[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 104 (Wednesday, July 21, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8919-S8921]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000--Continued


                Amendment No. 1262 to Amendment No. 1258

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, there is an amendment that Senator 
Domenici, Senator Reid, and I have agreed to, which I offer at this 
time and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative assistant read as follows:

       The Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Bingaman], for himself, 
     Senator Domenici and Senator Reid, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1262 to amendment No. 1258.

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

       In section 213 of the Department of Energy Organization 
     Act, as proposed by subsection (c) of the amendment, strike 
     subsection (o) and insert the following new subsection (o):
       (o)(1) The Secretary shall ensure that other programs of 
     the Department, other federal agencies, and other appropriate 
     entities continue to use the capabilities of the national 
     security laboratories.
       (2) The Under Secretary, under the direction, authority, 
     and control of the Secretary, shall, consistent with the 
     effective discharge of the Agency's responsibilities, make 
     the capabilities of the national security laboratories 
     available to the entities in paragraph (1) in a manner that 
     continues to provide direct programmatic control by such 
     entities.

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am very pleased that we could get 
agreement to offer this amendment. It is a joint amendment that Senator 
Domenici, Senator Reid, and I have participated in drafting. It tries 
to ensure that our national laboratories, particularly those that are 
focused on defense-related activities and our nuclear weapons 
capability, are open to do other work, work for other parts of the 
Department of Energy, work for other agencies of the Government, and 
work with industry, where appropriate.
  We provide what the Secretary needs to ensure that this is the case, 
and that the Under Secretary, working under the direction of the 
Secretary, shall make the capabilities of the national laboratories 
available to these other entities that want to perform work there, and 
that these entities shall be able to do so in a manner that continues 
to provide them with direct programmatic control of the activities they 
are sponsoring at the laboratories.
  Mr. President, this concern has been for the future of civilian 
research and development at the DOE laboratories that carry out 
defense-related research. I was concerned that the Kyl amendment was 
setting up an architecture for these laboratories that well may make it 
more difficult to carry out civilian-related research. We don't want to 
wake up, 5 years from now, and discover that this architecture dictated 
the destiny of those laboratories in unfortunate ways.

[[Page S8920]]

  I don't quarrel with the notion that these labs have, and should 
continue to have, nuclear weapons as a core mission. But it seems to me 
that the task of science-based stockpile stewardship cannot succeed 
unless these labs are fully integrated into the larger world of science 
and technology.
  I believe that the civilian R&D programs at Sandia, Los Alamos, and 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories play a critical role in 
attracting and keeping the best people in those laboratories. By 
civilian R&D, I am talking about the work funded at the laboratories by 
DOE programs other than the defense programs, programs funded by other 
civilian agencies of the government, and technology partnerships with 
industry.
  There have been numerous cases where this civilian R&D has provided 
new ideas for defense-related technical activities. In other cases, 
this civilian R&D has helped maintain core competencies at the labs 
needed for their defense missions. Our national security, in my view, 
would be damaged in the long run if these institutions stopped being 
national laboratories and just had a weapon focus.
  My colleagues and co-sponsors agree with this assessment. It is basic 
to a number of provisions of law that we have enacted in past 
Congresses, particularly the National Competitiveness Technology 
Transfer Act of 1989, which I sponsored with Senator Domenici. The 
findings of that bill are as relevant today, 10 years later, as they 
were when we passed that bill as part of the Defense Act that year.
  Last week, before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, we 
heard testimony from one of DOE's most distinguished laboratory 
directors, Dr. Burt Richter. He's the head of a civilian DOE 
laboratory, but has a long acquaintance with the defense side of DOE. 
He stated, ``one has to face the fact that maintaining the credibility 
of a nuclear deterrent is not the most exciting job in science these 
days'', underlining the issues of attracting and retaining personnel. 
But he says, ``it needs some of the best people to do it''.
  He then went on to say, ``The scientists at the weapons labs have to 
be able to interact with the rest of the scientific community, because 
all of the science needed for stockpile stewardship is not in the 
weapons labs, and the best people will not go into isolation behind a 
fence in today's world.'' He concluded by reminding us, ``This is not 
World War II.''
  I think that he's right. In creating this new Agency, we need to make 
sure that we are not damaging one of the most precious assets for which 
the Department of Energy is the custodian.

