(B) requires the entity described in section 
321(d)(1) to—
(i) establish qualifications for attor-
neys who may be appointed to represent 
indigents in capital cases in accordance 
with section 321(d)(2)(A); 
(ii) establish and maintain a roster of 
qualified attorneys in accordance with sec-
tion 321(d)(2)(B); 
(iii) assign attorneys from the roster in 
accordance with section 321(d)(2)(C); 
(iv) conduct, sponsor, or approve spe-
cialized training programs for attorneys 
representing defendants in capital cases in 
accordance with section 321(d)(2)(D); 
(v) monitor the performance and train-
ing program attendance of appointed attor-
neys, and remove from the roster attorneys 
who fail to deliver effective representation or 
fail to comply with such requirements as the 
entity may establish regarding participa-
tion in training programs, in accordance 
with section 321(d)(2)(E); and 
(vi) ensure funding for the full cost of 
competent legal representation by the de-
fense team and outside experts selected by 
counsel, 
in 
accordance 
with 
section 
321(d)(2)(F), including a statement setting 
forth—
(I) if the State employs a public 
defender 
program 
under 
section 
321(d)(1)(A), the salaries received by 
the attorneys employed by such pro-
gram and the salaries received by at-
torneys in the prosecutor’s office in the 
jurisdiction; 
(II) if the State employs ap-
pointed 
attorneys 
under 
section 
321(d)(1)(B), the hourly fees received 
by such attorneys for actual time and 
service and the basis on which the 
hourly rate was calculated; 
(III) the amounts paid to non-at-
torney members of the defense team, 
and the basis on which such amounts 
were determined; and 
(IV) the amounts for which attor-
ney and non-attorney members of the 
defense team were reimbursed for rea-
sonable incidental expenses; and
(3) a statement confirming that the funds have 
not been used to fund representation in specific cap-
ital cases or to supplant non-Federal funds. 
(c) CAPITAL PROSECUTION IMPROVEMENT GRANTS.—
With respect to the funds provided under section 322, a re-
port under subsection (a) shall include—
(1) an accounting of all amounts expended; 
(2) a description of the means by which the State 
has—
(A) designed and established training pro-
grams for State and local prosecutors to ensure 
effective representation in State capital cases in 
accordance with section 322(b)(1)(A); 
(B) developed and implemented appropriate 
standards and qualifications for State and local 
prosecutors who litigate State capital cases in 
accordance with section 322(b)(1)(B); 
(C) assessed the performance of State and 
local prosecutors who litigate State capital cases 
in accordance with section 322(b)(1)(C); 
(D) identified and implemented any poten-
tial legal reforms that may be appropriate to 
minimize the potential for error in the trial of 
capital 
cases 
in 
accordance 
with 
section 
322(b)(1)(D);
(E) established a program under which 
State and local prosecutors conduct a systematic 
review of cases in which a death sentence was 
imposed in order to identify cases in which post-
conviction DNA testing may be appropriate in 
accordance with section 322(b)(1)(E); and 
(F) provided support and assistance to the 
families of murder victims; and 
(3) a statement confirming that the funds have 
not been used to fund the prosecution of specific cap-
ital cases or to supplant non-Federal funds. 
(d) PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
OF ANNUAL STATE RE-
PORTS.—The annual reports to the Attorney General sub-
mitted by any State under this section shall be made avail-
able to the public. 
SEC. 325. EVALUATIONS BY INSPECTOR GENERAL AND AD-
MINISTRATIVE REMEDIES. 
(a) EVALUATION BY INSPECTOR GENERAL.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—As soon as practicable after 
the end of the first fiscal year for which a State re-
ceives funds under a grant made under this title, the 
Inspector General of the Department of Justice (in 
this section referred to as the ‘‘Inspector General’’) 
shall—
(A) after affording an opportunity for any 
person to provide comments on a report sub-
mitted under section 324, submit to Congress 
and to the Attorney General a report evaluating 
the compliance by the State with the terms and 
conditions of the grant; and 
(B) if the Inspector General concludes that 
the State is not in compliance with the terms 
and conditions of the grant, specify any defi-
ciencies and make recommendations for correc-
tive action. 
