U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1

19–006 2002

Union Calendar No. 492 

107th Congress, 2d Session – – – – – – – – – – – – House Report 107–791

REPORT OF THE ACTIVITIES

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

FOR THE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

DECEMBER 18, 2002.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House 

on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


e:\seals\Congress.#13
(II)

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

BOB STUMP, Arizona, Chairman 

FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, 

Chairman Emeritus1

DUNCAN HUNTER, California, Vice 

Chairman2

JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah 

CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania 

JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado 

JIM SAXTON, New Jersey 

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York 

TERRY EVERETT, Alabama 

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland 

HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, California 

J.C. WATTS, JR., Oklahoma 

MAC THORNBERRY, Texas 

JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee 

JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida4

WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JIM RYUN, Kansas 

BOB RILEY, Alabama 

JIM GIBBONS, Nevada 

ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina 

DONALD SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania5

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

KEN CALVERT, California 

ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut 

ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida 

MARK STEVEN KIRK, Illinois 

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia 

ED SCHROCK, Virginia 

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia7

JEFF MILLER, Florida8

JOE WILSON, South Carolina9

IKE SKELTON, Missouri, Ranking Member 

NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia3

JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina 

SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas 

LANE EVANS, Illinois 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii 

MARTY MEEHAN, Massachusetts 

ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam 

ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine 

VIC SNYDER, Arkansas 

JIM TURNER, Texas 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut 

MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina 

CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas 

CYNTHIA A. MCKINNEY, Georgia 

ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

MIKE THOMPSON, California 

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

RICK LARSEN, Washington6

ROBERT S. RANGEL, Staff Director 

ALEXIS R. LASSELLE, Legislative Operations Clerk 

1Mr. Spence was named Chairman Emeritus on February 7, 2001. Mr. Spence died August 

16, 2001. 2Mr. Hunter was named Vice Chairman of the Committee on September 24, 2001. 

3Mr. Sisisky died March 29, 2001. 

4Mr. Scarborough resigned from the House of Representatives on September 5, 2001. 

5Mr. Sherwood resigned from the Committee on March 7, 2001. 

6Mr. Larsen (WA) was assigned to the Committee on July 25, 2001. 

7Mr. Forbes was assigned to the Committee on June 28, 2001. 

8Mr. Miller was assigned to the Committee on November 8, 2001. 

9Mr. Wilson was assigned to the Committee on January 25, 2002. 

(III)

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, 

Washington, DC, December 18, 2002. 

Hon. JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk of the House of Representatives, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. TRANDAHL: Pursuant to House Rule XI 1.(d), there is 

transmitted herewith the report of activities of the Committee on 

Armed Services for the 107th Congress. 

Sincerely, 

BOB STUMP, Chairman.

(V)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Powers and Duties, Committee on Armed Services—107th Congress ................ 1 

Background ....................................................................................................... 1 

Constitutional Powers and Duties .................................................................. 2 

House Rules on Jurisdiction ............................................................................ 3 

Investigative Authority and Legislative Oversight ........................................ 3 

Committee Rules ...................................................................................................... 4

Rules Governing Procedure ............................................................................. 4 

Composition of the Committee on Armed Services—107th Congress ................. 13 

Subcommittees of the Committee on Armed Services—107th Congress ............. 14 

Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee ...................................... 14 

Military Personnel Subcommittee ................................................................... 15 

Military Procurement Subcommittee .............................................................. 16 

Military Readiness Subcommittee ................................................................... 17 

Military Research and Development Subcommittee ...................................... 18 

Full Committee Panels ............................................................................................ 19 

Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation ....................... 19 

Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine ......................................... 19 

Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization ............ 20

Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism ............................................................ 20

Committee Staff ....................................................................................................... 21 

Committee Meetings ................................................................................................ 23 

Legislative Actions ................................................................................................... 23 

Legislation Enacted Into Law ......................................................................... 23 

Public Law 107–56 (H.R. 3162) ................................................................ 23 

Public Law 107–103 (H.R. 1291) .............................................................. 23 

Public Law 107–107 (S. 1438) .................................................................. 24 

Public Law 107–152 (S.J. Res. 32) ........................................................... 26 

Public Law 107–296 (H.R. 5005) .............................................................. 27 

Public Law 107–314 (H.R. 4546) .............................................................. 27 

Legislation Reported but Not Enacted ........................................................... 30 

H.R. 2581 ................................................................................................... 30 

H.R. 4547 ................................................................................................... 30 

H.R. 5132 ................................................................................................... 31 

Oversight Activities ................................................................................................. 33 

Summary of Oversight Plan ............................................................................ 33 

Actions and Recommendations ........................................................................ 33 

Additional Oversight Activities ....................................................................... 38 

Other Activities of the Full Committee ................................................................. 45 

Budget Activity ................................................................................................. 45 

Full Committee Hearings ................................................................................ 46 

Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation ....................... 53 

Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine ......................................... 54 

Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization ............ 54

Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism ............................................................ 55

Other Activities of Subcommittees ......................................................................... 57 

Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee ...................................... 57 

Military Personnel Subcommittee ................................................................... 58 

Military Procurement Subcommittee .............................................................. 58 

Military Readiness Subcommittee ................................................................... 59 

Military Research and Development Subcommittee ...................................... 59 

Publications .............................................................................................................. 61 

Committee Prints of Laws Relating to National Defense ............................. 61 

Committee Prints ............................................................................................. 61 

Published Proceedings ...................................................................................... 61 

Page

VI

Publications —Continued

House Reports ................................................................................................... 65 

Public Laws ....................................................................................................... 66 

Press Releases .......................................................................................................... 67

Union Calendar No. 492

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 2d Session 107–791 

REPORT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON 

ARMED SERVICES FOR THE 107TH CONGRESS

DECEMBER 18, 2002.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. STUMP, from the Committee on Armed Services, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

ON

POWERS AND DUTIES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED

SERVICES—107TH CONGRESS 

BACKGROUND

The House Committee on Armed Services, a standing committee 

of Congress, was established on January 2, 1947, as a part of the 

Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), by merging 

the Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs. The Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs were established in 

1882. In 1885, jurisdiction over military and naval appropriations 

was taken from the Committee on Appropriations and given to the 

Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs, respectively. 

This practice continued until July 1, 1920, when jurisdiction over 

all appropriations was again placed in the Committee on Appropriations. 

In the 93rd Congress, following a study by the House Select 

Committee on Committees, the House passed H. Res. 988, the 

Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, to be effective January 3, 

1975. As a result of those amendments, the jurisdictional areas of 

the Committee on Armed Services remained essentially unchanged. 

However, oversight functions were amended to require each standing committee to review and study on a continuing basis all laws, 

programs, and government activities dealing with or involving 

international arms control and disarmament and the education of 

military dependents in school. 

2

The rules changes adopted by the House (H. Res. 5) on January 

4, 1977, placed new responsibilities in the field of atomic energy in 

the Committee on Armed Services. Those responsibilities involved 

the national security aspects of atomic energy previously within the 

jurisdiction of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. Public Law 

95–110, effective September 20, 1977, abolished the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. 

With the adoption of H. Res. 658 on July 14, 1977, which established the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the 

jurisdiction of the Committee on Armed Service over intelligence 

matters was diminished. 

That resolution gave the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence oversight responsibilities for intelligence and intelligencerelated activities and programs of the U.S. Government. Specifically, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has exclusive legislative jurisdiction regarding the Central Intelligence 

Agency and the director of Central Intelligence, including authorizations. Also, legislative jurisdiction over all intelligence and intelligence-related activities and programs was vested in the permanent select committee except that other committees with a jurisdictional interest may request consideration of any such matters. Accordingly, as a matter of practice, the Committee on Armed Services shared jurisdiction over the authorization process involving intelligence-related activities. 

The committee continues to have shared jurisdiction over military intelligence activities as set forth in Rule X of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives. 

With the adoption of House rules (H. Res. 5) on January 4, 1995, 

the Committee on National Security was established as the successor committee to the Committee on Armed Services, and was 

granted additional legislative and oversight authority over merchant marine academies, national security aspects of merchant marine policy and programs, and interoceanic canals. Rules for the 

104th Congress also codified the existing jurisdiction of the committee over tactical intelligence matters and the intelligence related activities of the Department of Defense. 

On January 6, 1999, the House adopted H. Res. 5, rules for the 

106th Congress, in which the Committee on National Security was 

redesignated as the Committee on Armed Services.

CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS AND DUTIES

The powers and duties of Congress in relation to national defense 

matters stem from Article I, section 8, of the Constitution, which 

provides, among other things, that the Congress shall have power 

to: 

Raise and support armies; 

Provide and maintain a navy; 

Make rules for the government and regulation of the land 

and naval forces; 

Provide for calling forth the militia; 

Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, 

and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the 

service of the United States; 

3

Exercise exclusive legislation * * * over all places purchased 

* * * for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, 

and other needful buildings; and 

Make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers. 

HOUSE RULES ON JURISDICTION

Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives established 

the jurisdiction and related functions for each standing committee. 

Under that rule, all bills, resolutions, and other matters relating to 

subjects within the jurisdiction of any standing shall be referred to 

such committee. The jurisdiction of the House Committee on 

Armed Services, pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule X is as follows: 

(1) Ammunition depots; forts; arsenals; Army, Navy, and Air 

Force reservations and establishments. 

(2) Common defense generally. 

(3) Conservation, development, and use of naval petroleum 

and oil shale reserves. 

(4) The Department of Defense generally, including the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force generally. 

(5) Interoceanic canals generally, including measures relating to the maintenance, operation, and administration of interoceanic canals. 

(6) Merchant Marine Academy, and State Maritime Academies. 

(7) Military applications of nuclear energy. 

(8) Tactical intelligence and intelligence-related activities of 

the Department of the Defense. 

(9) National security aspects of merchant marine, including 

financial assistance for the construction and operation of vessels, maintenance of the U.S. shipbuilding and ship repair industrial base, cabotage, cargo preference and merchant marine 

officers and seamen as these matters relate to the national security. 

(10) Pay, promotion, retirement, and other benefits and 

privileges of members of the armed forces. 

(11) Scientific research and development in support of the 

armed services. 

(12) Selective service. 

(13) Size and composition of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, 

and Air Force. 

(14) Soldiers’ and sailors’ homes. 

(15) Strategic and critical materials necessary for the common defense. 

In addition to its legislative jurisdiction and general oversight 

function, the Committee on Armed Services has special oversight 

functions with respect to international arms control and disarmament and military dependents’ education. 

INVESTIGATIVE AUTHORITY AND LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT

H. Res. 988 of the 93rd Congress, the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, amended clause 1(b) of rule XI of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, to provide general authority for each 

committee to investigate matters within its jurisdiction. That 

4

amendment established a permanent investigative authority and 

relieved the committee of the former requirement of obtaining a renewal of the investigative authority by a House resolution at the 

beginning of each Congress. H. Res. 988 also amended rule X of the 

Rules of the House of Representatives by requiring, as previously 

indicated, that standing committees are to conduct legislative oversight in the area of their respective jurisdiction, and by establishing specific oversight functions for the Committee on Armed 

Services. 

H. Res. 84, approved by the House on March 27, 2001, provided 

funds for oversight responsibilities to be conducted in the 107th 

Congress, pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives (relating to general oversight responsibilities), clause 3(g) of rule X (relating to special oversight functions), 

and clause 1(b) of rule XI (relating to investigations and studies). 

COMMITTEE RULES 

The committee held its organizational meeting on February 7, 

2001, and adopted the following rules governing procedure and 

rules for investigative hearings conducted by subcommittees. 

(H.A.S.C. No. 107–1) 

RULES GOVERNING PROCEDURE

RULE 1. APPLICATION OF HOUSE RULES

The Rules of the House of Representatives are the rules of the 

Committee on Armed Services (hereinafter referred to in these 

rules as the ‘‘Committee’’) and its subcommittees so far as applicable. 

RULE 2. FULL COMMITTEE MEETING DATE

(a) The Committee shall meet every Wednesday at 10:00 a.m., 

and at such other times as may be fixed by the chairman of the 

Committee (hereinafter referred to in these rules as the 

‘‘Chairman’’), or by written request of members of the Committee 

pursuant to clause 2(c) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

(b) A Wednesday meeting of the Committee may be dispensed 

with by the Chairman, but such action may be reversed by a written request of a majority of the members of the Committee. 

RULE 3. SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING DATES

Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings, receive 

evidence, and report to the Committee on all matters referred to 

it. Insofar as possible, meetings of the Committee and its subcommittees shall not conflict. A subcommittee chairman shall set 

meeting dates after consultation with the Chairman, the other subcommittee chairmen, and the ranking minority member of the subcommittee with a view toward avoiding simultaneous scheduling of 

committee and subcommittee meetings or hearings wherever possible. 

5

RULE 4. SUBCOMMITTEES

The Committee shall be organized to consist of five standing subcommittees with the following jurisdictions: 

Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities: military 

construction; real estate acquisitions and disposals; military family 

housing and support; base closure and realignment; and related 

legislative oversight. 

Subcommittee on Military Personnel: military forces and authorized strengths; integration of active and reserve components; military personnel policy; compensation and other benefits; and related 

legislative oversight. 

Subcommittee on Military Procurement: the annual authorization for procurement of military weapon systems and components 

thereof, including full scale development and systems transition; 

military application of nuclear energy; and related legislative oversight. 

Subcommittee on Military Readiness: the annual authorization 

for operation and maintenance; the readiness and preparedness requirements of the defense establishment; and related legislative 

oversight. 

Subcommittee on Military Research and Development: the annual authorization for military research and development and related legislative oversight. 

RULE 5. COMMITTEE PANELS

(a) The Chairman may designate a panel of the Committee consisting of members of the Committee to inquire into and take testimony on a matter or matters that fall within the jurisdiction of 

more than one subcommittee and to report to the Committee. 

(b) No panel so appointed shall continue in existence for more 

than six months. A panel so appointed may, upon the expiration of 

six months, be reappointed by the Chairman. 

(c) No panel so appointed shall have legislative jurisdiction. 

RULE 6. REFERENCE AND CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION

(a) The Chairman shall refer legislation and other matters to the 

appropriate subcommittee or to the full Committee. 

(b) Legislation shall be taken up for hearing only when called by 

the Chairman of the Committee or subcommittee, as appropriate, 

or by a majority of those present and voting. 

(c) The Chairman, with approval of a majority vote of a quorum 

of the Committee, shall have authority to discharge a subcommittee from consideration of any measure or matter referred 

thereto and have such measure or matter considered by the Committee. 

(d) Reports and recommendations of a subcommittee may not be 

considered by the Committee until after the intervention of three 

calendar days from the time the report is approved by the subcommittee and available to the members of the Committee, except 

that this rule may be waived by a majority vote of a quorum of the 

Committee. 

6

RULE 7. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARINGS AND MEETINGS

Pursuant to clause 2(g)(3) of rule XI of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Chairman of the Committee or of any subcommittee or panel shall make public announcement of the date, 

place, and subject matter of any committee or subcommittee hearing at least one week before the commencement of the hearing. 

However, if the Chairman of the Committee or of any subcommittee or panel, with the concurrence of the ranking minority 

member of the Committee or of any subcommittee or panel, determines that there is good cause to begin the hearing sooner, or if 

the Committee, subcommittee or panel so determines by majority 

vote, a quorum being present for the transaction of business, such 

chairman shall make the announcement at the earliest possible 

date. Any announcement made under this rule shall be promptly 

published in the Daily Digest, promptly entered into the committee 

scheduling service of the House Information Resources, and 

promptly posted to the internet web page maintained by the Committee. 

RULE 8. BROADCASTING OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND MEETINGS

Clause 4 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives 

shall apply to the Committee. 

RULE 9. MEETINGS AND HEARINGS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

(a) Each hearing and meeting for the transaction of business, including the markup of legislation, conducted by the Committee or 

a subcommittee shall be open to the public except when the Committee or subcommittee, in open session and with a majority being 

present, determines by record vote that all or part of the remainder 

of that hearing or meeting on that day shall be in executive session 

because disclosure of testimony, evidence, or other matters to be 

considered would endanger the national security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or would violate 

any law or rule of the House of Representatives. Notwithstanding 

the requirements of the preceding sentence, a majority of those 

present, there being in attendance no less than two members of the 

Committee or subcommittee, may vote to close a hearing or meeting for the sole purpose of discussing whether testimony or evidence to be received would endanger the national security, would 

compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or would violate any law or rule of the House of Representatives. If the decision 

is to proceed in executive session, the vote must be by record vote 

and in open session, a majority of the Committee or subcommittee 

being present. 

(b) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the committee that 

the evidence or testimony at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person, or it is asserted by a witness that 

the evidence or testimony that the witness would give at a hearing 

may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate the witness, notwithstanding the requirements of (a) and the provisions of clause 2(g)(2) 

of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, such evidence or testimony shall be presented in executive session, if by a 

majority vote of those present, there being in attendance no less 

than two members of the Committee or subcommittee, the ComVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
7

mittee or subcommittee determines that such evidence may tend to 

defame, degrade or incriminate any person. A majority of those 

present, there being in attendance no less than two members of the 

Committee or subcommittee, may also vote to close the hearing or 

meeting for the sole purpose of discussing whether evidence or testimony to be received would tend to defame, degrade or incriminate 

any person. The Committee or subcommittee shall proceed to receive such testimony in open session only if the Committee or subcommittee, a majority being present, determines that such evidence 

or testimony will not tend to defame, degrade or incriminate any 

person.

(c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, and with the approval of the 

Chairman, each member of the Committee may designate by letter 

to the Chairman, a member of that member’s personal staff with 

Top Secret security clearance to attend hearings of the Committee, 

or that member’s subcommittee(s) (excluding briefings or meetings 

held under the provisions of committee rule 9(a)), which have been 

closed under the provisions of rule 9(a) above for national security 

purposes for the taking of testimony. The attendance of such a staff 

member at such hearings is subject to the approval of the Committee or subcommittee as dictated by national security requirements at that time. The attainment of any required security clearances is the responsibility of individual members of the Committee. 

