressed our military leaders, the
Secretary of Defense, as to why there has been such a slow response to
such an obvious need. So we have been pressing very hard to provide all
of the adequate resources. We get different answers from the people who
run the Defense Department than we get from the people who are
providing the vehicles.
We were told, for instance, by the manufacturer that they never got a
request for an increased amount. On the other hand, our military
leaders said: Well, sure, we pressed for an increase in the amount.
We have a total conflict on the subject of whether there was ever a
time when funding was short, because the committee was determined that
we provide all of the resources--all of the resources--that are
necessary to provide the armor. It is inexcusable we have men and women
who are subject to these devices on the side of the road who do not
have the best armor.
Hearing after hearing, we put pressure on our civilian and uniformed
leaders to provide the equipment our men and women deserve, and the
armor our men and women deserve.
There has been a number of Members of our committee, particularly
Senator Kennedy, Senator Bayh, and others, who have had not only a
major interest in and made a major effort to press for additional
funding and for additional armor but who I know are interested in this
subject on this bill.
So I suggest to my friend from Virginia that we give them an
opportunity to read what he has now offered because I think it would be
very possible they may want to either go in a slightly more increased
direction or in a different direction. And I am not sure, they may want
to offer a second-degree amendment to this amendment or they may be
perfectly happy to cosponsor it. But I would like to give them an
opportunity, since this does come at this hour, to read to see exactly
what is being proposed since they have such an interest in this issue
and I know they were planning on offering language on this bill.
I would join in the suggestion that this language be available
promptly to the members of the committee or any Member of the body
because I think every Member of this body has had an interest in trying
to press the Defense Department to provide greater armor at greater
speed.
I have been very dissatisfied, publicly, as to an issue having to do
with the fact that our military leaders tried to get the manufacturer,
as we understand it, to have a second source. That would have required
the manufacturer to share some technology with the second producer.
According to one story, they refused to share the technology with a
second producer. If that is true, as I said publicly before, it would
be pretty shocking we would have a contractor who produces material for
the Defense Department, who knows we desperately need more, who would
not share the technology with a second source so we could produce the
armor a lot faster.
There is a lot of significant background. I think we ought to give
every member of our committee and every Member of the Senate an
opportunity to take a look at the approach the chairman is proposing to
see whether this meets the various needs and thoughts of Members of the
Senate. I welcome the chairman's willingness to lay this amendment
aside to give those Members an opportunity.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it is a perfectly reasonable request. I
fully wish to accommodate my colleague's wishes. We will lay this
amendment aside. But I would like to draw attention to the fact that
the subject is one which has been under constant review, the subject of
five hearings in committee over a period of time. It is so important, I
would like to have this bill start off with the amendment. I am
hopeful, with the concurrence of the leadership, we can address this
amendment this evening.

[[Page S8542]]

I am perfectly willing to lay it aside now and let colleagues come
over and speak to it, as you say, and take such parliamentary steps as
they so desire.
So at this time, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
pending amendment of the Senator from Virginia be laid aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 1315

Mr. WARNER. Now, Mr. President, I have, I think, discussed with our
colleague another amendment. It relates to a subject that one of our
distinguished Members of the House of Representatives, Congressman
Skelton, sent. He actually brought this up as a freestanding issue in
the House of Representatives. It was considered by the House and
adopted. So it is now, presumably, before the Senate as a freestanding
item. But it would be my desire, subject to the viewpoints of my
colleague, Senator Levin, that it be incorporated in this bill,
identical to what Congressman Skelton wishes to do.
The essence of it is as follows: The National Defense University and
the Joint Forces Staff College do an extraordinary job of preparing our
military and, indeed, a number of civilian personnel for greater
responsibility. The Joint Advanced Warfighting School, which is part of
the Joint Forces Staff College, has created and is now presenting a
course on Joint Campaign Planning and Strategy.
The first class graduated recently, and it was composed of an
impressive group of global war on terrorism officers, in other words,
officers who are devoting, at this time, their professional attention
to this subject.
The amendment authorizes the award of a Master of Science degree, and
it is one I think is deserving of the consideration of this body and,
hopefully, adoption by this body. It is an amendment which I will now
send to the desk for immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner], for himself and Mr.
Levin, proposes an amendment numbered 1315.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To authorize the National Defense University to award the
degree of Master of Science in Joint Campaign Planning and Strategy)

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

SEC. 596. AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY AWARD OF
DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN JOINT CAMPAIGN
PLANNING AND STRATEGY.

