[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 114 (Thursday, August 5, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10351-S10354]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               REORGANIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I would like to speak for just a moment to 
alert my fellow Senators and others about an important development this 
evening which I think we categorize as another piece of good news, in 
addition to the adoption of the conference report on the tax reform 
just concluded by the Senate.
  Even though the conference report is in the process of being signed 
and has not yet been filed, I think I can advise my colleagues that 
later on this evening the House and Senate Armed Services Committees 
will have concluded their conference report, including the important 
revisions of the Department of Energy which follow generally along the 
lines of the so-called Rudman report recommendations and the amendment 
that Senators Murkowski and Domenici and I filed earlier in this 
session to reorganize the Department of Energy.
  The House and Senate had both passed versions of that reform of the 
Department of Energy. The matter was concluded today in the House-
Senate conference report of the Armed Services bill, and that is the 
vehicle by which the reorganization of the Department of Energy will 
occur.
  Just to recapitulate a little bit about how this came about, if you 
will recall, as a result of the espionage that resulted in the Chinese 
receiving significant secrets about nuclear weapons of the United 
States and the possibility that some of that information had come out 
of our National Laboratories, there was a great deal of study of the 
security at our National Labs and in the weapons program generally of 
the Department.
  The President's own Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, the so-
called PFIAB, headed by former Senator Warren Rudman, issued a report, 
really a scathing indictment of the Department of Energy, its past 
security policies or lack of security, and its inability to reorganize 
itself notwithstanding Secretary Richardson's efforts to begin to 
reorganize the Department. What it said was the Department of Energy 
was incapable of reorganizing itself. They reiterated a long list of 
things which the Department had failed to do, which it had failed to 
put into place, and described the whole situation at the Department as 
such that it was impossible to expect them to be able to do this on 
their own.
  Therefore, the Rudman commission recommended strongly the Congress do 
this reorganization by legislation. That is when Senators Domenici, 
Murkowski and I reoriented our amendment to follow closely the Rudman 
commission recommendations and introduced that as an amendment before 
this body.
  It was originally introduced to the Armed Services bill. It was later 
put on the Intelligence bill instead. But the Armed Services Committee 
took the amendment and has worked it now in the conference committee, 
as I said. As a result of their agreement tonight, there will be a 
reorganization of the Department, assuming the President signs the 
Defense authorization bill, which I am sure he would want to do.
  Reorganization was agreed to in principle by Secretary Richardson, 
although there were many things he wanted to change in the detail of 
it. But what it will do in a nutshell is to establish within the 
Department of Energy a semiautonomous agency that will have the 
accountability and the responsibility for managing our nuclear weapons 
and complex including the National Laboratories. It will be headed by a 
specific person, an Under Secretary, who will be responsible to the 
Secretary directly and to a Deputy Secretary if the Secretary so 
desires.
  While, of course, the Secretary of Energy remains in general control 
of all of his Department, including the semiautonomous agency, on a 
day-to-day basis it is anticipated this agency will be operated by the 
Under Secretary, who is responsible for its functions. It will involve 
security, intelligence, counterintelligence, all of the different 
weapons, the Navy nuclear program and the other things at the 
laboratory that relate to our nuclear weapons. To a large extent it 
will remove the influences of other parts of the Department

[[Page S10352]]

of Energy over the nuclear weapons program.
  One of the things the Rudman commission found was that there were too 
many people with their fingers in the pie; that the laboratories and 
the weapons program people were having to get too many sign-offs from 
too many other people around the Department to work efficiently and 
effectively. The input of the field offices made it very difficult to 
know who was responsible, and it was hard to find out in some cases who 
you even had to get sign-offs from in order to get anything done. They 
said, in effect, it was no wonder the left hand didn't know what the 
right hand was doing and that is why they recommended a very clear 
chain of command, a very clear line of authority with accountability 
and responsibility with one person at the top and a bunch of people 
answerable to him and only him--as well as the Secretary, of course.
  The net result of that should be we will have a much tighter 
organization run much more efficiently. We will not have the influences 
of these other disparate people within the Department. Security can be 
carefully monitored and controlled and, in fact, maintained and in some 
cases even established. Therefore, the security of the nuclear weapons 
program generally and the laboratory specifically can be enhanced and 
we will not have the kind of espionage problems we have had in the 
past.