(2) PRIORITY.—In conducting evaluations under 
this subsection, the Inspector General shall give pri-
ority to States that the Inspector General determines, 
based on information submitted by the State and 
other comments provided by any other person, to be 
at the highest risk of noncompliance. 
(b) ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW.—
(1) COMMENT.—Upon receiving the report under 
subsection (a)(1), the Attorney General shall provide 
the State with an opportunity to comment regarding 
the findings and conclusions of the report. 
(2) CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN.—If the Attorney 
General, after reviewing the report under subsection 
(a)(1), determines that a State is not in compliance
with the terms and conditions of the grant, the Attor-
ney General shall consult with the appropriate State 
authorities to enter into a plan for corrective action. 
If the State does not agree to a plan for corrective ac-
tion that has been approved by the Attorney General 
within 90 days after the submission of the report 
under subsection (a)(1), the Attorney General shall, 
within 30 days, direct the State to take corrective ac-
tion to bring the State into compliance. 
(3) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 90 
days after the earlier of the implementation of a cor-
rective action plan or a directive to implement such 
a plan under paragraph (2), the Attorney General 
shall submit a report to Congress as to whether the 
State has taken corrective action and is in compli-
ance with the terms and conditions of the grant. 
(c) PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.—If the State 
fails to take the prescribed corrective action under sub-
section (b) and is not in compliance with the terms and 
conditions of the grant, the Attorney General shall dis-
continue all further funding under sections 321 and 322 
and require the State to return the funds granted under 
such sections for that fiscal year. Nothing in this paragraph 
shall prevent a State which has been subject to penalties
for noncompliance from reapplying for a grant under this 
subtitle in another fiscal year. 
(d) PERIODIC REPORTS.—During the grant period, 
the Inspector General shall periodically review the compli-
ance of each State with the terms and conditions of the 
grant. 
(e) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—Not less than 2.5 per-
cent of the funds appropriated to carry out this subtitle for 
each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009 shall be made avail-
able to the Inspector General for purposes of carrying out 
this section. Such sums shall remain available until ex-
pended. 
SEC. 326. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION FOR GRANTS.—There are author-
ized to be appropriated $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
2005 through 2009 to carry out this subtitle. 
(b) RESTRICTION ON USE OF FUNDS TO ENSURE 
EQUAL ALLOCATION.—Each State receiving a grant under 
this subtitle shall allocate the funds equally between the uses 
described in section 321 and the uses described in section 
322.
Subtitle C—Compensation for the 
Wrongfully Convicted 
SEC. 331. INCREASED COMPENSATION IN FEDERAL CASES 
FOR THE WRONGFULLY CONVICTED. 
Section 2513(e) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by striking ‘‘exceed the sum of $5,000’’ and insert-
ing ‘‘exceed $100,000 for each 12-month period of incarcer-
ation for any plaintiff who was unjustly sentenced to death 
and $50,000 for each 12-month period of incarceration for 
any other plaintiff’’. 
SEC. 332. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING COMPENSA-
TION IN STATE DEATH PENALTY CASES. 
It is the sense of Congress that States should provide 
reasonable compensation to any person found to have been 
unjustly convicted of an offense against the State and sen-
tenced to death.
Union Calendar No. 194
108TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. R. 3214
[Report No. 108–321, Part I] 
A BILL 
To eliminate the substantial backlog of DNA sam-
ples collected from crime scenes and convicted of-
fenders, to improve and expand the DNA testing 
capacity of Federal, State, and local crime lab-
oratories, to increase research and development 
of new DNA testing technologies, to develop new 
training programs regarding the collection and 
use of DNA evidence, to provide post-conviction 
testing of DNA evidence to exonerate the inno-
cent, to improve the performance of counsel in 
State capital cases, and for other purposes. 
OCTOBER 16, 2003
Reported from the Committee on the Judiciary with an 
amendment 
OCTOBER 16, 2003
Referral to the Committee on Armed Services extended 
for a period ending not later than October 16, 2003
OCTOBER 16, 2003
Committee on Armed Services discharged; committed to 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the 
Union and ordered to be printed