(d) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, no Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may be excluded from nonparticipatory attendance at any 

hearing of the Committee or a subcommittee, unless the House of 

Representatives shall by majority vote authorize the Committee or 

subcommittee, for purposes of a particular series of hearings on a 

particular article of legislation or on a particular subject of investigation, to close its hearings to Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner by the same procedures designated in this rule 

for closing hearings to the public. The Committee or the subcommittee may vote, by the same procedure, to meet in executive 

session for up to five additional consecutive days of hearings. 

RULE 10. QUORUM

(a) For purposes of taking testimony and receiving evidence, two 

members shall constitute a quorum. 

(b) One-third of the members of the Committee or subcommittee 

shall constitute a quorum for taking any action, with the following 

exceptions, in which case a majority of the Committee or subcommittee shall constitute a quorum: 

(1) Reporting a measure or recommendation; 

(2) Closing committee or subcommittee meetings and hearings to the public; 

(3) Authorizing the issuance of subpoenas; and 

(4) Authorizing the use of executive session material. 

(c) No measure or recommendation shall be reported to the 

House of Representatives unless a majority of the Committee is actually present. 

RULE 11. THE FIVE-MINUTE RULE

(a) The time any one member may address the Committee or 

subcommittee on any measure or matter under consideration shall 

8

not exceed five minutes and then only when the member has been 

recognized by the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as appropriate, except that this time limit may be exceeded by unanimous 

consent. Any member, upon request, shall be recognized for not to 

exceed five minutes to address the Committee or subcommittee on 

behalf of an amendment which the member has offered to any 

pending bill or resolution. The five minute limitation shall not 

apply to the Chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee or subcommittee. 

(b) Members present at a hearing of the Committee or subcommittee when a hearing is originally convened shall be recognized by the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as appropriate, 

in order of seniority. Those members arriving subsequently shall be 

recognized in order of their arrival. Notwithstanding the foregoing, 

the Chairman and the ranking minority member will take precedence upon their arrival. In recognizing members to question witnesses in this fashion, the Chairman shall take into consideration 

the ratio of the majority to minority members present and shall establish the order of recognition for questioning in such a manner 

as not to disadvantage the members of the majority. 

(c) No person other than a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of Congress and committee staff may be seated in or behind the dais area during Committee, subcommittee, or panel hearings and meetings. 

RULE 12. POWER TO SIT AND ACT; SUBPOENA POWER

(a) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions and duties 

under rules X and XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 

the Committee and any subcommittee is authorized (subject to subparagraph (b)(1) of this paragraph): 

(1) to sit and act at such times and places within the United 

States, whether the House is in session, has recessed, or has 

adjourned, and to hold hearings, and 

(2) to require by subpoena, or otherwise, the attendance and 

testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books, 

records, correspondence, memorandums, papers and documents, including, but not limited to, those in electronic form, 

as it considers necessary. 

(b)(1) A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the Committee, or any subcommittee with the concurrence of the full Committee Chairman, under subparagraph (a)(2) in the conduct of any 

investigation, or series of investigations or activities, only when authorized by a majority of the members voting, a majority of the 

Committee or subcommittee being present. Authorized subpoenas 

shall be signed only by the Chairman, or by any member designated by the Committee. 

(2) Pursuant to clause 2(m) of rule XI of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, compliance with any subpoena issued by the 

Committee or any subcommittee under subparagraph (a)(2) may be 

enforced only as authorized or directed by the House. 

RULE 13. WITNESS STATEMENTS

(a) Any prepared statement to be presented by a witness to the 

Committee or a subcommittee shall be submitted to the Committee 

or subcommittee at least 48 hours in advance of presentation and 

9

shall be distributed to all members of the Committee or subcommittee at least 24 hours in advance of presentation. A copy of 

any such prepared statement shall also be submitted to the Committee in electronic form. If a prepared statement contains national 

security information bearing a classification of secret or higher, the 

statement shall be made available in the Committee rooms to all 

members of the Committee or subcommittee at least 24 hours in 

advance of presentation; however, no such statement shall be removed from the Committee offices. The requirement of this rule 

may be waived by a majority vote of the Committee or subcommittee, a quorum being present. 

(b) The Committee and each subcommittee shall require each 

witness who is to appear before it to file with the Committee in advance of his or her appearance a written statement of the proposed 

testimony and to limit the oral presentation at such appearance to 

a brief summary of his or her argument. 

RULE 14. ADMINISTERING OATHS TO WITNESSES

(a) The Chairman, or any member designated by the Chairman, 

may administer oaths to any witness. 

(b) Witnesses, when sworn, shall subscribe to the following oath:

Do you solemnly swear (or affirm) that the testimony 

you will give before this Committee (or subcommittee) in 

the matters now under consideration will be the truth, the 

whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

RULE 15. QUESTIONING OF WITNESSES

(a) When a witness is before the Committee or a subcommittee, 

members of the Committee or subcommittee may put questions to 

the witness only when recognized by the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as appropriate, for that purpose. 

(b) Members of the Committee or subcommittee who so desire 

shall have not to exceed five minutes to interrogate each witness 

until such time as each member has had an opportunity to interrogate such witness; thereafter, additional rounds for questioning 

witnesses by members are discretionary with the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as appropriate. 

(c) Questions put to witnesses before the Committee or subcommittee shall be pertinent to the measure or matter that may be 

before the Committee or subcommittee for consideration. 

RULE 16. PUBLICATION OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND MARKUPS

The transcripts of those hearings and mark-ups conducted by the 

Committee or a subcommittee that are decided by the Chairman to 

be officially published will be published in verbatim form, with the 

material requested for the record inserted at that place requested, 

or at the end of the record, as appropriate. Any requests to correct 

any errors, other than those in transcription, or disputed errors in 

transcription, will be appended to the record, and the appropriate 

place where the change is requested will be footnoted. 

RULE 17. VOTING AND ROLLCALLS

(a) Voting on a measure or matter may be by record vote, division vote, voice vote, or unanimous consent. 

10

(b) A record vote shall be ordered upon the request of one-fifth 

of those members present. 

(c) No vote by any member of the Committee or a subcommittee 

with respect to any measure or matter shall be cast by proxy. 

(d) In the event of a vote or votes, when a member is in attendance at any other committee, subcommittee, or conference committee meeting during that time, the necessary absence of that 

member shall be so noted in the record vote record, upon timely notification to the Chairman by that member. 

RULE 18. COMMITTEE REPORTS

(a) If, at the time of approval of any measure or matter by the 

Committee, any member of the Committee gives timely notice of intention to file supplemental, minority, additional or dissenting 

views, that member shall be entitled to not less than two calendar 

days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except 

when the House is in session on such days) in which to file such 

views, in writing and signed by that member, with the staff director of the Committee. All such views so filed by one or more members of the Committee shall be included within, and shall be a part 

of, the report filed by the Committee with respect to that measure 

or matter. 

(b) With respect to each record vote on a motion to report any 

measure or matter, and on any amendment offered to the measure 

or matter, the total number of votes cast for and against, the 

names of those voting for and against, and a brief description of the 

question, shall be included in the committee report on the measure 

or matter. 

RULE 19. POINTS OF ORDER

No point of order shall lie with respect to any measure reported 

by the Committee or any subcommittee on the ground that hearings on such measure were not conducted in accordance with the 

provisions of the rules of the Committee; except that a point of 

order on that ground may be made by any member of the Committee or subcommittee which reported the measure if, in the Committee or subcommittee, such point of order was (a) timely made 

and (b) improperly overruled or not properly considered. 

RULE 20. PUBLIC INSPECTION OF COMMITTEE ROLLCALLS

The result of each record vote in any meeting of the Committee 

shall be made available by the Committee for inspection by the 

public at reasonable times in the offices of the Committee. Information so available for public inspection shall include a description of 

the amendment, motion, order, or other proposition and the name 

of each member voting for and each member voting against such 

amendment, motion, order, or proposition and the names of those 

members present but not voting. 

RULE 21. PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION

(a) Except as provided in clause 2(g) of rule XI of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives, all national security information 

bearing a classification of secret or higher which has been received 

by the Committee or a subcommittee shall be deemed to have been 

11

received in executive session and shall be given appropriate safekeeping. 

(b) The Chairman of the Committee shall, with the approval of 

a majority of the Committee, establish such procedures as in his 

judgment may be necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure 

of any national security information received classified as secret or 

higher. Such procedures shall, however, ensure access to this information by any member of the Committee or any other Member, 

Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of the House of Representatives who has requested the opportunity to review such material. 

RULE 22. COMMITTEE STAFFING

The staffing of the Committee, the standing subcommittees, and 

any panel designated by the Chairman shall be subject to the rules 

of the House of Representatives. 

RULE 23. COMMITTEE RECORDS

The records of the Committee at the National Archives and 

Records Administration shall be made available for public use in 

accordance with rule VII of the Rules of the House of Representatives. The Chairman shall notify the ranking minority member of 

any decision, pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause 4(b) of rule VII, 

to withhold a record otherwise available, and the matter shall be 

presented to the Committee for a determination on the written request of any member of the Committee. 

RULE 24. HEARING PROCEDURES

Clause 2(k) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives shall apply to the Committee.

(13)

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES—

107TH CONGRESS 

Pursuant to H. Res. 19, election of majority members, (adopted 

January 6, 2001), and H. Res. 25, election of minority members 

(adopted January 31, 2001), the following members served on the 

Committee on Armed Services in the 107th Congress:

BOB STUMP, Arizona, Chairman

FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, 

Chairman Emeritus 1

DUNCAN HUNTER, California, Vice 

Chairman 2

JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah 

CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania 

JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado 

JIM SAXTON, New Jersey 

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York 

TERRY EVERETT, Alabama 

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland 

HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, California 

J.C. WATTS, JR., Oklahoma 

MAC THORNBERRY, Texas 

JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee 

JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida 4

WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JIM RYUN, Kansas 

BOB RILEY, Alabama 

JIM GIBBONS, Nevada 

ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina 

DONALD SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania 5

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

KEN CALVERT, California 

ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut 

ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida 

MARK STEVEN KIRK, Illinois 

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia 

ED SCHROCK, Virginia 

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 7

JEFF MILLER, Florida 8

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 9

IKE SKELTON, Missouri, Ranking Member 

NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia 3

JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina 

SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas 

LANE EVANS, Illinois 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii 

MARTY MEEHAN, Massachusetts 

ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam 

ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine 

VIC SNYDER, Arkansas 

JIM TURNER, Texas 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut 

MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina 

CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas 

CYNTHIA A. MCKINNEY, Georgia 

ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

MIKE THOMPSON, California 

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 6

1Mr. Spence was named Chairman Emeritus on February 7, 2001. Mr. Spence died August 

16, 2001. 2Mr. Hunter was named Chairman of the Committee on September 24, 2001. 

3Mr. Sisisky died March 29, 2001. 

4Mr. Scarborough resigned from the House of Representatives on September 5, 2001. 

5Mr. Sherwood resigned from the Committee on March 7, 2001. 

6Mr. Larsen (WA) was assigned to the Committee on July 25, 2001. 

7Mr. Forbes was assigned to the Committee on June 28, 2001. 

8Mr. Miller was assigned to the Committee on November 8, 2001. 

9Mr. Wilson was assigned to the Committee on January 25, 2002.

14

SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED 

SERVICES 107TH CONGRESS 

The following subcommittees were established at the committee’s 

organizational meeting on February 7, 2001. 

MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AND FACILITIES

Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Military construction; real estate acquisitions and disposals; housing and support; 

base closure; and related legislative oversight.

Mr. SAXTON, Chairman 

Mr. HOSTETTLER 

Mr. SCARBOROUGH 2

Mr. HAYES, Vice Chairman

Mr. CALVERT 

Mr. CRENSHAW 

Mr. SCHROCK 

Mr. HEFLEY 4

Mr. MCHUGH 

Mr. EVERETT 

Mr. BARTLETT5

Mr. MCKEON 6

Mr. TAYLOR, Ranking Member 1

Mr. ORTIZ 

Mr. ABERCROMBIE 3

Mr. UNDERWOOD 

Mr. REYES 

Dr. SNYDER 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ 

Mr. THOMPSON 

1Mr. Taylor began the 107th Congress as Ranking Minority Member of the Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee. 2Mr. Scarborough resigned from the House of Representatives on September 5, 2001. 

3Mr. Abercrombie became Ranking Minority Member of the Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee on February 8, 2002. 4Mr. Hefley resigned from the Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee on February 

8, 2002. 5Mr. Bartlett was assigned to the Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee on 

February 8, 2002. 6Mr. McKeon was assigned to the Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee on 

February 8, 2002. 

15

MILITARY PERSONNEL

Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Military forces and 

authorized strengths; integration of active and reserve components; 

military personnel policy; compensation and other benefits; and related legislative oversight.

Mr. MCHUGH, Chairman

Mr. THORNBERRY 

Mr. GRAHAM 

Mr. RYUN, Vice Chairman

Mrs. WILSON 3

Mr. SIMMONS 4

Mr. KIRK 5

Mrs. DAVIS (VA) 

Mr. SCHROCK 

Mr. AKIN 

Mr. FORBES 6

Mr. MILLER 7

Mr. WILSON 8

Mr. MEEHAN, Ranking Member 1

Dr. SNYDER 2

Ms. SANCHEZ 

Ms. MCKINNEY 

Ms. TAUSCHER 

Mr. ANDREWS 

Mr. HILL 

Mrs. DAVIS (CA) 

Mr. LANGEVIN 

1Mr. Meehan began the 107th Congress as Ranking Minority Member of the Military Personnel Subcommittee. 2Dr. Snyder was assigned to the Military Personnel Subcommittee and became Ranking 

Minority Member on May 2, 2001. 3Mrs. Wilson resigned from the Military Personnel Subcommittee on July 13, 2001. 

4Mr. Simmons resigned from the Military Personnel Subcommittee on February 8, 2002. 

5Mr. Kirk resigned from the Military Personnel Subcommittee on February 8, 2002. 

6Mr. Forbes was assigned to the Military Personnel Subcommittee on July 13, 2001. 

7Mr. Miller was assigned to the Military Personnel Subcommittee on February 8, 2002. 

8Mr. Wilson was assigned to the Military Personnel Subcommittee on February 8, 2002.

16

MILITARY PROCUREMENT

Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Annual authorization for procurement of military weapon systems and components 

thereof, including full-scale development and systems transition; 

military application of nuclear energy; and related legislative oversight.

Mr. SPENCE, Chairman 1

Mr. WELDON 2

Mr. HANSEN 

Mr. HEFLEY 

Mr. EVERETT 

Mr. MCKEON 

Mr. WATTS 

Mr. THORNBERRY 

Mr. GRAHAM, Vice Chairman

Mr. RYUN 

Mr. GIBBONS 

Mr. SHERWOOD 5

Mrs. WILSON 

Mr. SIMMONS 

Mr. KIRK 

Mrs. DAVIS (VA) 

Mr. SCHROCK 6

Mr. SISISKY, Ranking Member 3

Mr. TAYLOR 4

Mr. SKELTON 

Mr. SPRATT 

Mr. EVANS 

Mr. BLAGOJEVICH 

Mr. ALLEN 

Mr. TURNER 

Mr. SMITH 

Mr. MALONEY 

Mr. MCINTYRE 

Ms. MCKINNEY 

Ms. TAUSCHER 

Mr. BRADY 

1Mr. Spence died August 16, 2001. 

2Mr. Weldon was assigned to the Military Procurement Subcommittee and became Chairman 

on September 24, 2001. 3Mr. Sisisky died March 29, 2001. 

4Mr. Taylor was assigned to the Military Procurement Subcommittee and became Ranking 

Minority Member on May 2, 2001. 5Mr. Sherwood resigned from the Committee on March 7, 2001. 

6Mr. Schrock was assigned to the Military Procurement Subcommittee on July 13, 2001. 

17

MILITARY READINESS

Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Annual authorization for operation and maintenance; the readiness and preparedness requirements of the defense establishment; and related legislative oversight.

Mr. WELDON, Chairman 1

Mr. HEFLEY 2

Mr. BARTLETT3

Mr. CHAMBLISS 

Mr. JONES 

Mr. RILEY, Vice Chairman

Mr. HUNTER 

Mr. HANSEN 

Mr. MCKEON 5

Mr. WATTS 

Mr. HILLEARY 

Mr. GIBBONS 

Mr. SHERWOOD 7

Mrs. WILSON 8

Mr. SIMMONS 9

Mr. KIRK 10

Mr. ORTIZ, Ranking Member 

Mr. SISISKY 4

Mr. EVANS 

Mr. UNDERWOOD 

Mr. MALONEY 

Mr. MCINTYRE 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ 

Mr. BRADY 

Mr. HILL 

Mrs. DAVIS (CA) 

Mr. LARSEN (WA) 6

1Mr. Weldon began the 107th Congress as the Chairman of the Military Readiness Subcommittee. 2Mr. Hefley was assigned to the Military Readiness Subcommittee and became Chairman 

on September 24, 2001. 3Mr. Bartlett resigned from the Military Readiness Subcommittee on February 8, 2002. 

4Mr. Sisisky died March 29, 2001. 

5Mr. McKeon resigned from the Military Readiness Subcommittee on February 8, 2002. 

6Mr. Larsen (WA) was assigned to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on July 25, 2001. 

7Mr. Sherwood resigned from the Committee on March 7, 2001. 

8Mrs. Wilson was assigned to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on July 13, 2001. 

9Mr. Simmons was assigned to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on February 8, 2002. 

10Mr. Kirk was assigned to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on February 8, 2002.

18

MILITARY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4—Annual authorization for military research and development and related legislative 

oversight.