  That is a summary of the problem, the recommendation of the Rudman 
report, the recommendations Senators Domenici, Murkowski, and I 
introduced, and the action of the House-Senate Armed Services Committee 
today in approving this particular plan.
  I thank some people specifically involved in developing this. In 
addition, of course, to Senator Domenici, who was the primary mover 
behind this idea, and Senator Rudman and the members of his panel; 
Senator Murkowski added a great deal as did Senator Shelby, the 
chairman of the Intelligence Committee, and Senator Warner, the 
chairman of the Armed Services Committee in the House.
  Specifically, I thank Senator Warner for his patience for working 
with a lot of people who had different ideas about what ought to be 
done, bringing this to a near successful conclusion, from my point of 
view, and which will enable us to move forward very quickly with this 
reorganization.
  There are also some special staff people who, as always, make these 
things happen. In the Senate, the staffs of Senators Domenici and 
Murkowski; Alex Flint, Howard Useem, and John Rood did a great deal of 
work on this and should be complimented. Two Members of the House of 
Representatives, who were very active in making this work, Congressman 
Duncan Hunter and Congressman Mac Thornberry were really the key movers 
and shakers on this.
  So as we get ready to leave here this evening, I think it is 
important for us to acknowledge the work of these people and the 
leadership of Senator Warner and the conclusion which I hope can soon 
be announced, as the successful completion of the conference, at least 
in this one important area, making a great stride toward ensuring the 
security of our weapons programs and our National Laboratories.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to thank our distinguished 
colleague, together with Senators Domenici and Murkowski and their 
respective staffs. Indeed, the staff of the Senate Armed Services 
Committee and the House Armed Services Committee all collaborated to 
try to make this a constructive, constitutional, and balanced approach.
  But if I could ask the Senator a question, so those persons who have 
not had the opportunity to follow as closely as he the progress of this 
legislation, does the Senator think the product created by the House-
Senate conference represents a piece of legislation that is stronger, 
in terms of creating this concept of a separate entity within the DOD, 
than was the bill passed by the Senate at 93-1?
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I think it is. I think the Senate passed a 
good bill almost unanimously. The House of Representatives had a 
somewhat different approach. I am sure they considered it an even 
stronger bill. As the chairman knows better than any of us, compromise 
is required in that kind of situation. I think each body moved somewhat 
toward the other. So inevitably I think the product, as good as it was 
out of the Senate, is even strengthened by some of the ideas that came 
out of the House of Representatives.
  I might ask the chairman a question, if I could.
  Mr. WARNER. Yes.
  Mr. KYL. One of the things that animated us in the Senate was the 
need to get on with this project, get the Department reorganized, and 
to begin dealing quickly with these security problems so we did not 
have any more problems. Reorganization of a Department, obviously, will 
take a lot of work and some time. Of course, time will be required to 
appoint the various officials who will be running it.

  But I ask the chairman this, just to get his ideas. There are 
different dates by which things are required to be done under the 
legislation. What is our intent with respect to moving this legislation 
forward and accomplishing its objectives as soon as is possible?
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, to use an old naval phrase, ``with all 
deliberate speed.''
  I know the Senator's concern about the insertion of a date in March 
with regard to the final achievement by, presumably, the current 
Secretary; if Secretary Richardson will carry this through. Certain 
sections, however, of this legislation are quite clear that he should 
start the day after the President, hopefully, affixes his signature to 
this piece of legislation.
  It is a phasing process. We looked at the date of March, and it 
should not, in my judgment, be interpreted as any lack of resolve by 
the Congress. To the contrary, it is a recognition that a major 
reorganization of this proportion will require a period of time within 
which to achieve it.
  The opposite side of the argument of those who say we should not have 
had that date would be, if you did not put in a recognition that it 
would take time, then presumably 1 week after the President affixes his 
signature, we could haul the Secretary of Energy up here and say: You 
haven't achieved this in 1 week's time, 2 week's time or 30 days' time.
  We had to strike a balance. I know that has been of great concern to 
my distinguished colleague.
  Mr. KYL. If I may add, I know the chairman and I share the same view 
that ``all deliberate speed'' means we need to get about it as soon as 
we can. I ask the chairman this: Is that more to be considered as a 
deadline for having achieved this rather than a time to begin? Time to 
begin, of course, when the President affixes his signature.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, certainly it is to be viewed the time 
within which to be completed. Given the certain constructive steps the 
current Secretary, Secretary Richardson, has taken, I presume he will 
have achieved the reorganization in a time shorter than that. But I 
must say to my colleague, you cannot satisfy everybody.
  This is my 21st year on the Armed Services Committee, and as we file 
tonight the signatures of those members of the respective committees, 
House and Senate, who have approved the conference report, it is my 
understanding that no Democrat member of the Armed Services Committee 
in the Senate will be signatory. That comes as a personal 
disappointment to me as chairman in my first year.
  I met with the committee this afternoon. There was representation of 
probably seven or eight members on the Democrat side. The ranking 
member let me know beforehand of his concern, and I understood him 
throughout. We tried as best we could to work with the minority on our 
committee on this issue, as we do all issues. It is a matter of deep 
regret that we were not able to reconcile the differences that 
apparently were very significant between the Democrat approach to this 
and the Republican majority approach.
  I will accept the consequences. I am the captain of this ship now, 
and I accept full accountability. I do note, however, that my 
understanding is, as of this hour, most, if not all, the Democrat 
Members of the House have signed, of course, the identical conference 
report.
  Mr. KYL. If I may interrupt for one other comment, I thank the 
chairman of the Armed Services Committee for

