[House Report 106-1043]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                     

                                                 Union Calendar No. 605

106th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - - House Report 106-1043



                       REPORT OF THE ACTIVITIES



                                of the



                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                                for the

                       ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS


 



January 2, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed



                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
89-006                     WASHINGTON : 2001



                   HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

               FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman
BOB STUMP, Arizona                   IKE SKELTON, Missouri
DUNCAN HUNTER, California            NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio                 JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South 
HERBERT H. BATEMAN,\1\ Virginia          Carolina
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah                SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania            OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado                LANE EVANS, Illinois
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey               GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida            MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York             ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
JAMES TALENT, Missouri               PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama               ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland         SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California   TOM ALLEN, Maine
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma            VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas                JIM TURNER, Texas
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana          ADAM SMITH, Washington
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia             LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee              JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida             MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North          CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
    Carolina                         CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina       ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California
JIM RYUN, Kansas                     ROBERT BRADY, Pennsylvania
BOB RILEY, Alabama                   ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada                  BARON P. HILL, Indiana
MARY BONO, California                MIKE THOMPSON, California
JOSEPH PITTS, Pennsylvania           JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina
STEVEN KUYKENDALL, California
DONALD SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania
HEATHER WILSON,\2\ New Mexico
                    Robert S. Rangel, Staff Director
              Ashley Godwin, Legislative Operations Clerk

----------
\1\ Mr. Bateman died September 11, 2000.
\2\ Ms. Wilson was elected to the Committee October 3, 2000.


                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                   Washington, DC, January 2, 2001.
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 106th Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                         Floyd D. Spence, Chairman.


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Powers and Duties, Committee on Armed Services--106th 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--106th Congress...    13
Subcommittees of the Committee on Armed Services--106th Congress.    14
    Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee...........    14
    Military Personnel Subcommittee..............................    14
    Military Procurement Subcommittee............................    15
    Military Readiness Subcommittee..............................    15
    Military Research and Development Subcommittee...............    16
Full Committee Panels............................................    17
    Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation....    17
    Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine...............    17
    Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy 
      Reorganization.............................................    18
    Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism.........................    18
Committee Staff..................................................    19
Committee Meetings...............................................    21
Legislative Actions..............................................    21
    Legislation Enacted Into Law.................................    21
        Public Law 106-38 (H.R. 4)...............................    21
        Public Law 106-65 (S. 1059)..............................    21
        Public Law 106-120 (H.R. 1555)...........................    24
        Public Law 106-195 (H.J. Res. 86)........................    25
        Public Law 106-227 (H.J. Res. 101).......................    25
        Public Law 106-398 (H.R. 4205)...........................    25
        Public Law 106-419 (S. 1402).............................    28
        Public Law 106-446 (H.R. 5314)...........................    28
    Legislation Reported But Not Enacted.........................    29
        H.Res. 534...............................................    29
        H.R. 850.................................................    29
        H.R. 3383................................................    29
        H.R. 3906................................................    30
        H.R. 4446................................................    30
        H.R. 4737................................................    31
Oversight Activities.............................................    33
Summary of Oversight Plan........................................    33
Actions and Recommendations......................................    33
Additional Oversight Activities..................................    38
Other Activities of the Full Committee...........................    47
    Budget Activity..............................................    47
    Full Committee Hearings......................................    47
    Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation....    55
    Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine...............    55
    Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy 
      Reorganization.............................................    56
    Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism.........................    57
Other Activities of Subcommittees................................    59
    Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee...........    59
    Military Personnel Subcommittee..............................    60
    Military Procurement Subcommittee............................    60
    Military Readiness Subcommittee..............................    61
    Military Research and Development Subcommittee...............    62
Publications.....................................................    65
    Committee Prints of Laws Relating to National Defense........    65
    Committee Prints.............................................    65
    Published Proceedings........................................    65
    House Reports................................................    69
    Public Laws..................................................    71
Press Releases...................................................    73


                                                 Union Calendar No. 605
106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                    106-1043

======================================================================



 
  REPORT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES FOR THE 
                             106TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

January 2, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Spence, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                                   ON

     POWERS AND DUTIES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES--106TH 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.
    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 
intelligence-related activities and programs of the U.S. 
Government. Specifically, the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence has exclusive legislation 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;
          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 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. 101, approved by the House on March 23, 1999, 
provided funds for oversight responsibilities to be conducted 
in the 106th 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 January 
20, 1999, and adopted the following rules governing procedure 
and rules for investigative hearings conducted by 
subcommittees.
    (H.A.S.C. No. 106-1)

                       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 (hereafter 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 Tuesday at 10:00 a.m., 
and at such other times as may be fixed by the chairman of the 
Committee (hereafter 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 Tuesday 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 and the other subcommittee chairmen with a view toward 
avoiding simultaneous scheduling of committee and subcommittee 
meetings or hearings wherever possible.

                         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; 
housing and support; base closure; 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 
drawn from 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 OF LEGISLATION AND SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS

    (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 
3 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.

          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 and promptly entered into the committee scheduling 
service of the House Information Resources.