Mr. HUNTER, Chairman

Mr. HILLEARY, Vice Chairman

Mr. AKIN 

Mr. WELDON 2

Mr. SAXTON 

Mr. BARTLETT 

Mr. HOSTETTLER 

Mr. CHAMBLISS 

Mr. SCARBOROUGH 6

Mr. JONES 

Mr. RILEY 

Mr. HAYES 

Mr. CALVERT 

Mr. CRENSHAW 

Mr. SCHROCK 9

Mr. FORBES 10

Mr. MILLER 11

Mr. WILSON 12

Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Ranking Member 1

Mr. SPRATT 

Mr. TAYLOR 3

Mr. MEEHAN 4

Mr. BLAGOJEVICH 5

Mr. REYES 

Mr. ALLEN 

Dr. SNYDER 7

Mr. TURNER 

Mr. SMITH 

Ms. SANCHEZ 

Mr. ANDREWS 

Mr. THOMPSON 8

Mr. LARSON (CT) 

Mr. LANGEVIN 

1Mr. Abercrombie began the 107th Congress as Ranking Minority Member of the Military 

Research and Development Subcommittee. 2Mr. Weldon resigned from the Military Research and Development Subcommittee on September 24, 2001. 3Mr. Taylor resigned from the Military Research and Development Subcommittee on May 

2, 2001. 4Mr. Meehan became Ranking Minority Member of the Military Research and Development 

Subcommittee on May 2, 2001. 5Mr. Blagojevich was assigned to the Military Research and Development Subcommittee 

on May 24, 2001. 6Mr. Scarborough resigned from the House of Representatives on September 5, 2001. 

7Dr. Snyder resigned from the Military Research and Development Subcommittee on May 

2, 2001. 8Mr. Thompson was assigned to the Military Research and Development Subcommittee 

on May 24, 2001. 9Mr. Schrock resigned from the Military Research and Development Subcommittee on July 

13, 2001. 10Mr. Forbes was assigned to the Military Research and Development Subcommittee on 

July 13, 2001. 11Mr. Miller was assigned to the Military Research and Development Subcommittee on 

February 8, 2002. 12Mr. Wilson was assigned to the Military Research and Development Subcommittee on 

February 8, 2002. 

(19)

FULL COMMITTEE PANELS 

The following full committee panels were appointed March 1, 

2001. 

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON MORALE, WELFARE AND RECREATION

Purpose—Oversight responsibility for all aspects of nonappropriated fund activities, including appropriated funding in support of those activities, within the Department of Defense, including commissaries, exchanges, clubs and related activities.

Mr. BARTLETT, Chairman

Mr. MCHUGH 

Mr. CHAMBLISS, Vice Chairman

Mr. SCARBOROUGH 2

Mr. JONES 

Mr. RILEY 

Mr. HAYES 

Mr. CRENSHAW 

Mr. KIRK 

Mr. SCHROCK 

Mr. FORBES 4

Mr. UNDERWOOD, Ranking Member 

Mr. SISISKY 1

Mr. ORTIZ 

Mr. ABERCROMBIE 

Mr. MEEHAN 

Mr. REYES 

Mr. ANDREWS 

Mrs. DAVIS (CA) 

Mr. LARSEN (WA) 3

1Mr. Sisisky died March 29, 2001. 

2Mr. Scarborough resigned from the House of Representatives on September 5, 2001. 

3Mr. Larsen (WA) was assigned to the Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and 

Recreation on July 25, 2001. 4Mr. Forbes was assigned to the Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation 

on March 7, 2002.

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON THE MERCHANT MARINE

Purpose—Oversight responsibility for all issues, including funding, related to the national security aspects of the Merchant Marine.

Mr. HUNTER, Chairman 

Mr. WELDON 

Mr. SAXTON 

Mr. JONES, Vice Chairman 

Mr. CRENSHAW 

Mrs. DAVIS (VA) 

Mr. ALLEN, Ranking Member 

Mr. TAYLOR 

Mr. SMITH 

Mr. MALONEY 

20

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

REORGANIZATION

Purpose—Oversight responsibility for the establishment and organization of the National Nuclear Security Administration 

(NNSA) pursuant to the provision contained in title 32 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, (Public Law 

106–65).

Mr. THORNBERRY, Chairman 

Mr. HUNTER 

Mr. GRAHAM 

Mr. RYUN 

Mr. GIBBONS 

Mrs. WILSON 

Mr. CALVERT, Vice Chairman

Mr. WILSON 3

Ms. TAUSCHER, Ranking Member 

Mr. SISISKY 1

Mr. SPRATT 

Mr. TAYLOR 2

Ms. MCKINNEY 

Mr. LARSON (CT) 

Mr. LANGEVIN 

1Mr. Sisisky died March 29, 2001. 

2Mr. Taylor was assigned to the Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization on May 2, 2001. 3Mr. Wilson was assigned to the Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization on February 11, 2002.

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON TERRORISM

Purpose—Oversight responsibility for assessing the nature of the 

terrorist threat facing U.S. armed forces and national security interests, including the threat of terrorism involving weapons of mass 

destruction.

Mr. SAXTON, Chairman

Mr. HUNTER 

Mr. HANSEN 

Mr. WELDON 

Mr. EVERETT 

Mr. BARTLETT 

Mr. WATTS 

Mr. HOSTETTLER, Vice Chairman

Mr. GIBBONS 

Mr. HAYES 

Mr. CALVERT 

Mr. SIMMONS 

Dr. SNYDER, Ranking Member 1

Mr. REYES 

Mr. TURNER 2

Ms. SANCHEZ 

Mr. MALONEY 

Mr. MCINTYRE 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ 

Ms. MCKINNEY 

Mr. HILL 

Mr. LANGEVIN 

1Dr. Snyder began the 107th Congress as Ranking Minority Member on the Special Oversight 

Panel on Terrorism. 2Mr. Turner became the Ranking Minority Member on the Special Oversight Panel on 

Terrorism on June 28, 2001.

(21)

COMMITTEE STAFF 

By committee resolution adopted at the organizational meeting 

on February 7, 2001, or by authority of the Chairman, the following 

persons were appointed to the staff of the committee during the 

107th Congress:

ROBERT S. RANGEL, Staff Director 

CARL D. COMMENATOR, Deputy Staff Director/Counsel 

HUGH N. JOHNSTON, Jr., General Counsel (appointed June 25, 2001) 

PHILIP W. GRONE, Assistant Deputy Staff Director (resigned September 26, 2001) 

RITA D. THOMPSON, Professional Staff Member 

BRENDA J. WRIGHT, Professional Staff Member 

KATHLEEN A. LIPOVAC, Professional Staff Member (resigned October 9, 2002) 

FRANK A. BARNES, Staff Assistant 

BETTY B. GRAY, Staff Assistant 

PEGGY COSSEBOOM, Staff Assistant (resigned March 30, 2001) 

PETER M. STEFFES, Professional Staff Member (resigned December 31, 2002) 

ERNEST B. WARRINGTON, Jr., Staff Assistant 

DIANE W. BOWMAN, Staff Assistant 

STEVEN A. THOMPSON, Professional Staff Member (resigned September 16, 2001) 

MICHAEL R. HIGGINS, Professional Staff Member 

JEAN D. REED, Professional Staff Member 

GEORGE O. WITHERS, Professional Staff Member 

DUDLEY L. TADEMY, Professional Staff Member 

JOHN D. CHAPLA, Professional Staff Member 

STEPHEN P. ANSLEY, Professional Staff Member 

DIONEL M. AVILES, Professional Staff Member (resigned July 16, 2001) 

PETER V. PRY, Professional Staff Member (resigned August 31, 2001) 

DAVID J. TRACHTENBERG, Professional Staff Member (resigned October 3, 2001) 

REBECCA J. ANFINSON, Staff Assistant (resigned July 2, 2001) 

ROGER M. SMITH, Professional Staff Member 

B. RYAN VAART, Press Secretary 

PETER J. BERRY, Professional Staff Member (resigned August 26, 2001) 

ROBERT W. LAUTRUP, Professional Staff Member 

JOSEPH F. BOESSEN, Professional Staff Member (resigned May 31, 2001) 

CHRISTIAN P. ZUR, Professional Staff Member (resigned June 7, 2002) 

JOHN F. SULLIVAN, Professional Staff Member 

NANCY M. WARNER, Professional Staff Member 

BRIAN R. GREEN, Professional Staff Member (resigned May 13, 2001) 

NOAH L. SIMON, Research Assistant (resigned August 17, 2001) 

THOMAS E. HAWLEY, Professional Staff Member 

WILLIAM H. NATTER, Professional Staff Member 

ASHLEY D. GODWIN, Professional Staff Member (resigned November 9, 2002) 

ELIZABETH A. SHARP, Staff Assistant (resigned March 9, 2001) 

JOHN J. POLLARD III, Counsel 

JAMES M. LARIVIERE, Professional Staff Member 

JESSE D. TOLLESON, Jr., Research Assistant 

MARY ELLEN FRASER, Counsel 

EDWARD P. WYATT, Professional Staff Member (resigned February 3, 2001) 

DEBRA S. WADA, Professional Staff Member 

HENRY J. SCHWEITER, Counsel 

J. J. GERTLER, Professional Staff Member 

DANIEL T. HILTON, Staff Assistant 

LAURA R. HAAS, Executive Assistant 

LAURA C. TRUESDELL, Staff Assistant (resigned June 27, 2001) 

CHRISTOPHER A. KIM, Staff Assistant 

KATHERINE K. GORDON, Staff Assistant 

22

LAURA K. HANCOCK, Staff Assistant (resigned December 31, 2001) 

JARROD C. TISDELL, Research Assistant (appointed May 1, 2001; resigned May 12, 2002) 

HARRY E. CARTLAND, Professional Staff Member (appointed May 29, 2001) 

ERIN C. CONATON, Professional Staff Member (appointed June 4, 2001) 

MEGHAN L. WEDD, Deputy Press Secretary (appointed June 4, 2001) 

WESLEY M. DENTON, Staff Assistant (appointed June 18, 2001; resigned January 6, 2002) 

DOUGLAS C. ROACH, Professional Staff Member (appointed September 4, 2001) 

VIRGINIA H. JOHNSON, Counsel (appointed September 24, 2001) 

ALEXIS R. LASSELLE, Legislative Operations Clerk (appointed October 15, 2001) 

DANLEIGH S. HALFAST, Staff Assistant (appointed November 5, 2001) 

GIRARD A. GALVIN, Staff Assistant (appointed November 29, 2001; resigned July 31, 2002) 

SARAH E. KITTEL, Staff Assistant (appointed January 7, 2002; resigned August 16, 2002) 

ANGELA M. SOWA, Staff Assistant (appointed February 7, 2002) 

MARK T. ESPER, Professional Staff Assistant (appointed March 20, 2002; resigned November 

11, 2002) 

WHITNEY H. NEAL, Intern (appointed June 3, 2002; resigned August 9, 2002) 

EMILY C. OLSON, Intern (appointed June 3, 2002; resigned August 9, 2002) 

JUSTIN P. BERNIER, Research Assistant (appointed June 14, 2002) 

RICHARD I. STARK, Jr., Professional Staff Member (appointed June 25, 2002) 

DAVID B. HEATON, Staff Assistant (appointed August 1, 2002) 

LORI SHAFFER, Staff Assistant (appointed August 19, 2002) 

LINDA M. BURNETTE, Printing Clerk (appointed November 4, 2002) 

CURTIS B. FLOOD, Staff Assistant (appointed November 4, 2002) 

MARY E. PETRELLA, Research Assistant (appointed December 1, 2002)

(23)

COMMITTEE MEETINGS 

A total of 122 meetings were held by the Committee on Armed 

Services, its subcommittees, and panels during the 107th Congress. 

The committee held four joint meetings. A breakdown of the meetings follows:

Full Committee ...................................................................................................... 33 

Subcommittees: 

Military Installations and Facilities ............................................................. 9 

Military Personnel .......................................................................................... 10 

Military Procurement ..................................................................................... 16 

Military Readiness .......................................................................................... 14 

Military Research and Development ............................................................. 14 

Full Committee Panels: 

Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation ..................... 5 

Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine ....................................... 8 

Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization ........... 4 

Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism .......................................................... 9

LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS 

LEGISLATION ENACTED INTO LAW

PUBLIC LAW 107–56 (H.R. 3162)

To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to 

enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes 

H.R. 3162, the USA Patriot Act of 2001, uses the tracking and 

interception of communications to better enable federal officials to 

enforce the law and gather foreign intelligence, provides the Secretary of the Treasury the authority to combat the corruption of 

U.S. financial institutions for foreign money laundering purposes, 

and attempts to make U.S. borders less penetrable to foreign terrorists and to detain and remove those already inside the country. 

H.R. 3162 was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, as 

well as the Committees on Intelligence (Permanent Select), Judiciary, Financial Services, International Relations, Energy and Commerce, Education and the Workforce, and Transportation and Infrastructure. This measure passed the House on October 24, 2001 

under suspension of the rules and was agreed to without amendment in the Senate on October 25, 2001. H.R. 3162 was signed by 

the President and became law on October 26, 2001. 

PUBLIC LAW 107–103 (H.R. 1291)

To amend title 38, United States Code, to modify and improve authorities relating 

to education benefits, burial benefits, and vocational rehabilitation benefits for 

veterans, to modify certain authorities relating to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and for other purposes 

H.R. 1291, the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act 

of 2001, amends federal provisions concerning the Montgomery GI 

Bill to provide a graduated increase in the rates of basic eduVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
24

cational assistance, increases the burial and funeral expense benefit for veterans who die of service-connected disabilities, adjusts 

certain compensation and pension matters for disabled veterans, 

and increases the number of judges authorized to serve on the 

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 

The measure was referred to the Committees on Armed Services 

and Veterans’ Affairs on March 29, 2001, and passed by the House 

under suspension of the rules on June 19, 2001. H.R. 1291 was 

amended in the Senate and passed by unanimous consent on December 8, 2001. The House agreed to the Senate amendments with 

an amendment on December 11, 2001, and by unanimous consent 

on December 13, 2001, the Senate agreed to the House amendment 

to the Senate amendments. The measure was signed by the President and became law on December 27, 2001. 

PUBLIC LAW 107–107 (S. 1438)

To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2002 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2002, 

and for other purposes 

Public Law 107–107 authorizes funds totaling $342,628,957,000 

for national defense functions for fiscal year 2002 and provides a 

budget authority level of $343,283,957,000. 

Division A 

Division A of Public Law 107–107 authorizes funds for fiscal year 

2002 for the Department of Defense. Subtitle A of Title I authorizes $62,477,661,000 for procurement 

of aircraft, missiles, weapons and tracked combat vehicles, ammunition, and other procurement for the armed forces, defense agencies, and reserve components of the armed forces. 

Subtitles B through D of Title I establish additional program requirements, restrictions, and limitations, authorize transfer of, or 

earmark funds for, specified programs for the armed forces, including the Army interim armored vehicles, the Navy V–22 Osprey aircraft program, and the Air Force C–17 aircraft. 

Subtitle A of Title II authorizes $46,526,075,000 for research, development, test and evaluation for the armed forces and the defense agencies, including amounts for basic research and development-related matters. 

Subtitle B of Title II establishes certain program requirements, 

restrictions, and limitations on six separate research and development-related matters. 

Subtitles C through E of Title II address ballistic missile defense 

programs, Air Force science and technology development planning, 

and miscellaneous other matters.

Subtitle A of Title III authorizes $123,259,927,000 for operation 

and maintenance (O&M) and $2,064,104,000 for working capital 

funds for the armed forces and defense agencies. 

Subtitles B through F of Title III address environmental provisions, commissaries and nonappropriated fund instrumentalities, 

workforce and depot issues, defense dependents education, as well 

as other miscellaneous matters. 

Title IV provides military personnel authorizations for the active 

and reserve forces for fiscal year 2002 and authorizes appropriaVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
25

tions of $82,307,281,000 for military personnel for fiscal year 2002. 

The end strengths for active duty personnel for fiscal year 2002 are 

as follows: 

Army, 480,000 

Navy, 376,000 

Marine Corps, 172,600 

Air Force, 358,800 

The Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2002 are as 

follows: 

Army National Guard, 350,000 

Army Reserve, 205,000 

Naval Reserve, 87,000 

Marine Corps Reserve, 39,558 

Air National Guard, 108,400 

Air Force Reserve, 74,700 

Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000 

The end strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the 

reserve components for fiscal year 2002 are as follows: 

Army National Guard, 23,698 

Army Reserve, 13,406 

Naval Reserve, 14,811 

Marine Corps Reserve, 2,261 

Air National Guard, 11,591 

Air Force Reserve, 1,437 

Title V sets military personnel policy, including provisions that 

address officer personnel policy; the reserve components; joint specialty officers and joint professional military education; education 

and training; recruiting and accession matters; decorations, 

awards, and posthumous commissions; funeral honors duty; military spouses and family members; military justice and legal assistance matters; and other matters such as the congressional review 

period for change in ground combat exclusion policy. 

Title VI addresses compensation and other personnel benefits, including pay and allowances; bonuses and special and incentive 

pays; travel and transportation allowances; retiree and survivor 

benefits; and related matters. 

Title VII contains military health care provisions, including 

TRICARE program improvements; senior health care; studies and 

reports relating to health care; and other matters. 

Title VIII addresses acquisition policy, acquisition management 

and related matters, including procurement management and administration; use of preferred sources; amendments to general contracting authorities, procedures, and limitations; and other matters 

such as multi-year procurement authority for dinitrogen tetroxide, 

hydrazine, and hydrazine-related products as well as environmental services. 

Title IX contains Department of Defense organization and management provisions, including duties and functions of officers; space 

activities; reports on DOD organization and management; and 

other related matters. 

Title X addresses general provisions relating to financial matters; 

naval vessels and shipyards; counter-drug activities; strategic 

forces; miscellaneous recommendations and report requirements; 

and other matters. 

26

Title XI addresses Department of Defense civilian personnel, including their management and retirement. 

Title XII concerns matters relating to other nations including 

matters relating to arms control and monitoring; matters relating 

to allies and friendly foreign nations; and related reports. 

Title XIII addresses Cooperative Threat Reduction with states of 

the Former Soviet Union. 

Title XIV addresses the Armed Forces Retirement Home. 

Title XV addresses activities relating to combating terrorism, including increased funding and policy matters. 

Title XVI addresses uniformed services voting. 

Division B 

Division B of Public Law 107–107 authorizes appropriations in the amount of $10,500,000 for military construction and military 

family housing in support of the active forces, the reserve components, and the NATO security investment program for fiscal year 

2002. In addition, Division B contains military construction program and military family housing changes; real property and facilities administration; implementation of prior base closure and realignment rounds; and miscellaneous land conveyances. Division B 

also addresses the Fort Irwin military land withdrawal as well as 

realignment and closure of military installations and preparation of 

infrastructure for the nuclear weapons complex. 