[[Page S10353]]

his courtesies in allowing three Senators who are not members of the 
committee--Senators Domenici, Murkowski, and myself--to be 
significantly involved in discussing this and proposing suggestions and 
passing on suggestions that came from the other body. That is a good 
example of how people in different committees--in my case, the 
Intelligence Committee--working across jurisdictional lines can help 
shape the legislation. I personally appreciate that very much.
  I will add this with respect to our friends on the other side of the 
aisle. I do not know if I can assign a percentage to it, but it still 
seems to me that about 90 percent of this bill is the Senate bill we 
passed. I do not know of a single concept that deviates from the 
concepts within the Senate bill, even though some of the language is 
different.

  I think we protected the Senate legislative concepts very well, and I 
hope that in the end our Democratic colleagues will continue to work 
with us and certainly with Secretary Richardson to implement the 
legislation.
  I know as we go forward there are going to be hearings in different 
committees. The chairman's committee will have primary jurisdiction, I 
understand, and we will be able to continue to work on this because 
something as significant as the reorganization of the Department is not 
going to be done in one fell swoop. It will have a lot of fits and 
starts and oversight and ways of working together. I am sure with the 
chairman's leadership we will all be able to make this work in the way 
we intend.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, one last observation, if the Senator will 
remain for a moment, and that is, I think we should acknowledge in this 
Record tonight the work of the Intelligence Committee, the Governmental 
Affairs Committee, the Energy Committee, and the Armed Services 
Committee. There were four committees that worked diligently.
  Our distinguished majority leader would have periodic meetings of the 
chairmen, and others such as yourself, who had an interest. Senator 
Domenici attended all of those meetings. On this side of the aisle, 
from our top leadership down through the committee chairmen and others, 
we worked together as a team to address this national, if not 
international, crisis of the leakage of information from these 
magnificent laboratories. Our national security is absolutely dependent 
on their work product and the security of that work product today and 
tomorrow and for the indefinite future.
  I thank all chairmen. They had a number of hearings. My estimate is 
that we in the Senate, among the four committees, must have had 25 
hearings on this subject.
  Mr. KYL. May I add one more thing? I know it sounds like a 
recapitulation, but when the Senator mentioned Senator Domenici and the 
fine work our National Laboratories do, I was moved to think about how 
many times during these negotiations Senator Domenici, who represents 
two of those laboratories, Sandia and Los Alamos, made absolutely sure 
that the work of those laboratories was well understood by everyone and 
appreciated by everyone. He was very zealous in assuring that nothing 
in the legislation would ever detract from their operation or their 
success, that they could reach out and engage in new missions, that 
they would be protected in terms of environmental protection and 
funding.
  He was a zealous advocate for those laboratories and all the great 
work they can do. His leadership in that regard is one of the reasons 
we were able to achieve such a balanced piece of legislation.
  I thank the Chair.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senator is correct. I also observe, 
yes, but he was very objective about the seriousness of this problem. 
Throughout his deliberations, whether in Senator Lott's office or the 
hearings or in our consultations together, he was always very 
objective, and he put national interests first at every step. So the 
Senator is correct.
  I conclude with one sentence to my friend. I do not think if we 
recalled William Shakespeare from the grave that this provision on 
reorganization could have been written on the Department of Energy to 
satisfy everyone. That is the reason I have such deep regret about my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Many times we consulted them 
