[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 149 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11495-S11496]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

 Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I support the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998. I congratulate the chairman, 
Senator Thurmond, and the ranking member, Senator Levin, for their 
leadership in the bipartisan effort which attained this substantive and 
far reaching conference agreement. And they reached this agreement with 
the unanimous support of the Senate Armed Services Committee, all 18 
committee members signed the conference report. Most importantly, this 
agreement was able to produce significant compromise in policy on key 
issues related to Bosnia, the B-2 bomber, and depot provisions.


                            depot provisions

  I would like to take a few moments to elaborate on the great 
accomplishment of this depot compromise. This is a compromise that was 
very difficult to achieve and I appreciate the very strong views of 
Senators on both sides of this issue. Earlier in this authorization 
conference process, I opposed the depot provisions which were 
originally recommended by the readiness panel because they explicitly 
precluded competition for the resolution of workloads at Kelly and 
McClellan Air Logistics Center. So we went back to work and through the 
significant efforts of many members with key interests in this depot 
issue, we were able to develop a substantive set of provisions that 
promote competition, and I support them. This compromise protects the 
integrity of the BRAC process and will serve the best interests of the 
Department of Defense and the U.S. taxpayer.
  First, this bill provides for an open and fair competition for the 
workloads at Kelly and McClellan Air Force Base by ensuring that 
consistent practices are used to value the bids of private and public 
sector entities. Furthermore, we have been able to incorporate a major 
initiative in public-private

[[Page S11496]]

partnerships. This provision enables the Department of Defense to 
leverage the core competencies of our public sector depots with those 
of private industry in building the most effective and the most 
efficient team for maintaining our military's equipment. And it does so 
in a way that keeps competitive pressures on both the private and the 
public sector that will ensure that the Pentagon and the U.S. taxpayer 
continue to get the best value for their defense dollar. The Pentagon 
has indicated that this is a workable approach to resolving the highly 
charged issue surrounding Kelly and McClellan Air Logistics Centers.
  Second, the depot package amends the 60-40 public-private workload 
split to 50-50. This provision, in addition to codifying the definition 
of depot maintenance in a way that protects procurement of upgrades and 
major modifications for private industry while retaining a core public 
sector capability, gives the Department of Defense much more 
flexibility in undertaking maintenance functions. In short, it allows 
them a significant increase in headroom to prudently shift depot 
workloads across the private and the public sectors to achieve 
efficiencies.

  Most importantly, this depot provision gives us a window of 
opportunity to get defense infrastructure reform on track. From my 
perspective as chairman of the Airland Subcommittee, I see the impact 
of the Pentagon's procurement shortfall which measures approximately 
$10 to $15 billion per year. This shortfall is due to this 
administration's spending too much on defense infrastructure and 
operations, and too little on vital modernization. I see it in terms of 
dozens and dozens of broken programs which are not funded at 
sustainable rates. Consequently, contractors are required to start and 
stop development and production of major assemblies, if not final 
products such as in digital communications, ballistic missile defense, 
tactical vehicles, and the list goes on and on. I also see it in areas 
where key Pentagon requirements simply are not being addressed because 
funding is unavailable such as in the Comanche armed reconnaissance 
helicopter or the Marine Corps advanced amphibious armored vehicle.
  In conclusion, I am encouraged that this depot compromise sets the 
stage for gaining efficiencies in our infrastructure so that we can 
retain the readiness levels required in the near term, while at the 
same time providing the means to boost our procurement programs to help 
ensure the preparedness of our future forces to dominate the uncertain 
threats of the 21st Century.


                                airland

  And now I would like to provide a few comments on the Airland aspects 
of this bill. First, this National Defense Authorization supports the 
Army's commendable Force XXI effort which significantly enhances the 
situational awareness and combat effectiveness of our land forces 
through information technology. Yet, we need to do much more to get the 
spectrum of digitization efforts which were strongly endorsed by the 
Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review adequately funded. But at least 
this is a fair start. We also were able to provide significant 
enhancements in the military's tactical and operational mobility 
through increases in tactical trucks, the establishment of multi-year 
procurement for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles [FMTV], and 
increases in V-22 procurement. We also added increases for tactical air 
and missile defense capabilities such as with the Sentinel Radar, the 
Avenger Slew-to-Cue modifications, and enhancements to Stinger missile 
modifications and the Patriot anticruise missile program.
  I spoke at length about my concerns with F-22 cost overruns and 
technology risks during our deliberations over Defense Appropriations. 
This National Defense Authorization provides the same F-22 funding 
levels, but goes the very important further step to put key oversight 
provisions in place that will help Congress and the administration keep 
this program on track. First, this bill includes the Senate's total 
cost cap provisions which limits the level of engineering and 
manufacturing development to approximately $18.7 billion, and 
production to $43.4B. Second, it require the General Accounting Office 
to conduct an annual F-22 review that addresses whether the program is 
meeting established goals in performance, cost, and schedule.


                               conclusion

  This National Defense Authorization makes great strides in supporting 
the defense strategy of Shape, Respond, and Prepare Now. It provides 
significant increases in our readiness accounts. It also takes better 
care of our military servicmembers and their quality of life through a 
2.8 percent payraise and a reformed approach to quarters allowances. 
And it accelerates procurement to address shortfalls in key mission 
capabilities. Finally, this National Defense Authorization provides a 
reasonable compromise to the depot issue through a fair and open 
competition which serves the best interests of the military and the 
American taxpayer. In short, this bill provides the policy and fiscal 
provisions representative of the prudent oversight from our Senate 
authorization process. It provides the framework for setting a course 
which ensures U.S. military dominance into the 21st Century.
  This National Defense Authorization has my full support, and I 
strongly encourage all members to vote for it.

                          ____________________