(a) Joint Forces Staff College Program.--Section 2163 of
title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 2163. National Defense University: master of science
degrees

``(a) Authority to Award Specified Degrees.--The President
of the National Defense University, upon the recommendation
of the faculty of the respective college or other school
within the University, may confer the master of science
degrees specified in subsection (b).
``(b) Authorized Degrees.--The following degrees may be
awarded under subsection (a):
``(1) Master of science in national security strategy.--The
degree of master of science in national security strategy, to
graduates of the University who fulfill the requirements of
the program of the National War College.
``(2) Master of science in national resource strategy.--The
degree of master of science in national resource strategy, to
graduates of the University who fulfill the requirements of
the program of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces.
``(3) Master of science in joint campaign planning and
strategy.--The degree of master of science in joint campaign
planning and strategy, to graduates of the University who
fulfill the requirements of the program of the Joint Advanced
Warfighting School at the Joint Forces Staff College.
``(c) Regulations.--The authority provided by this section
shall be exercised under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Defense.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The item relating to section 2163
in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 108 of
such title is amended to read as follows:

``2163. National Defense University: master of science degrees.''.

(c) Effective Date.--Paragraph (3) of section 2163(b) of
title 10, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a),
shall take effect for degrees awarded after May 2005.

Mr. WARNER. In brief, the amendment would amend section 2163 of title
10, United States Code, to authorize the president of the National
Defense University to confer the degree of Master of Science in Joint
Campaign Planning and Strategy on those students attending the Joint
Advanced Warfighting School at the Joint Forces Staff College who
pursued the particular course.
The Joint Forces Staff College initiated a new advanced course of
study in Joint Campaign Planning and Strategy in 2004. The program
received its full accreditation from the Department of Education in the
fall of 2004. As I said, the first class graduated in 2005. So the
legislation would authorize conferral of the degree retroactively to
that class of 2005 and prospectively to the future classes.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the pending amendment which I sent to the
desk, I ask unanimous consent that it be laid aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the bill before us, S.
1042, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006. I am
pleased to serve under Chairman Warner and Ranking Member Levin on the
Armed Services Committee. It is a particular thrill for me to have that
honor.
I am privileged to serve as the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Strategic Forces. In that capacity, I have worked hard, our staff has
worked hard, in cooperation particularly with my ranking member on the
Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Senator Nelson of Florida. Our efforts
have been to contribute our part to the bill that is now before the
Senate.
Under the leadership of Senator Warner, we believe we have achieved
our goal of bringing forward legislation that serves the national
security needs of this country, protects the interests of our fighting
men and women, and does so while making deliberate and judicious use of
precious taxpayer dollars. We simply have to be frugal. There is no
money to waste.
The Strategic Forces Subcommittee exercised oversight for the
Department of Defense budget request for missile defense, strategic
forces, space, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and
intelligence support activities. The DOD budget request in these areas
included $9.5 billion in procurement, $27.2 billion in research and
development, and $3 billion in operations and maintenance. The
administration budget request also included $14.8 billion for the
Department of Energy nuclear weapons and environmental management
programs and activities.
The bill reflects a net increase of $40 million in procurement, a net
decrease of $16 million in research and development, and a net increase
of $11 million in the amount requested in operations and maintenance,
for a total net increase of $35 million--not a lot of increase. It also
reflects the requested level of funding for the Department of Energy
programs and activities.
The bill fully funds the request for missile defense, but it does so
in a way that reduces some funding for longer term developmental
efforts to support near-term capabilities and enhanced testing.
Overall, $8.8 billion was requested for missile defense activities, of
which $7.8 billion is for the Missile Defense Agency.
Significant funding actions in the markup include an increase of $100
million for the ground-based midcourse defense system to enhance ground
and flight testing, and an increase of $75 million for the Aegis BMD
system to improve system performance and to accelerate SM-3 missile
delivery in 2007. Both of these systems, while continuing to undergo
development and testing, are available today for use in an emergency to
protect the United States and its allies against limited ballistic
missile attacks. By focusing