Division C 

Division C of Public Law 107–107 authorizes appropriations in the amount of $14,095,209,000 for Department of Energy national 

security programs for fiscal year 2002. Division C also includes authorization for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board; National Defense Stockpile; Naval Petroleum Reserves; and Maritime 

Administration. 

The Senate Committee on Armed Services reported S. 1416 to 

the Senate on September 12, 2001; H.R. 2586 was reported, as 

amended, by the House Committee on Armed Services on September 4, 2001. A later, similar version of the Senate bill, S. 1438, 

passed the Senate with amendments on October 2, 2002. The 

House passed S. 1438, as amended, on September 25, 2001, subsequent to striking all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu 

thereof the provisions of a similar measure, H.R. 2586. Conferees 

filed a conference report on December 12, 2001, which was agreed 

to both in the Senate and the House on December 13, 2001. S. 1438 

was signed by the President and became law on December 28, 

2001. 

(S. Rept. 107–62; H. Rept. 107–194; H. Rept. 107–333; H.A.S.C. 

107–2; H.A.S.C. 107–3; H.A.S.C. 107–4; H.A.S.C. 107–5; H.A.S.C. 

107–6; H.A.S.C. 107–7; H.A.S.C. 107–8; H.A.S.C. 107–9; H.A.S.C. 

107–10)

PUBLIC LAW 107–152 (S.J. RES. 32)

Congratulating the United States Military Academy at West Point on its bicentennial anniversary, and commending its outstanding contributions to the Nation 

S.J. Res. 32 congratulates the United States Military Academy 

on its bicentennial anniversary, recognizes it as an outstanding 

27

leadership development institution that upholds and promotes the 

highest virtues of American society, and commends all those who 

have led and taught at the academy for inculcating its 58,000 graduates with moral, ethical, and intellectual values and skills. After 

passing the Senate by unanimous consent on February 25, 2002, 

S.J. Res. 32 was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services on February 26, 2002, and was considered and passed under 

suspension of the rules on March 6, 2002. The joint resolution was 

signed by the President and became law on March 14, 2002. 

PUBLIC LAW 107–296 (H.R. 5005)

To establish the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes 

H.R. 5005, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, proposes a sweeping consolidation of more than 100 separate homeland security-related government agencies into a new Department of Homeland Security in an attempt to bring focus to the federal government’s efforts to protect the American homeland. The new Department’s primary responsibilities include information analysis and infrastructure protection; chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and related countermeasures; border and transportation security; emergency preparedness and response; and coordination with other 

parts of the federal government, state and local governments, and 

the private sector. 

H.R. 5005 was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, as 

well as the Committees on Agriculture, Appropriations, Energy and 

Commerce, Financial Services, Government Reform, Intelligence 

(Permanent Select), International Relations, the Judiciary, Science, 

Transportation and Infrastructure, and Ways and Means. On July 

10, 2002, the Committee on Armed Services held a markup session 

to consider H.R. 5005, which was ordered to be reported, as amended, by voice vote to the Select Committee on Homeland Security. 

This select committee reported, as amended, H.R. 5005 to the 

House on July 24, 2002. The measure passed the House, as amended, on July 26, 2002, and passed the Senate, with amendment, on 

November 19, 2002. The House concurred in the Senate amendment and passed the bill on November 22, 2002. H.R. 5005 was 

signed by the President and became law on November 25, 2002. 

PUBLIC LAW 107–314 (H.R. 4546)

To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 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 

Public Law 107–314, the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, authorizes funds totaling 

$391,354,735,000 for national defense functions for fiscal year 2003 

and provides a budget authority level of $392,874,252,000. 

Division A 

Division A of Public Law 107–314 authorizes funds for fiscal year 

2003 for the Department of Defense. 

Subtitle A of Title I authorizes $73,969,336,000 for procurement 

of aircraft, missiles, weapons and tracked combat vehicles, ammuVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
28

nition, and other procurement for the armed forces, defense agencies and reserve components of the armed forces. 

Subtitles B through E of Title I establish additional program requirements, restrictions, and limitations, and authorize transfer of 

or earmark funds for specified programs for the armed forces including the Navy Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and the Air Force 

C–130J aircraft program. 

Subtitle A of Title II authorizes $56,777,365,000 for research, development, test and evaluation for the armed forces and the defense agencies, including amounts for basic and applied research. 

Subtitle B of Title II establishes certain program requirements, 

restrictions, and limitations on eight separate research and development-related matters. 

Subtitles C through E of Title II address ballistic missile defense, 

improved management of test and evaluation facilities, and other 

matters such as the Technology Transition Initiative. 

Subtitle A of Title III authorizes $129,143,395,000 for operation 

and maintenance (O&M) and $2,618,485,000 for working capital 

funds for the armed forces and defense agencies. 

Subtitles B through G of Title III address environmental provisions; commissaries and nonappropriated fund instrumentalities; 

workplace and depot issues; defense dependents education; information technology; as well as other miscellaneous matters. 

Title IV provides military personnel authorizations for the active 

and reserve forces for fiscal year 2003 and authorizes appropriations of $93,829,525,000 for military personnel for fiscal year 2003. 

The end strengths for active duty personnel for fiscal year 2001 are 

as follows: 

Army, 480,000 

Navy, 375,700

Marine Corps, 175,000 

Air Force, 359,000 

The Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2003 are as 

follows: 

Army National Guard, 350,000 

Army Reserve, 205,000 

Naval Reserve, 87,800 

Marine Corps Reserve, 39,558 

Air National Guard, 106,600 

Air Force Reserve, 75,600 

Coast Guard Reserve, 9,000 

The end strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the 

reserve components for fiscal year 2003 are as follows: 

Army National Guard, 24,562 

Army Reserve, 14,070 

Naval Reserve, 14,572 

Marine Corps Reserve, 2,261

Air National Guard, 11,727 

Air Force Reserve, 1,498 

Title V sets military personnel policy, including provisions that 

address officer personnel policy; reserve component management; 

reserve component officer personnel policy; decorations, awards and 

commendations; administrative matters; matters relating to miVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
29

norities and women in the armed forces; benefits; and various reports. 

Title VI addresses compensation and other personnel benefits, including pay and allowances; bonuses and special and incentive 

pays; travel and transportation allowances; retired pay and survivor benefits; the Montgomery GI Bill; and other related matters. 

Title VII contains military health care provisions, including 

health care program improvements; health care reports; and Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs health resources sharing. 

Title VIII addresses acquisition policy, acquisition management 

and related matters, including amendments to general contracting 

authorities, procedures, and limitations; acquisition-related reports; 

and other matters. 

Title IX contains Department of Defense organization and management provisions, including duties and functions of Department 

of Defense officers; space activities; reports; and other matters. 

Title X addresses general provisions relating to financial matters; 

naval vessels and shipyards; strategic matters; miscellaneous report requirements and repeals; extension of expiring authorities; 

and other matters such as rewards for assistance in combating terrorism. 

Title XI addresses Department of Defense civilian personnel. 

Title XII concerns matters relating to other nations including 

matters relating to arms control and monitoring; matters relating 

to allies and friendly foreign nations; and related reports. 

Title XIII concerns Cooperative Threat Reduction with states of 

the Former Soviet Union. 

Title XIV addresses matters relating to homeland security. 

Title XV concerns the authorization of appropriations for the war 

on terrorism. 

Division B 

Division B of Public Law 107–314 authorizes appropriations in 

the amount of $10,423,629,000 for military construction and military family housing in support of the active forces, the reserve components, and the NATO security investment program. In addition, 

Division B contains miscellaneous and general provisions that concern military construction program and military family housing 

changes; real property and facilities administration; land conveyances; and other matters such as a new requirement for adding 

military installations to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment 

list. 

Division C 

Division C of Public Law 107–314 authorizes appropriations in 

the amount of $15,595,000,000 for Department of Energy national 

security programs for fiscal year 2003. Division C also includes authorization for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board; National Defense Stockpile; Naval Petroleum Reserves; Maritime Administration; and the permanent codification of general administrative and financial provisions affecting the Department of Energy. 

The Committee on Armed Services reported H.R. 4546, as 

amended, to the House on May 3, 2002. The measure passed the 

30

House, as amended, on May 10, 2002 and passed the Senate in lieu 

of S. 2514, as amended, on June 27, 2002. On November 12, 2002, 

a conference report was filed and agreed to in the House by a voice 

vote under suspension of the rules. The conference report was considered in the Senate by unanimous consent and agreed to by voice 

vote on November 13, 2002. H.R. 4546 was signed by the President 

and became law on December 2, 2002. 

(H. Rept. 107–436; H. Rept. 107–436 Part II; S. Rept. 107–151; 

H. Rept. 107–772; H.A.S.C. 107–20; H.A.S.C. 107–28; H.A.S.C. 

107–29; H.A.S.C. 107–30; H.A.S.C. 107–31; H.A.S.C. 107–32; 

H.A.S.C. 107–33; H.A.S.C. 107–34; H.A.S.C. 107–35) 

LEGISLATION REPORTED BUT NOT ENACTED 

H.R. 2581

To provide authority to control exports, and for other purposes 

As amended by the House Armed Services Committee, H.R. 2581, 

the Export Administration Act of 2001, would have restored and 

strengthened the role of the Secretary of Defense in the export control process and imposed additional protections against the export 

of sensitive goods and technologies with both civilian and military 

applications that could be detrimental to U.S. national security. 

On November 16, 2001, after being amended and reported by the 

Committee on International Relations, H.R. 2581 was referred sequentially to the Committees on Armed Services, Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, Intelligence (Permanent Select), Judiciary, 

and Ways and Means. On March 8, 2001, the Committee on Armed 

Services reported the measure, as amended, to the House. No further action was taken. 

(H. Rept. 107–297, Parts I–II; H.A.S.C. 107–11) 

H.R. 4547

To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for military activities of the Department of Defense and to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2003 

H.R. 4547, the Cost of War Against Terrorism Authorization Act 

of 2002, would have addressed the $10 billion special reserve fund 

included in the President’s fiscal year 2003 budget request to finance the costs of the war on terrorism. The Committee on Armed 

Services considered H.R. 4547 separately from H.R. 4546, essentially separating the deliberations of this $10 billion reserve fund 

from the rest of the defense authorization legislation for fiscal year 

2003. After preliminary consideration by the committee of H.R. 

4547, the President transmitted a budget amendment requesting 

that Congress authorize and appropriate $10 billion for fiscal year 

2003 in a Defense Emergency Response Fund and grant the Department of Defense significant latitude in executing this fund. 

Subsequently, the committee met and amended H.R. 4547 to cover 

the totality of the remaining $10 billion of the President’s budget 

request. The committee amendment declined to establish the Defense Emergency Response Fund, as it found this fiscal device to 

significantly reduce the ability of Congress to track and conduct 

oversight over the execution of Department of Defense funds. 

31

H.R. 4547 was referred to the Committee on Armed Services on 

April 23, 2002, and reported, as amended, to the House on July 18, 

2002. The measure was passed under suspension of the rules on 

July 24, 2002. However, the text of H.R. 4547, as passed by the 

House, was incorporated into H.R. 4546, the Bob Stump National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, on July 25, 2002. 

(H. Rept. 107–603) 

H.R. 5132

To express the sense of Congress concerning the fiscal year 2003 end strengths 

needed for the Armed Forces to fight the War on Terrorism 

H.R. 5132 expresses the sense of Congress that, in light of the 

war against terrorism, the increases in military personnel end 

strengths recommended by the Senate and House in their respective versions of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2003 are appropriate and justified. Furthermore, the measure 

stresses that the President and Secretary of Defense should support such increased end strengths and should not reduce the number of members of the armed forces. 

H.R. 5132 was referred to the Committee on Armed Services on 

July 16, 2002. On July 18, 2002, the committee held a markup session to consider H.R. 5132. The committee ordered the bill to be reported, as amended, by a voice vote. On November 4, 2002, H.R. 

5132 was reported, as amended, to the House. No further action 

was taken. 

(H. Rept. 107–771)

(33)

OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES 

The oversight responsibilities of the Committee on Armed Services were conducted primarily within the context of the committee’s 

consideration of annual defense authorization bills, which cover the 

breadth of the operations of the Department of Defense as well as 

two-thirds of the annual budget of the Department of Energy. The 

National Defense budget of nearly $364 billion involves millions of 

military and civilian personnel, thousands of facilities, and hundreds of agencies, departments, and commands located around the 

world. 

SUMMARY OF OVERSIGHT PLAN 

In response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the 

United States, the committee intensified its oversight and assessment of threats to U.S. national security and the preparedness of 

America’s armed forces to address them. The committee received 

briefings on international and terrorist threats throughout the 

107th Congress, and conducted a series of briefings and hearings 

on the threat posed by the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq. In addition, prior to consideration of the fiscal year 2002 and 2003 defense budgets, the committee conducted oversight hearings with 

the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 

military service Secretaries and Chiefs of Staff, regional commanders, and officials of the Department of Defense, military departments, Central Intelligence Agency, defense-related intelligence 

agencies, and Department of Energy. The committee also received 

testimony from outside experts in academia, industry, and associations on numerous national security matters. 

While the majority of the committee’s oversight was planned to 

support the annual defense authorization bill, the committee also 

conducted oversight activities as demanded by critical current 

events. 

ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The following specific areas and subjects were designated for special attention during the 107th Congress: 

DEFENSE BUDGET

After 13 consecutive years of cuts, in constant dollars, to DOD 

budgets, the committee dedicated annual budget oversight to ensuring continued increases in budget authorizations for national security programs. As a result, the 107th Congress adopted: 

(1) The fourth and fifth consecutive years of real increases 

to DOD spending levels; 

(2) The largest national defense budget in inflation adjusted 

terms (fiscal year 2003) since fiscal year 1990; 

34

(3) An increase from the fiscal year 2001 national defense budget ($329 billion) of more than $60 billion over two years; 

and 

(4) The largest one-year increase to national defense spending since the early 1980s (from fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 

2003). 

These increases to defense spending reflected a renewed commitment to revitalizing the United States military, improving homeland security, and keeping the nation’s promise to its service members, veterans, and retirees. 

DEFENDING THE AMERICAN HOMELAND

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the committee focused legislative and oversight efforts on programs to defend the American homeland against terrorists and ballistic missiles. In addition to multiple committee hearings, the committee’s 

special oversight panels took active roles in reviewing the Department’s ability to defend the nation and U.S. military installations 

against terrorist attacks. As a result of these oversight efforts during the 107th Congress, the committee authorized approximately 

$15 billion for programs to combat terrorism and more than $16 

billion for programs to defeat ballistic missile attacks. 

Specifically, the committee continued to work to ensure that the 

U.S. ballistic missile defense programs were well-funded and managed, and directed toward the ultimate goal of protecting the American people and U.S. troops abroad from ballistic missile attacks. 

Throughout the 107th Congress, the committee conducted oversight 

of missile defense research and development efforts, plans for deployment of missile defenses, and the rapid evolution of theater 

and long-range ballistic missile threats. 

In addition, in order to enhance the Department’s ability to assess and manage terrorist threats and defend the homeland, the 

committee included a provision in the Bob Stump National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) to establish an Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and an Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense. The committee 

also reviewed and provided recommendations to H.R. 5005, a bill 

to establish the Department of Homeland Security. 

QUALITY OF LIFE

The committee continued to address critical issues and programs 

affecting the quality of life for military personnel and their families. In particular, the committee investigated conditions of facilities where service personnel and their families live and work, including the Department’s investment strategy for maintaining facilities; cost, accessibility, and quality of peacetime military health 

care; policies, procedures and systems of the Department of Defense and the military departments related to domestic violence; 

family support programs, including child care, and dependent education; quality and adequacy of the military family housing supply; 

quality and adequacy of barracks, bachelor enlisted quarters, and 

dormitories; implementation of the Military Housing Privatization 

Initiative; and backlogs in the repair and maintenance of military 

housing. 

35

The committee also focused on military construction programs 

during the 107th Congress. Reflecting concerns about the eroding 

condition of U.S. military facilities around the world, the committee 

authorized nearly $21 billion for military construction projects in 

the National Defense Authorization Acts of Fiscal Years 2002 and 

2003 (Public Laws 107–107 and 107–314, respectively), reflecting 

an increase to Administration requests for construction programs of 

more than $1 billion.

The committee also gave special attention to the oversight of Morale, Welfare and Recreation programs including the operation of 

military exchanges and commissaries and the welfare of nonappropriated fund construction programs and other nonappropriated fund instrumentalities. 

READINESS

The committee continued its assessment of the readiness of U.S. 

armed forces and placed priority on revitalizing the readiness of 

U.S. military forces. During the 107th Congress, the committee received the views of operational unit commanders and senior noncommissioned officers on military readiness. Their testimony confirmed concerns about the readiness of U.S. military forces, and 

provided the committee with vital information about how best to 

repair military readiness. In addition, the Subcommittee on Military Readiness conducted a four-day fact-finding trip in August 

2001 to 22 military installations to review military readiness in the 

field. As a result of testimony received and the committee’s investigative efforts, the committee supported significant annual increases to critical budgets for training, recruiting, base operations, 

spare parts, and real property maintenance in the National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 (Public 

Laws 107–107 and 107–314, respectively). 

The committee also assessed the amount of training required to 

maintain a high state of readiness and whether training requirements are being properly funded; the impact of the high pace of deployments on service personnel and their families; current policies 

supporting officer and enlisted recruiting, accessions, training, promotions, separations, and retirements; the value of pay, compensation, and other benefits of military service; military recruitment 

and retention programs; and the condition of wartime medical 

readiness. 

In addition, the committee conducted a series of hearings on encroachment issues at military facilities. During the first session of 

the 107th Congress, the committee evaluated the value of the U.S. 

military training facility at Vieques, Puerto Rico in response to 

plans to cease training at the facility. As a result of numerous 

hearings and briefings, the committee included legislation in the 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public 

Law 107–107) to ensure that the Department would develop equivalent or superior training methods before it stopped using the 

training facilities at Vieques. Also during the 107th Congress, the 

committee reviewed the effects of environmental regulations, civilian construction, and related encroachments on military installations, training, and operations. As a result of these hearings, the 

committee included legislation in the Bob Stump National Defense 

36

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) to restore balance between military readiness, environmental, and civilian needs. 