  I think this is an important clarification, an important provision to 
add to the bill. I appreciate the cooperation of my colleague in 
getting agreement on the amendment. I hope the Senate will adopt it.
  Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may 
proceed for 30 seconds.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I think this is a good amendment. I was 
pleased to work with the Senator Bingaman and Senator Reid in getting 
it developed. I thank our staff.
  We are very proud that the laboratories do work for others. That 
means the Department of Defense and the private sector; it means other 
agencies of the Federal Government and work for the Department in other 
areas besides nuclear. It is important, and we knew it from the very 
beginning, that this flexibility and ability to do such work be 
protected to the maximum extent in the new configuration and management 
scheme.
  I believe we have done that. It will not detract from its principal 
mission, which is the subject matter of the amendment, creating a new 
agency within the Department, but it will assure that these jewels of 
research, which are the three nuclear deterrent laboratories, remain at 
the high level they have been for many, many decades. That means it 
will work for others, thus attracting the very best scientists.
  We think this can be done and protect intelligence and 
counterintelligence activities within the laboratories.
  We have no objection on our side, and I don't assume there is any on 
the other side.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, there is no objection here.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I think we are all in agreement that the 
quality of American science benefits from participation by the national 
security labs.
  And, I think all would agree that the quality and character of our 
nuclear stockpile benefits from non-weapons research and development at 
these labs.
  The national weapons labs are truly multi-program labs that apply 
their skills and facilities, unmatched anywhere in the world, to the 
solution of critical nondefense problems as well as defense problems.
  I do not believe for one moment that any of the bill's sponsors 
intend to isolate the weapons labs from their scientific roots.
  But I do believe that the amendment's restrictive language that 
assigns direct responsibility and authority to the Under Secretary for 
Nuclear Stewardship for ``all activities at the Department's national 
security laboratories, and nuclear weapons production facilities'' will 
do just that.
  For example, the Director of the Office of Science is responsible for 
research in high energy physics, a topic of particular interest and 
skill at the weapons labs.
  But, according to the amendment, the Director has no authority over 
high energy physics work that might be performed at Lawrence Livermore 
National Lab.
  According to the amendment, only the Under Secretary for Nuclear 
Stewardship can have responsibility and authority for work at that lab.
  Mr. President, I suppose that the Director of the Office of Science 
could simply ``trust'' the Under Secretary to do the ``right thing'', 
but that is not the way things normally work.
  A far more likely outcome in my opinion would be that the Director 
would choose to assign work to a University or other source of skills, 
regardless of the lost opportunity at these superb weapons labs--just 
in order to retain authority over things for which the Director is 
responsible.
  In the same way that the Secretary needs to retain authority over 
functions for which he is responsible, other functionaries in the 
Department need to retain authority over work for which they are 
responsible.
  There has been unanimous agreement among my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle as well as among the members of the President's Foreign 
Intelligence Advisory Board that no person should be assigned 
responsibility without appropriate accompanying authority.
  So I think we should be able to agree on this matter.
  I understand that we are very near agreement on this matter with some 
differences remaining between whether it is the Secretary or the Under 
Secretary who ensures that the national security labs remain available 
for appropriate scientific work for other agencies and other parts of 
the Department.
  I hope we can arrive at some common ground on this issue.
  It does not seem wrong to me to call for the Secretary to establish 
policies regarding the availability of the national security labs since 
the Secretary is, according to the underlying amendment, responsible 
for all policies at the Department of Energy.
  So I hope my colleagues can continue to work toward a bipartisan 
agreement that will strengthen this legislation and allow it to endure.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
1262. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 1262) was agreed to.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                       Vote On Amendment No. 1261

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the Levin 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a 
sufficient second.

[[Page S8921]]

  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
1261. The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative assistant called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Craig) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Kennedy) is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Voinovich). Are there any other Senators 
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 54, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 215 Leg.]

                                YEAS--44

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Byrd
     Cleland
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Torricelli
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--54

     Abraham
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coverdell
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Craig
     Kennedy
       
  The amendment (No. 1261) was rejected.
  Mr. SPECTER. I move to reconsider the vote and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized 
for 15 minutes.

                          ____________________