right down to the word and the comma and the like. We just did the very 
best we could, and I am proud of the work our committee did. I pay 
tribute to the respective staffs and my colleagues who worked on it.
  We are fully accountable for the effectiveness, and we, as a 
committee, perhaps with other committees, will hold a hearing very 
early next fall to determine the progress, assuming this is signed, 
within a period of, say, 2 months after the President's signature is 
affixed.
  I thank my distinguished colleague.
  Mr. President, I want to make a few more comments regarding the 
conference of the House and the Senate. Quite apart from the DOE 
provision, we are very pleased that we made major strides in this 
legislation on behalf of the men and women of the U.S. military.
  We have an authorized funding level of $288.8 billion, which is $8.3 
billion above the President's budget request. And that is in real 
terms. This is the first time in 13 years that there has been a real--I 
repeat--real increase in the defense budget.
  Our distinguished Presiding Officer is a member of the Senate Armed 
Services Committee. He actively participated in structuring this piece 
of legislation. We have approved a 4.8-percent pay raise for military 
personnel, reform of the military pay tables, and annual military pay 
raises 0.5 percent above the annual increases in the Employment Cost 
Index.
  We provide military members with a wider choice on their retirement 
system. We allowed both Active and Reserve component military personnel 
to participate in thrift savings. There is nothing more important. 
Indeed, the tax legislation just passed --always, certainly, on this 
side of the aisle we are trying to seek ways to increase savings in our 
United States. I am pleased now we give wider opportunity to the men 
and women of the Armed Forces.
  Strategic forces: We authorize a net increase of $400 million for 
ballistic missile defense, a program that finally has achieved 
recognition under our distinguished colleague, Senator Cochran of 
Mississippi, in passing here a week ago, the important legislation, 
which the President has now signed, to take another step forward in 
protecting America against the likelihood that possibly some accidental 
firing or limited attack could be launched against this country. We 
have a long way to go, but through the leadership of Senator Cochran, 
and others, we have finally forged, I think, another, should we say, 10 
yards on this lengthy ball field.
  We authorize an increase of $212 million for the Patriot PAC-3 
system, again missile defense.
  Seapower authorized a $1 billion increase to the procurement budget 
request of $18 billion and a $251 million increase to the research, 
development, test, and evaluation budget request of $3.9 billion for 
the Seapower Subcommittee under the chairmanship of Senator Snowe.
  Very able work was done on behalf of Senator Snowe and the ranking 
member, Senator Kennedy, for the Navy and the Marine Corps and a 
limited number of Air Force programs under their jurisdiction.
  We extended the multiyear procurement authority for the DDG-51 
procurement and authorized advance procurement and advance construction 
for the LHD-8. We authorize construction of three DDG-51 Arleigh Burke 
class destroyers, two LPD-17 San Antonio class amphibious ships, and 
one ADC(X), the first of a class of auxiliary refrigeration and 
ammunition supply ships.
  We authorize advance procurement for 2 SSN-774 Virginia class attack 
submarines, and $750 million for the CVN-77, the last of the Nimitz 
class aircraft carriers currently in planning. We will, however, go on 
with another class of carriers, and that is the subject of research and 
development.
  In the readiness, we increase funding for military readiness by $1.5 
billion. It provides for the protection of the military's access to 
essential frequency spectrum. That was a highly contested issue in our 
legislation. The private sector had concerns that the Pentagon would 
absorb a proportion of the spectrum beyond its needs. But in 
consultation with Congressman Bliley, the

[[Page S10354]]

chairman of the House committee with jurisdiction, Senator McCain, a 
distinguished member of our committee, as well as chairman here of the 
Commerce Committee, we reached this compromise, which I hope all will 
find satisfactory.