MILITARY MODERNIZATION

During the 107th Congress, the committee received compelling 

testimony that the U.S. military had not sufficiently adapted to 

meet the challenges of the post-Cold War environment. The military’s efforts to transform, in light of emerging threats, while receiving broad discussion within the military services, had failed to 

result in the development and deployment of major new capabilities to address the now highly varied threat spectrum. As such, the 

committee concluded that transformation efforts must be implemented on at least two fronts—maintaining an effective current 

force while developing revolutionary technologies through an aggressive research and development program. Unfortunately, several 

witnesses before the committee during the 107th Congress testified 

that the President’s budget requests continued to fall short of meeting these needs. Indeed, according to some expert witnesses, the 

Department needs to increase its annual procurement budgets by 

$20 billion to $30 billion. 

As a result of these oversight efforts, the committee authorized more than $135 billion during the 107th Congress to procure weapons, equipment, and ammunition, an increase of nearly $6 billion 

to the President’s budget requests. In addition, the committee au- thorized more than $104 billion during the 107th Congress for research and development efforts, an increase of more than $3 billion 

to the President’s budget requests. 

Also during the 107th Congress, the committee included a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2002 (Public Law 107–107) to enhance the military’s ability to develop and deploy new technologies. This legislation, which established the Technology Transition Initiative and the Defense Acquisition Challenge program, represents a significant step in the effort 

to ensure that new technologies are rapidly incorporated into 

America’s defense programs. 

Finally, the committee continued its assessment of the Department of Defense’s modernization requirements through several 

broad-based hearings on procurement and research and development programs, as well as a number of more focused hearings in 

the following areas: the adequacy of the services’ modernization 

plans; the status of missile defense programs; critical infrastructure protection/information assurance; shipbuilding requirements; 

and assessing the threat posed by the proliferation of chemical and 

biological weapons to U.S. forces. 

NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGY AND FORCE STRUCTURE

During the 107th Congress, the committee conducted close oversight on the strategic and tactical assumptions supporting the national military strategy of the United States; the force structure 

necessary to execute the national military strategy; the technological, doctrinal, and other factors affecting the long-term transformation of the conduct of military operations; initiatives to enhance national guard and reserve forces and the integration of acVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
37

tive and reserve components; the military requirements of the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and military combatant commands; and the roles and missions of the armed services and their 

implications on modernization requirements and the development 

of major weapons systems. 

Over the past five years, the committee has expressed concerns 

that active component manning levels are too low. Indeed, the war 

against terrorism only increased the committee’s concerns about 

military manpower levels. These concerns, buttressed by testimony 

presented to the committee by senior military officers and others, 

led to two specific legislative actions. First, the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 

107–314) eliminated the Secretary of Defense’s authority to reduce 

active duty end strengths and provided significant flexibility for the 

service secretaries and the Secretary of Defense to increase end 

strength levels. Second, the committee reported H.R. 5132, a bill 

that expressed concerns about reports of possible reductions in 

military manpower by the Secretary of Defense, restated its rationale for growth in active component end strength, and expressed the 

sense of Congress that active strength should not be reduced and 

that the President should support increases in that strength.

In addition to several hearings during the 107th Congress on the 

nation’s conventional military programs, the committee also conducted significant oversight on the nation’s strategic defenses. In 

particular, the committee closely examined the President’s Nuclear 

Posture Review (NPR) through hearings and briefings on the need 

to ensure effective nuclear stockpile stewardship to maintain a viable nuclear deterrent. As a result of these efforts, the committee 

endorsed the NPR in the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314). 

U.S. POLICY TOWARD IRAQ

Following heightened concerns about the threat posed by Iraq, 

and widespread speculation that the President would take military 

action against Saddam Hussein, the committee conducted nine 

hearings and briefings on Iraq. Specifically, the committee received 

testimony on U.S. policy toward Iraq, the threat posed by Iraq, lessons learned by United Nations weapons inspectors during previous efforts to uncover Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs, and strategies for dealing with the Iraqi threat. In addition, 

the committee hosted a series of closed briefings on current intelligence assessments regarding Iraq for all Members of Congress. At 

the close of the 107th Congress, United Nations weapons inspectors 

had reentered Iraq to begin inspections. This effort, and future U.S. 

actions with regards to Iraq, will be subject to continued committee 

oversight during the 108th Congress. 

ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

During the 107th Congress, the committee continued to address 

organizational and management reforms in the Department of Defense, with a focus on eliminating waste and inefficiency. Specifically, the committee pursued efforts to decrease the costs associated with the defense service support infrastructure and to encourage the Department of Defense to comply with established 

38

downsizing and streamlining goals. The committee also continued 

to monitor the implementation of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, the Federal Acquisition Reform Act of 1996, and 

other recent reforms of the federal acquisition system. In addition, 

the committee evaluated and implemented proposals to further reform the military procurement process to achieve greater efficiencies and economies. Finally, in response to reports that DOD 

employees had been misusing government purchase cards, the committee conducted oversight on DOD’s purchase card programs and 

included necessary reforms in the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314). 

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFERS AND EXPORT CONTROLS

The committee continued its examination of the current U.S. export control regime and its effectiveness in preventing the transfer 

of sensitive military-related technologies to potential adversaries, 

including Iraq. In particular, the committee focused on the impact 

of current and past export control regulations on U.S. national security and the effects of proposed legislation to reauthorize the Export Administration Act. 

MILITARY APPLICATIONS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY

The committee conducted oversight in relation to the following: 

the safety, security, and effectiveness of the nuclear weapons stockpile; the continued ability of the nuclear weapons complex to sustain the nuclear weapons stockpile; tritium requirements and production technology; the ability to sustain a skilled nuclear weapons 

workforce; future requirements for plutonium pit production; and 

the use of Department of Energy skills and assets to reinforce ballistic missile defense efforts. The committee also sought to ensure 

that the operations and practices of the Department of Energy are 

compliant with title 32 of the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65), which established the 

new, semi-autonomous organization to manage the nuclear weapons complex. 

ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES 

MILITARY COMPENSATION

The committee examined a wide range of compensation issues 

during the 107th Congress. During hearings with military personnel, family members, association representatives, and defense 

officials, the committee pursued concerns about military pay levels, 

the role of special and incentive pays, adequacy of pay during deployments, and retirement pay policies. This review resulted in legislation in the National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 

2002 and 2003 (Public Laws 107–107 and 107–314, respectively) to 

provide significant increases to basic, special and incentive pays, 

reform pay tables, and reduce out-of-pocket housing costs for military personnel. 

Specifically, the committee supported across-the-board pay raises 

for the uniformed services that exceed the rate of pay increases in 

the private sector by at least one-half of one percent, as required 

by law adopted during the 106th Congress. In addition, the comVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
39

mittee restructured the military pay tables during fiscal years 2002 

and 2003 to provide for increased pay for mid-grade and senior enlisted members and mid-grade officers. The committee also continued to monitor initiatives to enhance the basic allowance for housing and reform the basic allowance for subsistence. 

Finally, the committee examined deployed pay and tax programs 

to ensure that service members are compensated in a fair and equitable manner. The committee provided retroactive authorization for 

imminent danger pay in the combat zone and authorized payment 

of special and incentive pays at unreduced rates during the war. 

The committee remained committed to adequate compensation for 

deployed personnel and will continue to review the need to increase 

special and incentive pays and other benefits of importance to 

members participating in wartime missions. 

RETIREMENT BENEFITS

During the 107th Congress, the committee remained dedicated to 

demonstrating a commitment to military retirees. As such, the 

committee continued oversight of the TRICARE for Life program 

and established a significant ‘‘beachhead’’ in the effort to amend 

concurrent receipt law.

Specifically, the committee improved the compensation paid to 

disabled military retirees whose retired pay is offset by the amount 

of disability compensation received from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). During the first session, the committee included 

a permanent authority in the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107) to eliminate the prohibition on concurrent receipt which, due to funding concerns, was 

made contingent upon the President submitting the necessary 

funding offsets in a budget request and the Congress enacting 

those offsets. In the event that offsetting funding could not be 

found, the committee enacted improvements to the special compensation for the severely disabled program. 

During the second session, the committee established a compensation program in the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) to make payments to military retirees with combat-related disabilities to restore reduced retired pay. This program will target eligibility for 

enhanced payments to military retirees who have disabilities rated 

10 percent or higher directly as a result of injuries or wounds for 

which the Purple Heart was awarded, or who have a 60 percent or 

higher disability directly as the result of combat-related activities. 

The committee will closely monitor implementation of this program 

during the 108th Congress. 

RECRUITING AND RETENTION

The committee responded to recruiting shortfalls experienced 

during the 105th and 106th Congresses by supporting increased 

funding for recruiting operations, advertising, and incentives. During fiscal years 2001, 2002, and 2003, funding for recruiting increased to $3.3 billion, $3.5 billion, and $3.6 billion, respectively. 

In addition, the committee improved recruiting practices by facilitating recruiter access to secondary schools and authorizing the 

contracting of recruiter functions. As a result, the services enjoyed 

40

highly successful recruiting during fiscal years 2001 and 2002. Also 

during the 107th Congress, the committee authorized a 15-month 

national service enlistment program designed to attract college age 

recruits with strong education incentives in the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 107–314). This program will require close oversight by the committee in the 108th 

Congress. 

Recognizing that maintaining a strong military force also requires substantial efforts to retain quality personnel, the committee focused on improving existing retention bonuses and other 

incentives in the 107th Congress. The committee increased bonus 

levels for health care providers and provided DOD managers with 

increased flexibility and expanded eligibility criteria on several retention programs, to include sea pay and the critical skill retention 

bonus. In addition, the committee authorized two programs designed to respond to the need for educational assistance to families 

of service members including an Education Savings Plan and a program to transfer a portion of service members’ Montgomery G.I. 

Bill benefits to spouses or children. 

HEALTH CARE

Health care benefits have long been a top quality of life issue for 

military personnel. During several hearings, beneficiary groups, 

service members, and Department of Defense officials testified to 

the existence of obstacles that jeopardize the delivery of the 

TRICARE health care benefit to military personnel, retirees, and 

their families. Accordingly, the committee took a number of actions 

to improve administration of the military health care system and 

to ensure that military beneficiaries have access to quality health 

care. In addition, the committee investigated the potential for improvements to military health care by encouraging the Department 

of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to share its facilities. 

As a result of these efforts, the committee included provisions in 

the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 

(Public Law 107–107) to mandate a uniform skilled nursing facility 

benefit to be provided as long as medically necessary and appropriate; provide flexibility in TRICARE contracting; clarify and improve the procedures and administration of the DOD Medicare-eligible retiree health care fund; direct the study of health care coverage for members of the reserve components of the armed forces; 

eliminate many of the previously widely required non-availability 

statements; and provide transitional health care for members separated from active duty. Furthermore, the committee included provisions in the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) to eliminate the requirement 

for TRICARE preauthorization for inpatient mental health for 

Medicare-eligible beneficiaries; expand eligibility for TRICARE 

Prime Remote; approve Medicare providers as TRICARE providers; 

require the Department of Defense to disclose medically-relevant 

information on Project 112, which conducted chemical and biological tests involving military personnel in the 1960s; provide transitional health care for dependents of members separated from active 

duty; and study trends in TRICARE provider network turbulence 

41

and claims processing procedures that may contribute to provideraccess barriers. 

RESERVE COMPONENTS

The increased role of the reserve components in the defense of 

the nation warrants close attention to ensure that reservists are 

treated equitably in comparison to active duty service members. As 

such, during the 107th Congress, the committee reviewed the need 

to change policies and improve compensation for reservists and 

acted to improve reserve retention and recruiting bonuses, reform 

deployment management, balance promotion opportunities, and authorize equitable pay, transportation, disability, and health care 

benefits. Additionally, the committee authorized the United States 

General Accounting Office to conduct a review of reserve compensation programs, to include retirement benefits. The committee will 

consider the results of this study in the 108th Congress. 

BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSES

Americans at home and abroad are within striking range of thousands of ballistic missile warheads. The risk of an accidental or unauthorized launch of a ballistic missile remains real, while the proliferation of missile technologies has allowed nations such as North 

Korea to develop and test long-range ballistic missiles. In response 

to these threats, the President made development and deployment 

of effective ballistic missile defenses (BMD) a top national defense 

priority in 2002 and 2003. The committee endorsed this priority, 

and placed significant emphasis on oversight of BMD programs. As 

a result, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2002 (Public Law 107–107) supported the President’s request to increase spending for BMD programs from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal 

year 2002 by approximately $3 billion. Furthermore, the Bob 

Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 

(Public Law 107–314) maintained a heightened level of spending 

for BMD programs in fiscal year 2003. These increases allowed the 

committee to establish a robust and realistic BMD test program, 

take steps toward development and deployment of a layered defense system, and create an agency to coordinate and oversee the 

nation’s BMD programs (the Missile Defense Agency). 

SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: NATIONAL GUARD STRENGTH ACCOUNTING

Immediately following media reports in January 2002 about serious misconduct and mismanagement among the highest ranks in 

the national guard, the committee initiated an investigation. Following this investigation, the Subcommittee on Military Personnel 

released a report containing the preliminary findings of the subcommittee staff regarding a number of issues about Army National 

Guard strength accounting, senior national guard leadership selection and oversight, and whistleblower protections. 

Based upon the committee’s preliminary investigation of allegations related to strength accounting procedures in national guard 

units and the accountability of senior national guard officers, the 

Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2003 (Public Law 107–314) directed both the Comptroller General 

42

and the Secretary of Defense to undertake systemic reviews of a 

range of issues, including the effectiveness of the Department’s actions to improve national guard strength management, the effectiveness of the federal recognition process for senior national guard 

officers, the nature and extent of administrative and judicial actions taken in cases of substantiated misconduct by senior national 

guard officers, and the effectiveness of federal protections for whistleblowers in the national guard. The Bob Stump National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) also 

changed federal law governing courts-martial for the national 

guard when not in federal service, and required the Secretary of 

Defense to develop both a model Uniform Code of Military Justice 

and Manual for Courts-Martial. Such models will serve as an important step to promote the modernization and administration of 

military justice in the national guard while in a state status. 

SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: MILITARY VOTING

In the wake of allegations raised after the November 2000 election that both the Department of Defense and state election boards 

mishandled the ballots of overseas military personnel, the committee reviewed the absentee balloting process, the Federal Voter 

Assistance Program, and the Department of Defense mail system. 

The committee also called on the United States General Accounting 

Office to examine overseas absentee ballots that had been rejected 

by county election officials and to assess the Federal Voter Assistance Program administered by the Department of Defense to better 

understand the problems and the solutions that may be available 

to Congress. The committee investigated complaints that groups of 

service members serving at sea or assigned to remote locations had 

been denied their voting rights due to problems with the voting 

process or mail systems. Furthermore, the committee contacted 

service members whose overseas absentee ballots had been rejected 

by election officials in Florida to determine where the overseas voting process could be improved. Following these efforts, the committee conducted a hearing on May 9, 2001 to further assess the 

Department’s efforts to ensure that U.S. service members have an 

opportunity to participate in the democratic process. 

As a result, the committee enacted a series of reforms during the 

107th Congress to assist military voters. Specifically, the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–

107) added new structure and emphasis to the Department’s voting 

assistance program and mail delivery system used to support absentee voting. This law also provided new guarantees of state residency, simplified registration and ballot application procedures, 

new requirements for state governors to cooperate with military 

voting programs, and additional clarification of the policy for use 

of military facilities for voting. Finally, the legislation established 

a demonstration project to test the use of electronic absentee voting 

by military personnel. Finally, the committee participated in development of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–252) 

that made additional improvements to the Department of Defense 

voting assistance program. 

43

SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

In June and July of 2002, a series of murders and suicides at 

Fort Bragg, North Carolina raised significant concerns about domestic violence in the United States military. The committee conducted oversight on the Department’s efforts to deal with domestic 

violence issues through a number of field meetings with military 

and civilian community officials, victims of domestic violence, and 

advocacy groups. At the close of the 107th Congress, the committee 

had received the Department’s initial assessment of the incidents 

at Fort Bragg, and was closely monitoring the Department’s implementation of recommendations made to deal with domestic violence 

incidents in the military. The committee will continue oversight of 

this matter during the 108th Congress. 

SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: TERRORIST ATTACK ON THE U.S.S. COLE

On October 12, 2000, a small boat exploded along the port side 

of the USS Cole (DDG–67) during a brief refueling stop in the port 

of Aden, Yemen. The blast resulted in a 40- by 45-foot hole in the 

side of the ship, killing 17 sailors and wounding some 3 dozen 

more. In the aftermath of the attack, the committee initiated oversight of the incident and immediately received a classified briefing 

from Department of Defense officials on the initial reports surrounding the attack. During the 107th Congress, the committee 

conducted a hearing to receive testimony on the attack and lessons 

learned from the incident. As a result of its investigation, the committee released a report, ‘‘The Investigation into the Attack on the 

USS Cole,’’ in May 2001. 

BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT (BRAC)

The committee continued to review the costs and savings associated with base realignment and closure actions taken in 1988, 

1991, 1993, and 1995; the impact of base realignment and closure 

actions on affected local communities and military readiness; and 

the management of the base realignment and closure process by 

the military services. 

INDUSTRIAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL BASE

During the 107th Congress, the committee conducted hearings to 

assess current budget and policy priorities on the maintenance of 

the defense industrial and technology base; the ramifications of 

mergers and acquisitions in the defense industry on the development of future weapons systems; dual-use technology programs; 

the current defense laboratory system; and the role of defense 

funding for university research in the maintenance of the technology base. 

MERCHANT MARINE

The committee conducted oversight on programs to maintain the 

U.S. flag merchant fleet and its role in strategic and sustainment 

sealift; the condition of the National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF) 

and its capability to meet surge requirements; the operation and 

ownership of vessels operating under flags of convenience and the 

national security concerns related to entrance of these vessels into 

44

U.S. ports; and the scrapping of obsolete vessels under the control 

of the Maritime Administration. These oversight efforts were reflected by committee support for increased funding for the Title XI 

shipbuilding loan program; establishment of an innovative program 

to provide financial assistance to states to assist in the sinking of 

obsolete vessels to create artificial reefs; and creation of a pilot program to scrap a limited number of these vessels overseas in an environmentally sound way.