[[Page S8543]]

on near-term capabilities, this bill sends a strong message to
potential adversaries that the United States is no longer vulnerable to
ballistic missile threats or coercion.
The bill makes significant adjustments to the President's budget
request for military satellite programs. The bill recommends a $200
million reduction in the Transformational Satellite Program, TSAT, to
put the program on a healthier developmental track; an increase of $100
million for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency Satellite Program,
AEHF, to begin procuring a fourth AEHF communications satellite; and a
reduction, however, of $75 million for the Space Radar Program due to
insufficient programmatic and cost definition. We expect this Space
Radar Program to be successful as time goes by.
Related to the Department of Energy, the bill includes $14.8 billion
for nuclear weapons and environmental management programs for the
fiscal year 2006, the amount requested by the administration. Of this
amount, $6.6 billion is for the National Nuclear Security
Administration nuclear weapons activities.
The bill includes a few modest increases to help reduce deferred
maintenance and to support the infrastructure of the nuclear weapons
complex. The bill also increases funding for security at Department of
Energy sites. This is a reflection of the need to enhance security at
these sites in response to the potential threats that exist after 9/11.
The bill also includes authorization at the budget request to
continue the feasibility study of the robust nuclear earth penetrator,
RNEP. This bill does not, however, provide any funding for Air Force
activities to integrate RNEP into a delivery platform. The committee
has honored the balance struck 2 years ago when Congress enacted a
provision prohibiting the administration from proceeding beyond a
feasibility study of RNEP without explicit authorization from Congress.
No such authorization was sought by the administration this year, and
none is provided. The $4.0 million provided for RNEP is for
continuation of the feasibility study and nothing beyond that.
The bill also funds the Department of Energy Environmental Management
Program at $6.6 billion. The Environmental Management Program is
addressing the environmental cleanup needs at Department of Energy
nuclear sites. This environmental contamination is an unfortunate and
highly expensive legacy of our victory in the Cold War. Our bill
provides appropriate funding to continue this cleanup program.
Again, I thank the ranking member on the Strategic Forces
Subcommittee, Senator Nelson, for working with me on this legislation
and throughout our hearings and in the markup leading up to this point.
The Armed Services Committee takes a lot of time and deliberation to
produce this bill. It is the product of a lot of hard work, a lot of
hard choices, and a fair amount of compromise. I hope my colleagues
will support the bill that our committee has produced. I again express
my appreciation to Chairman Warner for his leadership, for the fact
that we have been able to move this bill promptly this year. I think
our Nation is going to benefit from many of the important provisions
that are contained in it.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to thank my longtime friend and
committee member, the Senator from Alabama. We have worked together. We
have traveled together. We have been to Iraq together. We went down
last Friday to Guantanamo to inspect the detention facilities down
there. He has always responded to the request of the chairman, pack a
bag, will travel, take on any mission. I thank him.
I also thank him for working as subcommittee chairman and getting the
work done in his subcommittee.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank the chairman. There is no
committee on which I serve that is more of a pleasure to work and has a
better bipartisan spirit. Chairman Warner and Senator Levin deserve
much credit for that. We get to make a number of trips. Nobody makes
more trips than Chairman Warner, but it is a thrill to visit our fine
men and women in uniform in the highly dangerous areas that we many
times get to visit.
It is an honor to be on the committee whose responsibility it is to
support them.
I thank the chairman.
Mr. WARNER. I thank my colleague.
Mr. President, we are working with the other side. I think we have a
package of cleared amendments, but maybe the Senator wishes to address
something else.

Amendment No. 1315

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, the amendment which was just offered has
now been cleared on this side relative to the degree at the university.
We support it. Senator Nelson is our ranking member. We wanted to
doublecheck with him.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on amendment No. 1315?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 1315) was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. LEVIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator Jon
Kyl as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1314.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendments Nos. 1318, 1319, 1320, 1321, 1322, and 1323, En Bloc

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, with the attention of my distinguished
ranking member, we ask that a series of amendments, which I will now
send to the desk, which have been cleared, be considered, and I ask
that any statements relating to the individual amendments be printed
the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner] proposes amendments
numbered 1318, 1319, 1320, 1321, 1322 and 1323 en bloc.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendments be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendments are as follows:

amendment no. 1318

(Purpose: To authorize a pilot program on expanded public-private
partnerships for research and development)

At the end of subtitle E of title VIII, add the following:

