H7894 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE December 12, 2013 SEC. 4701. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS (In Thousands of Dollars) FY 2014 Agreement Program Request Authorized Program direction .............................................................................................................................................. 13,712 13,712 Total, Office of Legacy Management ......................................................................................................................... 176,983 176,983 Defense-related activities Defense related administrative support Chief financial officer ......................................................................................................................................... 38,979 38,979 Chief information officer .................................................................................................................................... 79,857 79,857 Total, Defense related administrative support ......................................................................................................... 118,836 118,836 Office of hearings and appeals .................................................................................................................................. 5,022 5,022 Subtotal, Other defense activities ................................................................................................................................... 749,080 758,658 Total, Other Defense Activities ....................................................................................................................................... 749,080 758,658 The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- compliance with the Budget Control tion Act for Fiscal Year 2014, are generally ant to the rule, the gentleman from Act and the House, the Senate, and the referred to as ‘‘the House bill.’’ The provi- California (Mr. MCKEON) and the gen- Republican Study Committee-approved sions of S. 1197, the Senate Committee on Armed Services committee-reported version tleman from Washington (Mr. SMITH) budgets for 2014. of the National Defense Authorization Act each will control 20 minutes. What makes this bill such an impor- for Fiscal Year 2014, are generally referred to The Chair recognizes the gentleman tant piece of legislation are the vital as ‘‘the Senate committee-reported bill.’’ from California. authorities contained therein, which is The final form of the agreements reached GENERAL LEAVE why Chairman Dempsey, Chairman of during negotiations between the House and Mr. MCKEON. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff; General the Senate are referred to as ‘‘the agree- unanimous consent that all Members Amos, Commandant of the Marine ment.’’ have 5 legislative days to revise and ex- Corps; The Washington Post; the Na- Compliance with rules of the House of Rep- tend their remarks and insert extra- tional Guard Bureau; and others all resentatives and Senate regarding earmarks and congressionally directed spending items neous material on the matter under weighed in this week urging us to com- Consistent with the intent of clause 9 of consideration. plete consideration of the bill. This legislation pays our troops and rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Rep- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there resentatives and Rule XLIV of the Standing objection to the request of the gen- their families. It keeps our Navy fleet Rules of the Senate, neither the bill nor the tleman from California? sailing and military aircraft flying. It accompanying joint explanatory statement There was no objection. maintains a strong nuclear deterrent. contains any congressional earmarks, con- Mr. MCKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield This year’s NDAA also provides badly gressionally directed spending items, limited myself as much time as I may con- needed reforms to help alleviate the tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits, as de- sume. crisis of sexual assault in the military. fined in such rules. I rise today in support of the fiscal I want to thank Congressmen MIKE Summary of discretionary authorizations and year 2014 National Defense Authoriza- TURNER and NIKI TSONGAS of our com- budget implication tion Act. The NDAA is the key mecha- mittee for leading a bipartisan group of The administration’s budget request for nism by which the Congress fulfills its members who worked tirelessly on national defense discretionary programs within the jurisdiction of the Committees on primary constitutional responsibility those reforms; also JOE WILSON, chair- Armed Services of the Senate and the House to provide for the common defense, and man of the subcommittee, and SUSAN of Representatives for fiscal year 2014 was this year will mark the 52nd consecu- DAVIS, his ranking member, for the ef- $625.2 billion. Of this amount, $526.6 billion tive year that we have completed our forts they made on this issue. They was requested for base Department of De- work. were long overdue. fense (DOD) programs, $80.7 billion was re- The NDAA passed the Armed Serv- The NDAA covers many more critical quested for overseas contingency operations ices Committee with a vote of 59–2. It issues, but I will close in the interest of (OCO), and $17.9 billion was requested for na- passed the full House by a margin of time. Before I do, I would like to thank tional security programs in the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Defense Nuclear Fa- 315–108. Likewise, the Senate voted its all our members of the Armed Services cilities Safety Board (DNFSB). version of the bill out of committee by Committee for their efforts. I am The bill authorizes $625.1 billion in fiscal a vote of 23–3. grateful not only for the hardworking year 2014, including $526.8 billion for base This year we had unique challenges chairs and ranking members of the DOD programs, $80.7 billion for OCO, and in bringing back a bipartisan, bi- HASC, but also to all Members of this $17.6 billion for national security programs cameral deal to the House for final body for recognizing the importance of in the DOE and the DNFSB. consideration. Yet despite those obsta- this vital piece of legislation, along The two tables preceding the detailed pro- gram adjustments in Division D of this Joint cles, we were able to negotiate a bipar- with all members of our staff on both Explanatory Statement summarize the di- tisan bill with our Senate colleagues. sides of the aisle. rect discretionary authorizations in the I am especially grateful to Ranking I reserve the balance of my time. agreement and the equivalent budget author- Member ADAM SMITH as well as Chair- f ity levels for fiscal year 2014 defense pro- man LEVIN and Ranking Member grams. The first table summarizes the agree- INHOFE of the Senate Armed Services JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT ment on authorizations within the jurisdic- Committee. They all rolled up their TO ACCOMPANY THE NATIONAL tion of the Armed Services Committees. The sleeves, and we got the bill done in the DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT second table details the budget authority im- FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014 plication of the discretionary authorizations allotted time. Believe me, that was no in the agreement when accounting for na- small hill to climb. The following consists of the explanatory tional defense items that are not in the ju- On a related note, I would be remiss material to accompany the National Defense risdiction of the Armed Services Commit- if I failed to note that we will be voting Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. tees. on another hard-fought measure that is Section 4 of the Act specifies that this ex- DIVISION A—DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE critical to defense. We have in sight a planatory statement shall have the same ef- AUTHORIZATIONS fect with respect to the implementation of budget agreement for the next 2 years TITLE I—PROCUREMENT that provides a measure of predict- this legislation as if it were a joint explana- tory statement of a committee of con- SUBTITLE A—AUTHORIZATION OF ability for our military. As we take the ference. APPROPRIATIONS first steps to get this deal enacted, I In this joint explanatory statement, the Authorization of appropriations (sec. 101) wanted to assure Members that the provisions of H.R. 1960, the House-passed The House bill contained a provision (sec. NDAA’s authorization levels remain in version of the National Defense Authoriza- 101) authorizing appropriations for fiscal VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:20 Dec 14, 2013 Jkt 039060 PO 00000 Frm 00204 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A12DE7.018 H12DEPT1 bjneal on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with HOUSE December 12, 2013 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H7895 year 2014 for procurement for the Army, the peal a reporting requirement in section 125 of The agreement includes the Senate provi- Navy and Marine Corps, the Air Force, and the National Defense Authorization Act for sion. defense-wide activities, as specified in the Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84). The re- Prohibition on cancellation or modification of funding table in section 4101. port submitted by the Secretary of the Navy avionics modernization program for C–130 The Senate committee-reported bill con- to Congress of February 2010 provided the aircraft (sec. 133) tained an identical provision (sec. 101). Department of the Navy’s implementation The agreement includes this provision. The House bill contained a provision (sec. plan to complete these reports. 132) that would prohibit the Secretary of the SUBTITLE B—ARMY PROGRAMS The House bill contained no similar provi- Air Force from terminating the legacy C– Limitation on availability of funds for Stryker