(45)

OTHER ACTIVITIES OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

BUDGET ACTIVITY

On March 12, 2001, the committee forwarded its views and estimates regarding the budget for National Defense (function 050) for 

fiscal year 2002 to the Committee on the Budget. The committee 

noted, because of the Secretary of Defense’s ongoing and comprehensive review of defense missions and functions, that the 

President’s fiscal year 2002 budget should not be considered the 

Administration’s final position on defense spending for that year. 

However, as initially presented, the committee further noted that 

the budget request for the national defense function was estimated 

to only marginally exceed the expected rate of inflation and, in fact 

that between fiscal years 1993 and 2001, appropriations had actually fallen over $200.0 billion short of keeping pace with inflation. 

The committee also noted that the President had proposed a contingency fund of approximately $60.0 billion in fiscal year 2002, 

which was not included in the discretionary spending totals of the 

initial budget request. As a result of the pendency of the Secretary 

of Defense’s review noted above and the likely submission of a 

budget amendment, the committee did not recommend specific National Defense (function 050) authorization levels for budget authority and outlays, but instead sought sufficient discretionary and 

mandatory resources to address critical readiness and training 

needs. The committee also sought additional entitlement authority 

to address the issue of concurrent receipt. The committee further 

expressed concern with regard to the potential for a difference between the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional 

Budget Office in the estimation of defense outlays in the President’s budget and the consequent potential reduction in defense 

budget authority. 

On February 25, 2000, the committee forwarded its views and estimates regarding the budget for National Defense (function 050) 

for fiscal year 2003 to the Committee on the Budget. The committee noted that the proposed budget would increase defense expenditures by $48.1 billion over the previous fiscal year. While the 

President’s defense budget request was substantial, the committee 

expressed concern that the proposed increase still left unfulfilled a 

number of pressing requirements facing the military and that over 

58% of the growth will go to ‘‘must-pay’’ bills, including increased 

health care costs and pay raises. The committee also noted that the 

proposed procurement budget of $71.9 billion still fell short of the 

$103.0 billion recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff as needed 

annually to properly modernize and transform the military services. The committee recommended that the Concurrent Resolution 

of the Budget provide, at an absolute minimum, the full $396.1 billion in budget authority that the Administration had requested for 

46

the national defense function (050) for fiscal year 2003. The committee further requested that the budget resolution provide additional mandatory and discretionary budget authority to the national defense function to permit implementation of the previous 

year’s concurrent receipt initiative. 

FULL COMMITTEE HEARINGS

During the 107th Congress, the Committee on Armed Services 

held numerous hearings in accordance with its legislative and oversight roles. An examination of the new security environment, 

prompted by the September 11th terrorist attacks and the United 

States’ response, provided the thematic overlay for the committee’s 

consideration of the fiscal years 2002 and 2003 defense budget requests. Consideration of U.S. policy toward Iraq and its weapons 

of mass destruction programs resulted in a series of five open hearings. Other full committee hearings focused on committee organization; U.S. national security strategy; the two major theater war 

force sizing and shaping construct; U.S. national security strategy 

and the Quadrennial Defense Review; the implications of closing 

the Vieques training facility; missile defense programs and policy; 

the President’s proposal to create a new Department of Homeland 

Security and its impact on the Department of Defense (DOD) and 

the defense-related aspects of the Department of Energy (DOE); 

and the Export Administration Act of 2001. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–1; H.A.S.C. 107–2; H.A.S.C. 107–11; H.A.S.C. 107–

13; H.A.S.C. 107–22; H.A.S.C. 107–23; H.A.S.C. 107–24; H.A.S.C. 

107–26; H.A.S.C. 107–28; H.A.S.C. 107–38; H.A.S.C. 107–46) 

POSTURE HEARINGS

In exercising its oversight obligations, the committee sought and 

received testimony in each session of the 107th Congress from U.S. 

officials with respect to the President’s overall national security 

policy, plans, programs, and the budget proposals requested to implement them. As part of its review of these issues, the committee 

requested and received statements from the Secretary of Defense, 

the service Secretaries, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 

and the uniformed service chiefs. 

In the first session, during deliberations on the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107), the 

committee received testimony from Secretary of Defense Donald H. 

Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Henry 

H. Shelton on June 28, 2001. Subsequently, the committee received 

testimony from the service secretaries and the uniformed service 

chiefs. The committee heard from Hon. James G. Roche, Secretary 

of the Air Force, and Gen. Michael E. Ryan, Chief of Staff of the 

Air Force, on July 11, 2001; Hon. Gordon R. England, Secretary of 

the Navy; Adm. Vernon Clark, Chief of Naval Operations; and Gen. 

James L. Jones, Commandant of the Marine Corps, on July 12, 

2001; and Hon. Thomas E. White, Secretary of the Army, and Gen. 

Eric K. Shinseki, Chief of Staff of the Army, on July 18, 2001. In 

addition, the committee heard from regional commanders-in-chief. 

On March 28, 2001, the committee met to receive testimony from 

Gen. Tommy R. Franks, USA, Commander in Chief, U.S. Central 

47

Command (CENTCOM); on March 29, 2001, the committee received testimony from Gen. Joseph W. Ralston, USAF, Commander 

in Chief, U.S. European Command (EUCOM); and on April 4, 2001, 

the committee received testimony from Gen. Peter Pace, USMC, 

Commander in Chief, U.S. Southern Command (SOCOM). 

During the second session, the committee began its deliberations 

on the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314) with a hearing on February 6, 

2002, receiving testimony from Secretary of Defense Donald H. 

Rumsfeld, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard 

B. Myers, USAF, and Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller) Dov 

S. Zakheim. This was followed with testimony from the service secretaries and the uniformed service chiefs. On February 13, 2002, 

the committee received testimony from Hon. Gordon R. England, 

Secretary of the Navy; Adm. Vernon Clark, Chief of Naval Operations; and Gen. James L. Jones, Commandant of the Marine 

Corps; on February 28, 2002, the committee received testimony 

from Hon. Thomas E. White, Secretary of the Army, and Gen. Eric 

K. Shinseki, Chief of Staff of the Army; and on March 6, 2002, the 

committee received testimony from Hon. James G. Roche, Secretary 

of the Air Force, and Gen. John P. Jumper, Chief of Staff of the 

Air Force. The committee also met to receive testimony from the 

regional commanders-in-chief. On February 27, 2002, the committee heard from Gen. Tommy R. Franks, USA, Commander in 

Chief, CENTCOM, and Hon. Peter Rodman, Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for International Security Affairs; on March 14, 2002, the 

committee heard from Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, USAF, Commander 

in Chief, U.S. Space Command, and Gen. William F. Kernan, USA, 

Commander in Chief, U.S. Joint Forces Command; on March 20, 

2002, the committee heard from Gen. Joseph W. Ralston, USAF, 

Commander in Chief, EUCOM, and Adm. Dennis C. Blair, USN, 

Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Pacific Command. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–2; H.A.S.C. 107–28) 

THREATS TO U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY

During the 107th Congress, the committee’s review of the President’s defense budget proposals was framed by assessments and 

evaluations of the threats to U.S. national security. On February 

14, 2001, the committee received testimony in closed session from 

the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence, Central Intelligence 

Agency, John McLaughlin and the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Vice Admiral Thomas R. Wilson, on global threats 

to U.S. national security. On March 7, 2001, the committee met to 

receive classified testimony on current military operations and intelligence from Joint Staff representatives Rear Adm. Lowell E. 

Jacoby, Director of the Joint Staff Intelligence Directorate; Lt. Gen. 

Gregory S. Newbold, USMC, Director of the Joint Staff Operations 

Directorate; and Lt. Gen. John P. Abizaid, USA, Director of the 

Joint Staff Plans & Policy Directorate. In each case, the information received provided important context for the committee’s consideration of the President’s fiscal year 2002 defense budget request. This approach was repeated during the committee’s consideration of the fiscal year 2003 budget request. On July 24, 2002, 

the committee received a closed briefing on the threats posed by 

48

weapons of mass destruction from Secretary of Defense Donald H. 

Rumsfeld, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security 

Policy J.D. Crouch, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. 

Richard B. Myers, USAF. 

U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY

The committee continued its examination of U.S. national security strategy and the national military strategy during the 107th 

Congress with a view toward judging the appropriateness of U.S. 

strategy and the adequacy of defense resources being applied to 

execute it. 

With the President’s strategic review of U.S. defense policies and 

programs providing a backdrop, the committee held three hearings 

on the United States’ national security strategy. On March 21, 

2001, the committee took testimony from members of the United 

States Commission on National Security/21st Century, established 

by Congress to provide an independent assessment of the national 

security challenges facing the United States in the next quarter 

century, and leaders from think-tanks dealing with U.S. national 

security strategy. The committee received testimony from Hon. 

Newt Gingrich, Member of the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century; Hon. Gary Hart, Co-Chairman of the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century; Hon. John J. Hamre, 

President & Chief Executive Officer of the Center for Strategic & 

International Studies; and Mr. William Kristol, Chairman of the 

Project for the New American Century on March 21, 2001. On May 

23, 2001, the committee received a briefing regarding options for 

revising the national military strategy delivered by Secretary of 

Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. 

Wolfowitz, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General 

Henry H. Shelton. To better understand the results of the studies 

conducted as part of the Department of Defense’s strategy review, 

the committee received a briefing from Gen. Peter Franklin, Deputy Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, on the 

results of the Missile Defense study on June 6, 2001; from Gen. 

James P. McCarthy, USAF (Ret.), on the results of the Transformation study on June 7, 2001; and from Admiral David Jeremiah, USN (Ret.), on the results of the Morale and Quality of Life 

study on June 13, 2001. The committee then received testimony on 

U.S. national military strategy options from Ms. Miche`lle Flournoy, 

Senior Advisor of the International Security Program at the Center 

for Strategic & International Studies; Dr. Donald Kagan, Professor 

at Yale University; Dr. Andrew Krepinevich, Executive Director of 

the Center for Strategic & Budgetary Assessments; and Dr. Michael O’ Hanlon, Senior Fellow of Foreign Policy Studies at The 

Brookings Institution, on June 20, 2001. The committee met the 

next day, on June 21, 2001, to consider the Quadrennial Defense 

Review, a study mandated by Congress to provide the Department 

of Defense with a blueprint for executing the nation’s defense strategy, receiving testimony from Secretary of Defense Donald H. 

Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Henry 

H. Shelton. Finally, on October 3, 2001, the committee received a 

classified briefing on the Quadrennial Defense Review by Deputy 

Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz, Deputy Under Secretary of 

49

Defense (Policy) Stephen Cambone, and Lt. Gen. Bruce Carlson, 

Joint Staff Force Structure, Resources and Assessment Directorate. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–13; H.A.S.C. 107–22; H.A.S.C. 107–24) 

EP–3 INCIDENT

On April 3, 2001, the committee received a closed briefing on the 

U.S. EP–3 incident with China by a briefing team comprised of representatives from the Department of the Navy, the Office of the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and 

the State Department. Shortly thereafter, on April 25, 2002, the 

committee received another closed briefing regarding the U.S. EP–

3 reconnaissance aircraft and China. On this occasion, the committee heard from Mr. Chris Williams, Acting Under Secretary of 

Defense (Policy); Mr. Peter Verga, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Policy Support); Capt. Guy Holliday, USN, Deputy Director 

for Crisis Management, Directorate for Intelligence, Joint Staff; Lt. 

Col. Joseph Simiscalchi, USAF, Chief, Reconnaissance Operations 

Division, Directorate of Operations, Joint Staff; and Capt. Scott 

Witt, USN, National Security Group, National Security Agency. 

VIEQUES TRAINING FACILITY

In an effort to ensure that U.S. forces are effectively trained, and 

to address the issue of continuing live fire training on the Island 

of Vieques, Puerto Rico, the committee met to discuss the President’s plan for this Naval training facility. The issue of live fire 

training on the range at Vieques is of great concern to the people 

of Vieques, the Department of the Navy, the Department of Defense, and Congress. The position of the uniformed leadership of 

both the Navy and the Marine Corps has been clear: The range at 

Vieques was critical to the training of U.S. sailors and Marines. On 

June 27, 2001, the committee received testimony on the implications of closing the Vieques training facility from Hon. Paul 

Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense; Hon. Gordon R. England, 

Secretary of the Navy; Admiral Vernon Clark, Chief of Naval Operations; and Gen. Michael J. Williams, Assistant Commandant of 

the Marine Corps. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–23) 

NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE

The committee continued its oversight of U.S. national missile 

defense (NMD) policy and programs during the 107th Congress. 

The committee’s continued interest in the President’s NMD plans 

and architecture were fueled by the recognition of the seriousness 

of the ballistic missile threat to the United States and its forces 

overseas. The committee began its deliberation of NMD in the first 

session with a closed briefing by Hon. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Hon. Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary of 

State, on consultation with allies on the subject of missile defenses. 

The President’s fiscal year 2002 budget request represented a significant increase in funding for ballistic missile defense programs 

in order to develop a layered defense against ballistic missiles in 

various stages of their trajectory. The committee welcomed this 

spending increase, and met with officials from the Department of 

50

Defense and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization to evaluate 

and consider the President’s missile defense programs and policy. 

On July 19, 2001, the committee received testimony from Dr. Paul 

Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Lt. Gen. Ronald 

Kadish, USAF, Director, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–26) 

OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM

In order to fulfill its oversight responsibilities in the wake of the 

September 11th terrorist attacks and the subsequent war in Afghanistan, the committee received a series of classified briefings 

from civilian and uniformed officials. On October 3, 2001, the committee heard from Hon. J.D. Crouch, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy, and representatives from 

the Joint Staff Intelligence and Operations Directorates; on October 

18, 2001, the committee heard classified testimony on current military operations; on November 29, 2001, the committee received a 

classified briefing on Operation Enduring Freedom from Hon. Doug 

Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; Maj. Gen. Henry P. 

Osman, USMC, Director for Operational Plans and Joint Force Development; and Col. Jeffrey Burton, USA, Assistant Director for Intelligence. Beginning early in the second session, the committee 

continued to meet to receive updates on the war in Afghanistan. 

On January 23, 2002, the committee received a briefing on Operation Enduring Freedom and related anti-terrorism efforts from 

Hon. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense; Rear Adm. Lowell E. Jacoby, USN, Director, Intelligence, Joint Staff; and Lt. Gen. 

Gregory Newbold, USMC, Director, Operations, Joint Staff. Finally, 

on November 12, 2002, the committee received an informal briefing 

on current operations and intelligence from Hon. Paul Wolfowitz, 

Deputy Secretary of Defense; Rear Adm. Robert Murrett, Vice Director, Directorate for Intelligence, Joint Staff; and Maj. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Vice Director, Operations, Joint Staff. 

EXPORT CONTROLS AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFERS

During the 107th Congress, the committee continued its oversight of the Administration’s policy regarding the export of sophisticated dual-use technologies. Controls on the export of these technologies to countries of proliferation concern had been progressively 

loosened in recent years as rapid technological advances increased 

the ability of other states to acquire militarily useful, or so-called 

dual-use, technologies through commercial means. The committee 

sought a better understanding of the Administration’s rationale for 

further loosening controls over the export of sophisticated U.S. 

technologies in light of concerns that certain technologies had been 

diverted to inappropriate end-users or end-uses, including Iraq and 

its nuclear weapons programs. In particular, the committee assessed the Administration’s support for S. 149, the Export Administration Act of 2001, as passed by the Senate, which would have further loosened U.S. controls on sensitive dual-use items and technologies that could be employed by countries of proliferation concern to develop weapons of mass destruction. On February 28, 

2002, the committee held a hearing with government officials, the 

U.S. General Accounting Office, and outside experts on U.S. policy 

51

regarding export controls to consider the President’s position on the 

Export Administration Act of 2001. The committee heard testimony 

from Hon. J.D. Crouch, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy; Hon. James J. Jochum, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Administration; Hon. Vann Van 

Diepen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State 

(Nonproliferation); Mr. Joseph Christoff, Director, International Affairs and Trade Team, U.S. General Accounting Office; Mr. Edmund Rice, President, Coalition for Employment Through Exports; 

and Dr. Gary Milhollin, Director, Wisconsin Project on Nuclear 

Arms Control. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–11) 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NUCLEAR SECURITY

On March 13, 2002, the committee met to receive testimony from 

Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham on the Department of Energy’s fiscal year 2003 budget request for Atomic Energy Defense Activities. Secretary Abraham was accompanied by Dr. Everet 

Beckner, Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs at the National Nuclear Security Administration, and Ambassador Linton 

Brooks, Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs at the National Nuclear Security Administration. 

The hearing took place shortly after the completion of the Department of Defense’s Nuclear Posture Review, a congressionally-directed study that laid out the direction of U.S. nuclear forces over 

the next five to ten years. The results of that review were briefed 

to the committee in closed session on February 14, 2002 by Hon. 

J.D. Crouch, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy; Rear Adm. Barry Costello, Deputy Director, Strategy 

and Policy, Joint Staff; and Dr. Everet Beckner, Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–28)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

In response to the September 11 attacks on America, and in an 

effort to prevent future terrorist strikes, the committee asserted its 

oversight role of homeland defense-related activities. The committee met to consider the President’s proposal to create a new Department of Homeland Security and its impact on the Department 

of Defense and the defense-related aspects of the Department of 

Energy as soon as was possible. On April 24, 2002, the committee 

held an informal briefing by Hon. Stephen Cambone, Principal 

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and a Joint Chiefs 

of Staff representative regarding the President’s announced 

changes to the Unified Command Plan and the creation of the new 

Northern Command. On June 25, H.R. 5005, the introduced 

version of the President’s legislative proposal, was referred to the 

committee and 11 other House committees for consideration and 

recommendations. On June 26, 2002, Hon. Stephen Cambone, Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, and General 

John Gordon, USAF (Ret.), Administrator of the National Nuclear 

Security Administration at the Department of Energy, testified before the committee on the roles, missions, and activities of those orVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
52

ganizations the President had proposed to transfer from DOD and 

DOE to the Department of Homeland Security. On July 10, 2002, 

the committee marked up H.R. 5005, a bill to establish the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes. H.R. 5005 subsequently passed both Houses of Congress and was signed into law 

by the President on November 25, 2002 (Public Law 107–296). 