SEC. 846. PILOT PROGRAM ON EXPANDED PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

(a) Pilot Program Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense may
carry out a pilot program to authorize the organizations
referred to in subsection (b) to enter into cooperative
research and development agreements under section 12 of the
Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C.
3710a) in order to assess the benefits of such agreements for
such organizations and for the Department of Defense as a
whole.
(b) Covered Organizations.--The organizations referred to
in this subsection are as follows:
(1) The National Defense University.
(2) The Defense Acquisition University.
(3) The Joint Forces Command.
(4) The United States Transportation Command.
(c) Limitation.--No agreement may be entered into, or
continue in force, under the pilot program under subsection
(a) after September 30, 2009.
(d) Report.--Not later than February 1, 2009, the Secretary
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the pilot program under subsection (a). The report shall
include--
(1) a description of any agreements entered into under the
pilot program; and
(2) the assessment of the Secretary of the benefits of the
agreements entered into under the pilot program for the
organizations referred to in subsection (b) and for the
Department of Defense as a whole.

amendment no. 1319

(Purpose: To modify the requirements for reports on program to award
prizes for advanced technology achievements)

At the end of subtitle E of title II, add the following:

[[Page S8544]]

SEC. 244. MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTS ON PROGRAM
TO AWARD PRIZES FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
ACHIEVEMENTS.

Subsection (e) of section 2374a of title 10, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(e) Annual Report.--(1) Not later than March 1 each year,
the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
report on the activities undertaken by the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency in the preceding year under the
authority of this section.
``(2) The report for a year under this subsection shall
include the following:
``(A) The results of consultations between the Director and
officials of the military departments regarding the areas of
research, technology development, or prototype development
for which prizes would be awarded under the program under
this section.
``(B) A description of the proposed goals of the
competitions established under the program, including the
areas of research, technology development, or prototype
development to be promoted by such competitions and the
relationship of such areas to the military missions of the
Department.
``(C) The total amount of cash prizes awarded under the
program, including a description of the manner in which the
amounts of cash prizes awarded and claimed were allocated
among the accounts of the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency for recording as obligations and expenditures.
``(D) The methods used for the solicitation and evaluation
of submissions under the program, together with an assessment
of the effectiveness of such methods.
``(E) A description of the resources, including personnel
and funding, used in the execution of the program, together
with a detailed description of the activities for which such
resources were used.
``(F) A description of any plans to transition the
technologies or prototypes developed as a result of the
program into acquisition programs of the Department.
``(G) For each competition under the program, a statement
of the reasons why the competition was a preferable means of
promoting basic, advanced, or applied research, technology
development, or prototype development projects to other means
of promoting such projects, including contracts, grants,
cooperative agreements, or other transactions.''.

amendment no. 1320

(Purpose: To make a technical correction relating to the Science,
Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) Defense Education
Program)

On page 289, line 25, strike ``during such periods'' and
insert ``in the case of the period after completion of the
degree''.

amendment no. 1321

(Purpose: To establish certain qualifications for individuals who serve
as Regional Directors of the TRICARE program)

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

SEC. 718. QUALIFICATIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS SERVING AS TRICARE
REGIONAL DIRECTORS.

(a) Qualifications.--Effective as of the date of the
enactment of this Act, no individual may serve in the
position of Regional Director under the TRICARE program
unless the individual--
(1) is--
(A) an officer of the Armed Forces in a general or flag
officer grade; or
(B) a civilian employee of the Department of Defense in the
Senior Executive Service; and
(2) has at least 10 years of experience, or equivalent
expertise or training, in the military health care system,
managed care, and health care policy and administration.
(b) TRICARE Program Defined.--In this section, the term
``TRICARE program'' has the meaning given such term in
section 1072(7) of title 10, United States Code.

amendment no. 1322

(Purpose: To make technical corrections to authorizations of
appropriations)

On page 27, line 21, strike ``$18,843,296,000'' and insert
``$19,011,754,000''.

On page 305, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:
(6) For the Naval Reserve, $2,400,000.

amendment no. 1323

(Purpose: To clarify the amendment relating to the grade of the Judge
Advocate General of the Army)

On page 77, strike lines 22 through 25 and insert the
following:

Section 3037(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by striking the last sentence and inserting the following new
sentences: ``The Judge Advocate General, while so serving,
has the grade of lieutenant general. An officer appointed as
Assistant Judge Advocate General who holds a lower regular
grade shall be appointed in the regular grade of major
general.''.