  In the Airland area, we had an additional $1.5 billion for critical 
procurement requirements and an additional $400 million for research 
and development activities above the President's request. We fully 
authorized the development and procurement budget request for the F-22 
Raptor.
  It is with some regret that the House did not adequately fund that 
program, in my judgment. That is a subject that is actively before the 
two Appropriations Committees. But both the House and the Senate 
authorizing committees fully funded that program.
  Lastly, upon assuming the chairmanship of this committee from my 
distinguished predecessor, Senator Thurmond, I decided to establish a 
new subcommittee entitled ``Emerging Threats.'' That committee, under 
the great leadership of Senator Roberts, moved out, and here are some 
of the initiatives taken by that subcommittee.
  We authorize and fully fund 17 new National Guard Rapid Assessment 
and Initial Detection--commonly known as RAID--Teams to respond to 
terrorist attacks in the United States--12 more than the administration 
request.
  It was my judgment, and Senator Roberts' and the members of the 
committee, that this is the greatest threat poised at the United States 
today--the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, whether they 
be biological, chemical, or possibly the incorporation of some crude 
weapon involving fissionable material. We have to move out on that. 
Progress was made by this new subcommittee.
  Further, we required the department to establish specific budget 
reporting procedures for its Combating Terrorism Program. This will 
give the program the focus and visibility it deserves while providing 
Congress with the information it requires to conduct thorough oversight 
of the department's efforts to combat the threat of terrorist attack 
both inside and outside the United States.
  We authorize $475 million for the Cooperative Threat Reduction 
Program to accelerate the disarmament of the former Soviet Union--now 
Russia--strategic offensive arms that always threaten the United 
States. That was commonly referred to as the Nunn-Lugar program for a 
number of years.
  We establish an Information Assurance Initiative to strengthen DOD's 
information assurance program and provide for an additional $150 
million to the administration's request for information assurances 
programs, projects, and activities.
  In cyberspace today, with the rapid research and development--indeed, 
achievement--of many technical initiatives, the whole area of 
cyberspace is threatened by an ever-growing number of sources of 
invasion and compromise, and indeed, disabling of the systems 
themselves.
  I thank my colleagues for indulging me to speak to this important 
piece of legislation which will be filed tonight in the House and, of 
course, automatically in the Senate.
  I shall now inquire of our staff as to the desire of other Members to 
speak, as well as the wrap up for the evening.
  (Mr. KYL assumed the Chair.)
  I yield the floor, Mr. President.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I note the Senator from Kansas would 
like to be recognized, but I ask if I could just make a few comments 
about the remarks that Senator Warner has just made.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I have been honored to join the Armed Services 
Committee this year. Senator Warner just took over as its new chairman. 
Some said we did not do anything the first part of the year, but even 
before the impeachment hearings came, Senator Warner knew that we had a 
crisis in our defense circumstances.
  He has served as Secretary of the Navy. He loves this country, and he 
loves our men and women in uniform. He decided early that we had to 
send a signal to reverse this 13-year trend of cutting our defense 
budgets, and he did that with great leadership.
  We have now a very healthy pay raise this year for our men and women, 
a guaranteed pay raise in excess of the inflation rate for the next 5 
years for our men and women in the services.
  We want to send them a message that we are concerned about the rapid 
deployments that they are undergoing and the amount of time they spend 
away from their families. And we want to continue to monitor that.
  I want to say how much I have enjoyed serving with the Senator. 
Members of both parties respect him and enjoy working with him.
  Mr. WARNER. If the Senator would yield?
  Mr. SESSIONS. Yes.
  Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator very much for his kind comments. But 
the Senator has brought to mind the fact that our majority leader, 
Senator Lott, made a decision to support our committee in putting 
through S. 4, I think the earliest bill in the Senate, which brought 
about the pay raises and retirement adjustments, which, hopefully, will 
increase our readiness by encouraging more young men and women to join 
the Armed Forces--our recruiting having fallen off--and retaining the 
skilled personnel that we now have.
  Also, it was the Joint Chiefs of Staff that on two occasions came 
before our committee--in September of last year and again in January of 
this year--and unequivocally stated, in their best professional 
judgment, the need for additional dollars, and how best those funds 
could be expended by the Congress, and putting particular emphasis on 
the pay and allowances, which is always the top priority of the Chiefs 
for their men and women of the Armed Forces.
  I thank my colleague.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I want to say how much I respect our chairman. I 
believe this bill, this appropriations report, represents a commitment 
by our Nation to reverse the trend of decline. The chairman has 
supported the President when he is right. He has been prepared to 
oppose him when he is wrong. As to those who disagree with our firm 
commitment, that I know the Senator in the chair supports, to reform 
our nuclear labs and to bring an end to this absolute disaster of 
security that we have had, I am disappointed that they have not yet 
gotten the message that serious fundamental reform is needed. They say 
those words, but when we come down with a good bill that does it, they 
draw back and again have excuses. I hope we can work this out and the 
bill will pass.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I have just 
been informed, much to my great pleasure, that two members of the 
minority, two Democrats on the Armed Services Committee, have now 
decided to sign our conference report, and there is a likelihood of one 
or more additional ones. I depart the floor far more heartened than 
when I entered about 40 minutes ago.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the chairman. I also appreciate his leadership 
and those who are signing this report. I think it is a good one.
  Mr. BROWNBACK addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.

                          ____________________