(H.A.S.C. 107–38) 

U.S. POLICY TOWARD IRAQ

During the second half of the 107th Congress, the committee 

began a systematic, in-depth examination of U.S. policy toward 

Iraq amidst specific consideration of a congressional resolution that 

would authorize the President’s use of force against Iraq. In an effort to educate and inform the committee and the American people 

on the various issues surrounding Iraq’s continued violation of numerous United Nation’s resolutions, its illicit development of weapons of mass destruction, and the threat that Saddam Hussein poses 

to the United States, the Middle East, and the international community, the committee held a number of hearings and briefings. 

On September 10, 2002, the committee received a classified briefing from the intelligence community on Iraqi threats. The briefers 

included Mr. John E. McLaughlin, Deputy Director of Central Intelligence, and Rear Adm. Robert Murrett, Vice Director, Joint 

Staff Intelligence. Immediately following the intelligence briefing, 

the committee began a series of five open hearings by holding a 

hearing on the state of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction program and the history of the United Nations inspection efforts in 

Iraq, with an emphasis on the experiences of the United Nations 

Special Commission on Iraq from 1991 through 1998. The committee heard from Dr. David A. Kay, Former United Nations Chief 

Nuclear Weapons Inspector in Iraq, United Nations Special Commission on Iraq and International Atomic Energy Association, and 

Dr. Richard O. Spertzel, Former Head of Biology Section, United 

Nations Special Commission on Iraq. Having considered the United 

States’ past experience with inspections in Iraq, the committee welcomed the President’s first cabinet-level official to appear on Capitol Hill regarding U.S. policy toward Iraq. On September 18, 2002, 

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld and Chairman of the 

Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard B. Myers, USAF, delivered testimony to the committee on the President’s plans to address the 

threat posed to the U.S. by Iraq. On September 19, 2002, the committee continued its review of the Iraqi threat and United States 

policy toward Iraq, with a specific focus on how the U.S. and the 

international community should act in concert to restrain Saddam’s 

weapons of mass destruction programs. To this end, the committee 

received testimony on Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Program 

and Technology Exports from Mr. Gary Milhollin, Director of the 

Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, and Dr. Khidir 

Hamza, a former Iraqi Nuclear Engineer and Director of the Council on Middle Eastern Affairs. The committee then turned to outside experts to give their views on U.S. policy toward Iraq. Hon. 

Richard N. Perle, Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, and Gen. Wesley K. Clark, USA 

(Ret.), Managing Director of Merchant Banking at the Stephens 

53

Group, Inc. testified to the committee on September 26, 2002; Dr. 

Eliot Cohen, Professor and Director of Strategic Studies at The 

School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University; and Dr. Michael O’Hanlon, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, testified on October 2, 2002. In addition, on September 

25, 2002, the Committee met for a closed, informal meeting with 

senior, retired United States military officers to discuss United 

States policy toward Iraq, with a particular emphasis on military 

options to achieve U.S. policy objectives. The former officers included Gen. Wayne A. Downing, USA (Ret.), former Commanderin-Chief, Special Operations Command; Gen. William M. Keys, 

USMC (Ret.), former Commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Atlantic; and Gen. Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret.), former Deputy 

Commander-in-Chief, European Command. 

In the 107th congress, the committee continued its efforts to inform and educate the U.S. House of Representatives on key issues 

of national security. Toward the purpose of giving every Member 

of the House of Representatives an opportunity to receive detailed 

information from the intelligence community on the important 

issue of Iraq, the committee held classified briefings by the Central 

Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency on Iraq’s 

weapons of mass destruction programs and military capabilities. 

The committee held such all-Member briefings on September 18, 

2002 and September 25, 2002. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–46) 

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON MORALE, WELFARE AND RECREATION

The Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation 

was appointed for the 107th Congress on March 1, 2001. 

The panel conducted three hearings under its jurisdiction during 

the 107th Congress. Reviews of the fiscal year 2002 budget request 

for morale, welfare and recreation (MWR) programs were conducted on March 29, 2001, and April 4, 2001, while the review of 

the fiscal year 2003 budget request was conducted on March 12, 

2002. The panel continued its oversight of the military services’ MWR programs and operations of the Defense Commissary Agency 

(DeCA) and the military exchanges. Issues examined included the 

adequacy of appropriated fund support to MWR programs; the importance of the military resale system as a non pay benefit; and efforts to improve the efficiency of the operation of the commissaries, 

exchanges, and MWR activities.

This active oversight resulted in a number of initiatives contained in National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 

2002 and 2003 (Public Laws 107–107 and 107–314, respectively). 

These included providing commissary benefits to members of the 

reserve components immediately upon their enlistment; providing 

commissary benefits to members of the national guard called to 

state service during a national emergency; directing the Comptroller General to review the adequacy of DeCA funding and staffing; encouraging service secretaries to provide appropriate MWR 

support for privatized military housing areas; recommending that 

the Secretary of Defense provide appropriated fund support to 

MWR activities adversely affected by the tighter security required 

at military installations in the aftermath of the events of SepVerDate 0ct 31 2002 07:34 Dec 20, 2002 Jkt 019016 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR791.XXX HR791
54

tember 11, 2001; and allowing the Department of Defense to combine appropriated and nonapproprated funds at the installation 

level for greater management flexibility. 

The panel also continued its annual review of the commissary 

surcharge and nonappropriated fund construction program. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–8; H.A.S.C. 107–34) 

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON THE MERCHANT MARINE

The Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine was appointed for the 107th Congress on March 1, 2001. 

On July 13, 2001 the Panel held a hearing to receive testimony 

on the budget request for the Maritime Administration for fiscal 

year 2002 and related legislative proposals. The panel’s recommendations were adopted on August 1, 2001 by voice vote, and 

were subsequently included in title XXXV of Division C of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (107–107). 

On March 14, 2002 the panel held a hearing to receive testimony 

on the budget request for fiscal year 2003 for the Maritime Administration and legislative proposals to facilitate its national defense 

mission. On April 24, 2002, the panel’s recommendations on authorization levels and legislative provisions affecting the Maritime 

Administration were adopted by voice vote, and were subsequently 

included as title XXXV of Division C of the Bob Stump National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107–

314). On June 13, 2002, the panel also conducted a hearing on the 

operation and ownership of vessels operating under flags of convenience and the national security concerns raised with respect to 

these vessels entering U.S. ports. Additionally, the panel held a series of hearings on July 16, 2002, July 23, 2002, and October 8, 

2002 relating to the reauthorization of the maritime security program, which is due to expire at the end of fiscal year 2005. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–9; H.A.S.C. 107–35; H.A.S.C. 107–42; H.A.S.C. 

107–47) 

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

REORGANIZATION

The Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization was appointed for the 107th Congress on March 1, 2001 

to oversee the implementation of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Act (Public Law 106–65). Public Law 106–65 

established a semi-autonomous agency within the Department of 

Energy to manage the Department’s nuclear weapons, nuclear nonproliferation, and naval reactor activities. 

The panel’s mandate is to assess the progress being made by 

NNSA in implementing the provisions of law creating the NNSA 

and whether additional legislative changes are warranted. On April 

4, 2001 the panel held a hearing with testimony from the administrator of the NNSA, General John Gordon, USAF (Ret.), and the 

General Accounting Office. Their testimony addressed recently announced plans for realigning NNSA’s organizational structure and 

the progress being made by NNSA in effecting management 

changes. On June 26, 2001, the panel took testimony from Dr. John 

S. Foster, in his capacity as Chairman of the Panel to Assess the 

55

Reliability, Safety and Security of the United States Nuclear Stockpile. Dr. Foster’s testimony addressed three areas: restoring the 

production complex, reorienting headquarters management and 

oversight, and maintaining a strong weapons complex workforce. 

On February 26, 2002 the panel again received testimony from the 

Administrator of the NNSA, General John Gordon, USAF (Ret.), 

and the General Accounting Office. Their testimony concentrated 

on NNSA’s efforts to enhance its management of the nation’s nuclear stockpile by restructuring its headquarters and field units 

and the progress being made in establishing an effective planning, 

programming, and budgeting process. Dr. Foster testified again before the panel on March 21, 2002. On this occasion, Dr. Foster recommended that the NNSA complete its reorganization, resolve organizational relationships with DOE headquarters, and develop a 

plan for reducing unnecessary administrative burden; clarify program management roles, responsibilities, and authorities; and create a future years program plan and budget that would define 

deliverables and priorities. In addition to formal hearings, the 

panel conducted a number of briefings involving representatives 

from the national weapons laboratories and the nuclear weapons 

production plants and sites. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–14; H.A.S.C. 107–21; H.A.S.C. 107–40) 

SPECIAL OVERSIGHT PANEL ON TERRORISM

The Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism was appointed for the 

107th Congress on March 1, 2001. The panel conducted numerous 

exploratory hearings and briefings on the nature of the terrorist 

threat facing U.S. national security interests and the armed forces. 

Specifically, the panel focused its activities on gaining a greater understanding of the regional underpinnings of terrorism, the threats 

posed to U.S. interests in various regions of the world, and unconventional terrorist threats, including weapons of mass destruction. 

The panel held 9 hearings during the 107th Congress: May 22, 

2001, Patterns of Global Terrorism and Threats to the United 

States; June 14, 2001, Department of Defense’s Role in Combating 

Terrorism and Force Protection Lessons Learned Since the Attack 

on the U.S.S. Cole; June 28, 2001, Security Against Terrorism on 

U.S. Military Bases; May 23, 2002, Assessing Support for Terrorism in the Middle East; June 6, 2002, Are Yasser Arafat and the 

Palestinian Authority Credible Partners for Peace?; June 28, 2002, 

and July 11, 2002, How the Services Are Transforming to Better 

Prepare Themselves for Counter-terrorism (Navy, Marine Corps 

and Army, Air Force, respectively); September 5, 2002, The House 

Intelligence Committee Report on Counter-terrorism Intelligence 

Capabilities and Performance Prior to 9/11; and October 10, 2002, 

The Role of the Department of Defense in the Security of U.S. Embassies Abroad. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–16; H.A.S.C. 107–18; H.A.S.C. 107–19; H.A.S.C. 

107–25; H.A.S.C. 107–27; H.A.S.C. 107–43; H.A.S.C. 107–44; 

H.A.S.C. 107–45)

(57)

OTHER ACTIVITIES OF SUBCOMMITTEES 

MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AND FACILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE

The Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities held 

several hearings in support of its consideration of the fiscal year 

2002 and 2003 budget requests for the military construction, military family housing, and other related programs of the Department 

of Defense and the military services. In addition to its consideration of the annual budget request, the subcommittee considered 

and reported legislation in each session of the 107th Congress, 

which was included in Division B of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107) and Division 

B of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2003 (Public Law 107–314). In both instances, the legislation 

included alterations to the management of the military construction program and the military family housing program, modifications of the defense base closure and realignment process, and provisions affecting the conveyance, exchange, transfer of jurisdiction, 

or modification to existing statutory authority of the disposition of 

real property. Other legislation provided the Secretary of Defense 

with the authority to conduct a base realignment and closure round 

in 2005; provided the service secretaries with authorities to partner 

with private entities to acquire land establishing buffer zones 

around military installations; and substantially increased the size 

of the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California. 

Taking testimony from senior officials and military officers of the 

Department of Defense and the military services, the subcommittee 

met on July 11, 2001, to review the budget request for fiscal year 

2002, and on March 7 and March 20, 2002, to review the budget 

request for fiscal year 2003. 

The subcommittee also conducted several oversight hearings during the 107th Congress, taking testimony from senior Department 

of Defense officials, military officers, and senior noncommissioned 

officers. The subcommittee met on April 26, 2001, to review the 

conditions of military facilities and their effect on military readiness and quality of life; on May 3, 2001, to conduct an oversight 

hearing on the implementation of the military housing privatization initiative; and on May 9, 2001, to receive testimony from senior enlisted personnel concerning their perspective of military facility conditions. The committee also conducted an oversight hearing 

on April 10, 2002, on the force protection aspects of military construction and Department of Defense and military services long 

term planning for military infrastructure requirements. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–7; H.A.S.C. 107–33) 

58

MILITARY PERSONNEL SUBCOMMITTEE

The Military Personnel Subcommittee held a series of hearings 

to review the manpower portion of the fiscal years 2002 and 2003 

defense budget requests and to conduct oversight: March 14, 2001, 

implementation of TRICARE benefits for Medicare-eligible military 

retirees; May 9, 2001, Department of Defense voting assistance and 

military absentee ballot issues; May 17, 2001, lessons learned from 

the current version of the TRICARE managed care support contracts and recommendations for the design of the next round of 

contracts; June 21, 2001, current status of cooperation between the 

Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs in 

sharing medical resources; July 18, 2001, overview of military personnel, health care, and the reserve component issues in the fiscal 

year 2002 national defense authorization budget request; March 7, 

2002, healthcare sharing by the Department of Defense and the 

Department of Veterans Affairs; March 13, 2002, fiscal year 2003 

national defense authorization budget request; April 10, 2002, fiscal year 2003 defense health program budget request. Additionally, 

the subcommittee received briefings from the chiefs of the reserve 

components and the service deputy chiefs of staff for personnel on 

April 3, 2001 and May 2, 2001, respectively. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–6; H.A.S.C. 107–12; H.A.S.C. 107–15; H.A.S.C. 

107–17; H.A.S.C. 107–39; H.A.S.C. 107–32) 

MILITARY PROCUREMENT SUBCOMMITTEE

The Subcommittee on Military Procurement addressed the Department of Defense’s (DOD) modernization programs and Department of Energy’s (DOE) programs, management and security problems by conducting numerous oversight hearings during its consideration of the fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003 budget requests, 

including: March 28, 2001, transformation impact on equipment 

modernization; May 1, 2001, V–22 Osprey program; June 27, 2001, 

DOE’s budget request for defense related programs; July 12, 2001 

(joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development), DOD’s procurement and research and development 

budget requests; February 27, 2002 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development), ballistic missile 

defense programs; March 5, 2002, crisis response capabilities to domestic acts of terrorism related to weapons of mass destruction; 

March 6, 2002 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military 

Research and Development), DOD acquisition programs; March 19, 

2002, United States defense industrial base; March 20, 2002, Navy 

shipbuilding programs; April 11, 2002 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development), ground forces 

modernization programs; June 12, 2002, safety, security, reliability, 

and performance of the United States nuclear stockpile; June 27, 

2002 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Research 

and Development), ballistic missile defense programs; November 

14, 2002, crisis response requirements for homeland security. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–3, H.A.S.C. 107–10, H.A.S.C. 107–20, H.A.S.C. 

107–29, H.A.S.C. 107–36, H.A.S.C. 107–37, H.A.S.C. 107–48) 

59

MILITARY READINESS SUBCOMMITTEE

In addition to its review of the operations and maintenance portion of the fiscal years 2002 and 2003 Department of Defense authorization requests, the subcommittee held a series of hearings 

within its jurisdiction. Major areas of the subcommittee’s examinations included military readiness trends and perspectives, defense 

reform initiatives, depot-level maintenance issues, Department of 

Defense acquisition workforce, operation and maintenance financial 

management issues, mission capability rates, improving readiness 

capabilities, military training issues, information assurance and information technology, and issues concerning the Naval Petroleum 

Reserves and the National Defense Stockpile of strategic and critical materials. 

The subcommittee also conducted a series of hearings on encroachment issues at military facilities and reviewed the effects of 

environmental regulations, civilian construction, and related encroachments on military installations, training, and operations. As 

a result of these hearings, the committee included legislation in the 

Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2003 (Public Law 107–314) to restore balance between military 

readiness, environmental, and civilian needs by establishing ‘‘buffer 

zones’’ around military installations and relieving the Department 

of limitations imposed by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 

During the 107th Congress the subcommittee conducted field 

hearings at Corpus Christi, Texas, concerning depot maintenance 

repair capabilities; at Fort Carson, Colorado, concerning the adequacy of military combat training ranges and facilities; and at the 

former Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, Pennsylvania, concerning the 

readiness capabilities of the V–22 tilt rotor aircraft. In addition, 

the subcommittee conducted a four-day fact-finding trip to 22 military installations within the United States to review military readiness in the field. As a result of testimony received and the subcommittee’s investigative efforts, the committee supported significant annual increases to critical budgets for training, recruiting, 

base operations, spare parts, and real property maintenance in the 

National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2002 and 

2003 (P.L. 107–107 and P.L. 107–314, respectively). 

The subcommittee undertook a detailed and extensive examination of issues concerning the outsourcing of Department of Defense 

activities to the private sector, which culminated in a major legislative initiative in this area. 

(H.A.S.C. 107–5; H.A.S.C. 107–31; H.A.S.C. 107–41) 

MILITARY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE

The Subcommittee on Military Research and Development (R&D) 

conducted numerous oversight hearings to review programs included in the Department of Defense research and development 

budget requests for fiscal years 2002 and 2003 during the 107th 

Congress. In addition to traditional budget oversight reviews, the 

subcommittee held a number of hearings, several conducted jointly 

with the Subcommittee on Military Procurement, to address specific areas of concern. 

60

The subcommittee held the following hearings: March 22, 2001, 

Innovative Research Companies; June 14, 2001, Ballistic Missile 

Defense Testing; June 20, 2001, Space Now and in the Future; July 

12, 2001, Fiscal Year 2002 National Defense Authorization Act— Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2002 Procurement and Research and Development Budget Requests (joint hearing with the 

Subcommittee on Military Procurement); June 26, 2001, Defense 

Science and Technology Program; February 20, 2002, Navy Transformation—From the Present to the Future (field hearing); February 21, 2002, Research and Development in Support of the War 

on Terrorism (field hearing); February 27, 2002, Missile Defense 

Agency (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Procurement); March 6, 2002, DOD Procurement and Research and Development Budget Requests for Fiscal Year 2003 (joint hearing with 

the Subcommittee on Military Procurement); March 12, 2002, Innovative Technologies in Support of Homeland Defense and CounterTerrorism; April 11, 2002, Ground Forces Modernization and 

Transformation Requirements for the Fiscal Year 2003 Budget Request and the Future Years Defense Program (joint hearing with 

the Subcommittee on Military Procurement); and June 27, 2002, 

Ballistic Missile Defense (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on 

Military Procurement). 