Mr. LEVIN. We have no objection on this side.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I urge adoption of these amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments are agreed
to en bloc.
The amendments (Nos. 1318, 1319, 1320, 1321, 1322, and 1323) were
agreed to.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. WARNER. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1324

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I send an amendment on behalf of Senators
McConnell, Bunning, Allard, and Salazar, which would provide the
Secretary of Defense authority to use research and development funds
available for chemical weapons demilitarization activities under the
Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternative Program to carry out
construction projects for facilities necessary to support chemical
demilitarization at Pueblo Army Depot in Colorado and Bluegrass Army
Depot in Kentucky. I believe it has been cleared.
Mr. LEVIN. It has been.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner], for Mr. McConnell,
proposes an amendment numbered 1324.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To authorize the construction of chemical demilitarization
facilities)

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

SEC. 213. CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION FACILITIES.

(a) Authority To Use Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation Funds To Construct Facilities.--The Secretary of
Defense may, using amounts authorized to be appropriated by
section 201(4) for research, development, test, and
evaluation, Defense-wide and available for chemical weapons
demilitarization activities under the Assembled Chemical
Weapons Alternatives program, carry out construction
projects, or portions of construction projects, for
facilities necessary to support chemical demilitarization
operations at each of the following:
(1) Pueblo Army Depot, Colorado.
(2) Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky.
(b) Scope of Authority.--The authority in subsection (a) to
carry out a construction project for facilities includes
authority to carry out planning and design and the
acquisition of land for the construction or improvement of
such facilities.
(c) Limitation on Amount of Funds.--The amount of funds
that may be utilized under the authority in subsection (a)
may not exceed $51,000,000.
(d) Duration of Authority.--A construction project, or
portion of a construction project, may not be commenced under
the authority in subsection (a) after September 30, 2006.
(e) Notice and Wait.--The Secretary may not carry out a
construction project, or portion of a construction project,
under the authority in subsection (a) until the end of the
21-day period beginning on the date on which the Secretary
notifies the congressional defense committees of the intent
to carry out such project.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to speak with respect to
amendment No. 1326. to the Defense authorization bill, which was
adopted by the Senate today, that directly affects the citizens of
Pueblo, CO, and the cleanup of those chemical weapons stockpiled at the
Pueblo Chemical Depot. I thank my colleagues, Senator Warner and
Senator Levin, and their staffs, for their help on this measure. I
thank, too, Senators McConnell and Bunning and my colleague from the
great State of Colorado, Senator Allard. We have maintained an
important alliance on this issue, and I appreciate their efforts.
This bipartisan Pueblo amendment, which I am proud to cosponsor,
moves $51 million from the Department of Defense's Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation budget to the Military Construction
budget for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program. This
program, known as ACWA, is the authority for chemical weapons
destruction at both the Pueblo Chemical Depot and the Bluegrass, KY,
site.
More than three-quarters of a million chemical weapons--mustard agent
rounds--are stockpiled in the Pueblo Chemical Depot. These weapons are
a threat to the security of the surrounding community. The United
States has sworn to safely destroy these weapons before the 2012
deadline established by the Chemical Weapons Convention. Progress has
been slow in the past but has recently been moving forward.
Unfortunately, under the President's budget request, there was no
money allotted for Military Construction at the Pueblo Chemical Depot
facility for fiscal year 2006. The program was on hold at the time the
budget was released. But now that the dedication and hard

[[Page S8545]]

work of the citizens of Pueblo, along with a strong bipartisan effort
here in DC, has resulted in forward progress, money needs to be
designated specifically for MilCon so the Department of Defense can
spend money for ACWA construction projects. Without money being
designated for MilCon, the progress at Pueblo Chemical Depot could be
halted once again.
The amendment adopted today was cosponsored by the Senators from
Colorado and Kentucky. It ensures that money will be available to be
spent in fiscal year 2006 for construction, planning, and design work
at both the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado and at the Bluegrass, KY,
site.
This amendment is an essential step forward for the destruction of
the tons of chemical weapons still stored at the Pueblo Chemical Depot.
I hope this is another indication that the Pentagon recognizes the
urgency this situation demands--an urgency the people of Pueblo and all
of Colorado are right to expect.
I am proud to be part of such a strong coalition of concerned
citizens and Senators from the communities impacted by these terrible
weapons. But even though I am cautiously optimistic that today's
amendment signals positive action in the future, there is still much
work to do. I hope that this upcoming work will go forward in a similar
manner: with good communications, with utmost concern for the safety of
the citizens of Pueblo and Bluegrass, and with our eye always fixed on
the goal of the safe destruction of these chemical weapons by 2012.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I urge the Senate to adopt this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
If not, the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 1324) was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.

Amendment No. 1325

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senator Collins, I
offer an amendment that would require the Department of Defense to
develop a strategic plan for the civilian workforce of the Department
of Defense, and I believe the amendment has been cleared.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Michigan [Mr. Levin], for himself, and Ms.
Collins, proposes an amendment numbered 1325.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To require a strategic human capital plan for civilian
employees of the Department of Defense)

At the end of title XI, add the following:

SEC. 1106. STRATEGIC HUMAN CAPITAL PLAN FOR CIVILIAN
EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

(a) Plan Required.--(1) Not later than six months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall develop and submit to the appropriate committees of
Congress a strategic plan to shape and improve the civilian
employee workforce of the Department of Defense.
(2) The plan shall be known as the ``strategic human
capital plan''.
(b) Contents.--The strategic human capital plan required by
subsection (a) shall include--
(1) a workforce gap analysis, including an assessment of--
(A) the critical skills and competencies that will be
needed in the future civilian employee workforce of the
Department of Defense to support national security
requirements and effectively manage the Department over the
next decade;
(B) the skills and competencies of the existing civilian
employee workforce of the Department and projected trends in
that workforce based on expected losses due to retirement and
other attrition; and
(C) gaps in the existing or projected civilian employee
workforce of the Department that should be addressed to
ensure that the Department has continued access to the
critical skills and competencies described in subparagraph
(A); and
(2) a plan of action for developing and reshaping the
civilian employee workforce of the Department to address the
gaps in critical skills and competencies identified under
paragraph (1)(C), including--
(A) specific recruiting and retention goals, including the
program objectives of the Department to be achieved through
such goals; and
(B) specific strategies for development, training,
deploying, compensating, and motivating the civilian employee
workforce of the Department, including the program objectives
of the Department to be achieved through such strategies.
(c) Inapplicability of Certain Limitations.--The
recruitment and retention of civilian employees to meet the
goals established under subsection (b)(2)(A) shall not be
subject to any limitation or constraint under statute or
regulations on the end strength of the civilian workforce of
the Department of Defense or any part of the workforce of the
Department.
(d) Annual Updates.--Not later than March 1 of each year
from 2007 through 2012, the Secretary shall update the
strategic human capital plan required by subsection (a), as
previously updated under this subsection.
(e) Annual Reports.--Not later than March 1 of each year
from 2007 through 2012, the Secretary shall submit to the
appropriate committees of Congress--
(1) the update of the strategic human capital plan prepared
in such year under subsection (d); and
(2) the assessment of the Secretary, using results-oriented
performance measures, of the progress of the Department of
Defense in implementing the strategic human capital plan.
(f) Comptroller General Review.--(1) Not later than 90 days
after the Secretary submits under subsection (a) the
strategic human capital plan required by that subsection, the
Comptroller General shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a report on the plan.
(2) Not later than 90 days after the Secretary submits
under subsection (e) an update of the strategic human capital
plan under subsection (d), the Comptroller General shall
submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on
the update.
(3) A report on the strategic human capital plan under
paragraph (1), or on an update of the plan under paragraph
(2), shall include the assessment of the Comptroller General
of the extent to which the plan or update, as the case may
be--
(A) complies with the requirements of this section; and
(B) complies with applicable best management practices (as
determined by the Comptroller General).
(g) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate committees of Congress''
means--
(1) the Committees on Armed Services and Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and
(2) the Committees on Armed Services and Government Reform
of the House of Representatives.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the amendment is acceptable to this side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? Without objection,
the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 1325) was agreed to.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. WARNER. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I believe, unless my distinguished
colleague has a need to further address the Senate, we have concluded
the opening round of our bill. My understanding is that the pending
business will be amendment No. 1314 to S. 1042, am I correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct, that is the pending question.

____________________