The R&D subcommittee also conducted hearings and briefings 

during the 107th Congress to address concerns over the military’s 

preparedness in a post-September 11th environment, homeland defense, and transformation activities. The subcommittee received 

testimony on the Administration’s program for critical infrastructure protection, information superiority for the 21st century battlefield, and the status of the defense science and technology base. 

The committee continues to be concerned by the serious decline in 

research and development funding, specifically science and technology accounts, which are critical to maintaining U.S. military superiority. Accordingly, the committee allocated an increase in funding for research, development, test, and evaluation, rather than the 

decrease reflected in the budget request. 

(H.A.S.C. No. 107–3; H.A.S.C. No. 107–4; H.A.S.C. No. 107–11; 

H.A.S.C. No. 107–29; H.A.S.C. No. 107–30)

(61)

PUBLICATIONS 

COMMITTEE PRINTS OF LAWS RELATING TO NATIONAL DEFENSE

To assist individuals in referencing statutes that are frequently 

under consideration by the Committee on Armed Services and the 

Department of Defense and others in looking for statutory guidance, the committee printed three volumes pertaining to current 

law in the 107th Congress: 

Title 10, United States Code—Armed Forces (as amended 

through December 31, 2000). 

Compilation of Defense-Related Federal Laws (other than 

title 10, United States Code) (as amended through December 

31, 2000). 

Laws Relating to Federal Procurement (as amended through 

December 31, 2000). 

(Committee Prints 2, 3 and 4) 

COMMITTEE PRINTS

1. Committee rules, adopted February 7, 2001. 

2. Title 10, United States Code—Armed Forces (as amended 

through December 31, 2000). March 2001. 

3. Compilation of Defense-Related Federal Laws (other than title 

10, United States Code) (as amended through December 31, 2000). 

April 2001. 

4. Laws Relating to Federal Procurement (as amended through 

December 31, 2000). May 2001. 

5. A Ceremony Unveiling the Portrait of The Honorable Bob 

Stump. October 9, 2002. 

PUBLISHED PROCEEDINGS

H.A.S.C. 107–1—Full committee hearing on committee organization. February 7, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–2—Full Committee hearings on National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002—H.R. 2586 and Oversight 

of Previously Authorized Programs. March 28, 29, April 4, June 28, 

July 11, 12, and 18, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–3—Military Procurement Subcommittee hearings 

on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002—H.R. 

2586 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title I—

Procurement. March 28, May 1, and July 12, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–4—Military Research and Development Subcommittee hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002—H.R. 2586 and Oversight of Previously Authorized 

Programs, Title II—Research and Development, Test, and Evaluation. March 22, June 14, 20, and 26, 2001. 

62

H.A.S.C. 107–5—Military Readiness Subcommittee hearings on 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002—H.R. 

2586 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title III— Operation and Maintenance. March 23, May 17, 21, and 22, June 

26, and July 11, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–6—Military Personnel Subcommittee hearings on 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002—H.R. 

2586 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title IV— Personnel Authorizations, Title V—Military Personnel Policy, Title 

VI—Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits, and Title VII— Health Care Provisions. June 21, and July 18, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–7—Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002—H.R. 2586 and Oversight of Previously Authorized 

Programs, Division B—Military Construction Authorization. April 

26, May 3, 9, and July 11, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–8—Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare, 

and Recreation hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2002—H.R. 2586 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs. March 29 and April 4, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–9—Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine hearing on the Fiscal Year 2002 Maritime Administration Authorization Request and Related Matters. July 13, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–10—Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 

on Department of Energy Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2002. 

June 27, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–11—Full Committee hearing on Export Administration Act of 2001. February 28, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–12—Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on 

Implementation of TRICARE Benefits for Medicare-Eligible Military Beneficiaries. March 14, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–13—Full Committee hearing on U.S. National Security Strategy. March 21, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–14—Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization hearing on Management of the National Nuclear Security Administration. June 26, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–15—Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on 

Department of Defense Voting Assistance and Military Absentee 

Ballot Issues. May 9, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–16—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing 

on Patterns of Global Terrorism and Threats to the United States. 

May 22, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–17—Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on 

TRICARE Managed Care Support Contracts: Lessons Learned and 

Future Contracts. May 17, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–18—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing 

on Assessing Support for Terrorism in the Middle East. May 23, 

2002 

H.A.S.C. 107–19—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing 

on the Department of Defense’s Role in Combating Terrorism and 

Force Protection Lessons Learned Since the Attack on the USS 

Cole. June 14, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–20—Military Procurement Subcommittee hearings 

on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003—H.R. 

63

4546 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title I— Procurement. March 20 and June 12, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–21—Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization hearing on Reorganization Plan of the National Nuclear Security Administration. April 4, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–22—Full Committee hearing on U.S. National Security Strategy and the Quadrennial Defense Review. June 21, 

2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–23—Full Committee hearing on Military Training 

on the Island of Vieques. June 27, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–24—Full Committee hearing on U.S. National Military Strategy Options. June 20, 2001.

H.A.S.C. 107–25—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing 

on Security Against Terrorism on U.S. Military Bases. June 28, 

2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–26—Full Committee hearing on Missile Defense 

Programs and Policy. July 19, 2001. 

H.A.S.C. 107–27—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing ‘‘Are Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority Credible Partners for Peace?’’ June 6, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–28—Full Committee hearings on National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003—H.R. 4546 and Oversight 

of Previously Authorized Programs. February 6, 13, 27, 28, March 

6, 13, 14, and 20, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–29—Military Research and Development Subcommittee meeting jointly with the Procurement Subcommittee 

hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2003—H.R. 4546 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title I—Procurement, Title II—Research, Development, 

Test and Evaluation. February 27, March 6, April 11, and June 27, 

2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–30—Military Research and Development Subcommittee hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003—H.R. 4546 and Oversight of Previously Authorized 

Programs, Title II—Research and Development, Test, and Evaluation. February 20, 21, March 12, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–31—Military Readiness Subcommittee hearings on 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003—H.R. 

4546 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title III—

Operation and Maintenance. March 7, 8 (2 hearings), 13, and 14, 

2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–32—Military Personnel Subcommittee hearings on 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003—H.R. 

4546 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title IV—

Personnel Authorizations, Title V—Military Personnel Policy, Title 

VI—Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits, and Title VII—

Health Care Provisions. March 13, April 10, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–33—Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003—H.R. 4546 and Oversight of Previously Authorized 

Programs, Division B—Military Construction Authorization. March 

7, 20, and April 10, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–34—Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare, 

and Recreation hearing on National Defense Authorization Act for 

64

Fiscal Year 2003—H.R. 4546 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs. March 12, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–35—Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine hearing on Fiscal Year 2003 Maritime Administration Authorization Budget Request. March 14, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–36—Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 

on Crisis Response Capabilities to Domestic Acts of Terrorism Related to Weapons of Mass Destruction. March 5, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–37—Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 

on United States Defense Industrial Base. March 19, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–38—Full Committee hearing on H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act of 2002. June 26 and July 10, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–39—Military Personnel Subcommittee and Health 

Subcommittee of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs joint hearing 

on Health Care Sharing by the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs. March 7, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–40—Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization hearing on the Findings and Recommendations of the Report of the Panel to Access the Reliability, Safety, 

and Security of the United States Nuclear Stockpile. February 26, 

and March 21, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–41—Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on 

Outsourcing Review of the Commercial Activities Panel Report. 

June 26, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–42—Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine hearing on Vessel Operations Under Flags of Convenience and 

Their Implications on National Security. June 13, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–43—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing 

on the House Intelligence Committee Report on Counter Terrorism 

Intelligence Capabilities and Performance Prior to 9/11. September 

5, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–44—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing 

on the Role of the Department of Defense and the Security of U.S. 

Embassies Abroad. October 10, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–45—Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism hearing 

on How the Services Are Transforming Themselves to Better Conduct Anti- and Counter-Terrorism Operations. June 28 and July 

11, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–46—Full Committee hearings on U.S. Policy Towards Iraq. September 10, 18, 19, 26, and October 2, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–47—Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine hearings on Reauthorization of the Maritime Security Program. July 16, 23, and October 8, 2002. 

H.A.S.C. 107–48—Procurement Subcommittee hearing on Crisis 

Response Requirements for Homeland Security. November 14, 

2002.

65

HOUSE REPORTS

Report Number Date filed Bill Number Title 

107–194 ............................. Sept. 4, 2001 ..................... H.R. 2586 ........................... To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2002 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, to prescribe military 

personnel strengths for fiscal 

year 2002, and for other purposes. 

107–297, part 2 ................ Mar. 8, 2002 ...................... H.R. 2581 ........................... To provide authority to control 

exports, and for other purposes. 

107–333 ............................. Dec. 12, 2001 .................... S. 1438 Conf. Rept ............ To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2002 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, to prescribe military 

personnel strengths for fiscal 

year 2002, and for other purposes. 

107–436 ............................. May 3, 2002 ....................... H.R. 4546 ........................... To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2003 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, and for military construction, to prescribe military 

personnel strengths for fiscal 

year 2003, and for other purposes. 

107–436, part 2 ................ May 6, 2002 ....................... H.R. 4546 ........................... To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2003 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, and for military construction, to prescribe military 

personnel strengths for fiscal 

year 2003, and for other purposes. 

107–603 ............................. July 23, 2002 ..................... H.R. 4547 ........................... To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2003 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, and to prescribe 

military personnel strengths 

for fiscal year 2003. 

107–771 ............................. Nov. 4, 2002 ...................... H.R. 5132 ........................... To express the sense of Congress 

concerning the fiscal year 

2003 end strengths needed 

for the Armed Forces to fight 

the War on Terrorism. 

107–772 ............................. Nov. 12, 2002 .................... H.R. 4546 Conf. Rept ......... To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2003 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, and for military construction, to prescribe military 

personnel strengths for fiscal 

year 2003, and for other purposes. 

66

PUBLIC LAWS

Law Number Date approved Bill Number Title 

107–56 ............................... Oct. 26, 2001 ..................... H.R. 3162 ........................... To deter and punish terrorist 

acts in the United States and 

around the world, to enhance 

law enforcement investigatory 

tools, and for other purposes. 

107–103 ............................. Dec. 27, 2001 .................... H.R. 1291 (S. 1088) ........... To amend title 38, United States

Code, to modify and improve 

authorities relating to education benefits, burial benefits, and vocational rehabilitation benefits for veterans, to 

modify certain authorities relating to the United States 

Court of Appeals for Veterans 

Claims, and for other purposes. 

107–107 ............................. Dec. 28, 2001 .................... H.R. 2586 (S. 1438) ........... To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2002 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, to prescribe military 

personnel strengths for fiscal 

year 2002, and for other purposes. 

107–152 ............................. Mar. 14, 2002 .................... S.J. Res. 32 ........................ Congratulating the United States 

Military Academy at West 

Point on its bicentennial anniversary, and commending its 

outstanding contributions to 

the Nation. 

107–314 ............................. Dec. 2, 2002 ...................... H.R. 4546 ........................... To authorize appropriations for 

fiscal year 2003 for military 

activities of the Department of 

Defense, and for military construction, to prescribe military 

personnel strengths for fiscal 

year 2003, and for other purposes. 

(67)

PRESS RELEASES 

FIRST SESSION

February 1, 2001—Chairman Stump Announces Leadership of 

House Armed Services Committee. 

February 7, 2001—Statement by Chairman Stump on the Defense Budget. 

February 12, 2001—Stump, Skelton Announce Subcommittee Assignments. 

February 28, 2001—Chairman Stump Statement on Bush Defense Budget. 

March 1, 2001—Special Oversight Panels Appointed for the 

107th Congress. 

March 14, 2001—Opening Statement of Chairman McHugh at 

Personnel Subcommittee Hearing on Implementation of TRICARE 

Benefits for Medicare-Eligible Military Beneficiaries. 

March 15, 2001—Press Advisory—House Armed Services Subcommittee to conduct field hearing at Corpus Christi Army Depot, 

Texas. 

March 21, 2001—Opening Statement of Chairman Stump at Full 

Committee Hearing on U.S. National Security Strategy. 

March 28, 2001—Opening Statement of Chairman Stump at 

Hearing with U.S. Central Command. 

March 29, 2001—Opening Statement of Chairman Stump at 

Hearing with U.S. European Command. 

March 29, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump on the Death of 

Representative Norman Sisisky. 

April 4, 2001—Opening Statement of Chairman Stump at Hearing with U.S. Southern Command. 

April 4, 2001—Chairman Stump Announces HASC Vice-Chairs. 

May 1, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump on Presidential 

Speech on Missile Defense Systems. 

May 30, 2001—Stump, Skelton Release Report on Congressional 

Investigation into Terrorist Attack on the USS Cole.

June 15, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump on the Vieques 

Training Facility Decision. 

June 20, 2001—Chairman Stump Announces Hearing on the 

Vieques Training Facility. 

June 27, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee Hearing on the Vieques Training Facilities. 

June 27, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump on Amended Fiscal Year 2002 Defense Budget. 

June 27, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump Following HASC 

Hearing on Vieques Training Facility. 

June 28, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee hearing on the Fiscal Year 2002 National Defense Authorization Budget Request. 

68

July 11, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee 

hearing on the Fiscal Year 2002 Air Force Budget Request. 

July 12, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee 

hearing on the Fiscal Year 2002 Department of the Navy Budget 

Request. 

July 15, 2001—Chairman Stump on Missile Defense Test. 

July 18, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee 

hearing on Fiscal Year 2002 Department of the Army Budget Request. 

July 19, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee 

hearing on Missile Defense. 

August 1, 2001—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee Markup of H.R. 2586. 

August 1, 2001—H.R. 2586: The National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2002—Summary of Committee Markup. 

August 17, 2001—Chairman Stump on the Death of Floyd 

Spence. 

September 12, 2001—Chairman Stump on Terrorist Attacks 

Against the United States. 

September 20, 2001—Chairman Stump’s Statement at General 

Debate of H.R. 2586, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2002. 

September 25, 2001—Chairman Stump’s Statement at Final Passage of H.R. 2586, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2002. 

December 12, 2001—S. 1438: The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002—Summary of Conference Report. 

December 13, 2001—Chairman Stump’s Statement at Floor Consideration of S. 1438, The National Defense Authorization Conference Report. 

December 13, 2001—Chairman Stump’s Statement on Presidential Decision to Withdraw from ABM Treaty. 

SECOND SESSION

January 29, 2002—Chairman Stump Reacts to 2002 State of the 

Union Address. 

February 4, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump on Fiscal Year 

2003 Defense Budget. 

February 6, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump on Posture 

Hearing on Fiscal Year 2003 Defense Budget. 

February 12, 2002—Stump Announces New Committee Assignments. 

February 15, 2002—Press Advisory—Research and Development 

Subcommittee to Conduct Field Hearings in San Diego. 

February 27, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump on Posture 

Hearing on U.S. Central Command. 

February 28, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump on Posture 

Hearing on Fiscal Year 2003 Army Budget. 

February 28, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump on Hearing 

on the Export Administration Act of 2001. 

February 28, 2002—Press Advisory—Readiness Subcommittee to 

Conduct Field Hearing at Fort Carson, Colorado. 

March 6, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump on Mark-up of 

Export Administration Act of 2001. 

69

March 6, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump on Hearing on 

Fiscal Year 2003 Air Force Budget Request. 

March 6, 2002—Press Advisory—Joint Hearing to Examine 

Health Sharing Between the Department of Veterans Affairs and 

the Department of Defense. 

March 7, 2002—House Armed Services Committee Reports Export Administration Act. 

March 13, 2002—Chairman Stump’s Statement at Hearing on 

Fiscal Year 2003 DOE National Security Budget. 

March 14, 2002—Chairman Stump’s Statement on Posture Hearing on U.S. Space Command and Joint Forces Command. 

March 20, 2002—Chairman Stump and Ranking Member Skelton 

on DOD Plans for Military Tribunals. 

April 11, 2002—Chairman Stump’s Statement on the International Criminal Court (ICC). 

April 18, 2002—Personnel Subcommittee Chairman John 

McHugh and Ranking Member Vic Snyder Issue Report on National Guard Misconduct & Strength Accounting. 

May 1, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee 

Mark-up of H.R. 4546. 

May 1, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee 

Mark-up of H.R. 4547. 

May 1, 2002—The National Defense Authorization Legislation 

for Fiscal Year 2003—Summary of Committee Mark-up. 

May 9, 2002—Chairman Stump’s Statement at General Debate 

of H.R. 4546, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2003. 

May 9, 2002—Chairman Stump’s Statement at Passage of H.R. 

4546, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. 

June 26, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump at Full Committee Hearing on Homeland Security Department. 

July 10, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump at Mark-up of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002. 

July 10, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump at Passage of H.R. 

5005, the Homeland Security Act of 2002. 

July 18, 2002—Statement of Chairman Stump at Mark-up of 

H.R. 4547, The Cost of War Against Terrorism. 

September 10, 2002—Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 

Full Committee Hearing on the State of the Iraqi Weapons of Mass 

Destruction Program and the History of the U.N. Inspection Efforts 

in Iraq. 

September 10, 2002—Press Advisory—Secretary Rumsfeld to 

Testify Before Armed Services Committee on U.S. Policy Toward 

Iraq. 

September 10, 2002—Press Advisory—Armed Services Committee to receive testimony on how Iraq acquires technology necessary to build weapons of mass destruction. 

September 18, 2002—Statement of Chairman Hunter at Full 

Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy Towards Iraq. 

September 19, 2002—Statement of Chairman Hunter at Full 

Committee Hearing on Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Program and Technology Exports. 

September 23, 2002—Press Advisory—Armed Services Subcommittee to conduct meetings in Fayetteville and Fort Bragg, 

70

North Carolina to examine issues associated with domestic violence 

in the military. 

September 26, 2002—Statement of Chairman Hunter at Full 

Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy Towards Iraq. 

October 2, 2002—Statement of Chairman Weldon at Full Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy Towards Iraq.

Æ