        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 closed to the public 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 
close, the vote must be by record vote and in open session, 
there being a majority of the Committee or subcommittee 
present.
    (b) Whenever it is asserted that the evidence or testimony 
at a hearing or meeting may tend to defame, degrade, or 
incriminate any person, and 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 closed session, if by a 
majority vote of those present, there being in attendance no 
less than two members of the Committee or subcommittee, the 
Committee 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 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) which have been 
closed under the provisions of rule 9(a) above for national 
security purposes for the taking of testimony: Provided, That 
such staff member's attendance at such hearings is subject to 
the approval of the Committee or subcommittee as dictated by 
national security requirements at the time: Provided further, 
That this paragraph addresses hearings only and not briefings 
or meetings held under the provisions of paragraph (a) of this 
rule; and Provided further, That the attainment of any security 
clearances involved is the responsibility of individual 
members.
    (d) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, no Member 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 by the same 
procedures designated in this rule for closing hearings to the 
public: Provided, however, That the Committee or the 
subcommittee may by the same procedure vote to close up to 5 
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; and
          (3) Authorizing the issuance of subpoenas.
    (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 
not exceed 5 minutes and then only when the member has 
beenrecognized 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 5 minutes to address the Committee or subcommittee on behalf of 
an amendment which the member has offered to any pending bill or 
resolution. The 5 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 will be 
recognized by the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as 
appropriate, in order of seniority. Those members arriving 
subsequently will 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 Members of Congress and committee 
staff may be seated in or behind the dais area during 
Committee, subcommittee or panel hearings and meetings.

                      rule 12. subpoena authority

    (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 as it deems 
        necessary. The Chairman of the Committee, or any member 
        designated by the Chairman, may administer oaths to any 
        witness.
    (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 Chairman.
    (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 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 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 a quorum of the Committee or 
subcommittee, as appropriate.
    (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 they have been 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 5 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 which 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.
    (b) A record vote may be had 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 may 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 
thatmember 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 2 calendar days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal 
holidays) 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 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 of the House of Representatives 
who has requested the opportunity to review such material.

                      RULE 22. COMMITTEE STAFFING

    The staffing of the Committee and the standing 
subcommittees 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. INVESTIGATIVE HEARING PROCEDURES

    Clause 2(k) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives shall apply to the Committee.
     COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES--106TH CONGRESS

    Pursuant to H. Res. 6, election of majority members, and H. 
Res. 7, election of minority members (both adopted January 16, 
1999), the following members served on the Committee on Armed 
Services in the 106th Congress:

 FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, 
             Chairman

IKE SKELTON, Missouri, Ranking MemberBOB STUMP, Arizona, Vice Chairman 
NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia             DUNCAN HUNTER, California
JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South Carolina  JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio
SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas              HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia \1\
OWEN PICKETT, Virginia               JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah
LANE EVANS, Illinois                 CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania
GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi             JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado
NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii             JIM SAXTON, New Jersey
MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts      STEVE BUYER, Indiana
ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam            TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida
PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island     JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois         JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri
SILVESTRE REYES, Texas               TERRY EVERETT, Alabama
THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine               ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
VIC SNYDER, Arkansas                 HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON, 
JIM TURNER, Texas                    California
ADAM SMITH, Washington               J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma
LORETTA SANCHEZ, California          MAC THORNBERRY, Texas
JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut        JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana
MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina        SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia
CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas             VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee
CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia         JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida
ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California        WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina
ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania        LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey        JIM RYUN, Kansas
BARON P. HILL, Indiana               BOB RILEY, Alabama
MIKE THOMPSON, California            JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut          MARY BONO, California
                                     JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
                                     ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina
                                     STEVEN T. KUYKENDALL, California
                                     DON SHERWOOD, California
                                     HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico \2\

----------
\1\ Mr. Bateman died September 11, 2000.
\2\ Ms. Wilson was elected to the committee on October 3, 2000, 
pursuant to H. Res. 608.
    SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 106TH CONGRESS

    The following subcommittees were established at the 
organizational meeting of the Committee on Armed Services on 
January 20, 1999:

                 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. HEFLEY, Chairman

Mr. TAYLOR, Ranking Member           Mrs. FOWLER
Mr. ORTIZ                            Mr. McHUGH
Mr. ABERCROMBIE                      Mr. McKEON
Mr. UNDERWOOD                        Mr. HOSTETTLER
Mr. REYES                            Mr. HILLEARY, Vice Chairman
Mr. SNYDER                           Mr. SCARBOROUGH
Mr. BRADY                            Mr. STUMP
Mr. THOMPSON                         Mr. SAXTON
                                     Mr. BUYER

                           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. BUYER, Chairman

Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Ranking Member      Mr. BARTLETT
Mr. MEEHAN                           Mr. WATTS
Mr. KENNEDY                          Mr. THORNBERRY
Ms. SANCHEZ                          Mr. GRAHAM, Vice Chairman
Ms. McKINNEY                         Mr. RYUN
Ms. TAUSCHER                         Mrs. BONO
Mr. THOMPSON                         Mr. PITTS
Mr. LARSON                           Mr. HAYES
                                     Mr. KUYKENDALL
                          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. HUNTER, Chairman

Mr. SISISKY, Ranking Member          Mr. SPENCE
Mr. SKELTON                          Mr. STUMP
Mr. SPRATT                           Mr. HANSEN
Mr. EVANS                            Mr. SAXTON
Mr. BLAGOJEVICH                      Mr. TALENT
Mr. ALLEN                            Mr. EVERETT
Mr. TURNER                           Mr. WATTS
Mr. SMITH                            Mr. THORNBERRY, Vice Chairman
Mr. MALONEY                          Mr. GRAHAM
Mr. McINTYRE                         Mr. RYUN
Ms. McKINNEY                         Mr. GIBBONS
Ms. TAUSCHER                         Mrs. BONO
Mr. BRADY                            Mr. PITTS
                                     Mr. HAYES

                           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. BATEMAN, Chairman \1\

Mr. ORTIZ, Ranking Member            Mr. CHAMBLISS
Mr. SISISKY                          Mr. JONES, Vice Chairman
Mr. SPRATT                           Mr. RILEY
Mr. PICKETT                          Mr. HUNTER
Mr. UNDERWOOD                        Mr. HANSEN
Mr. BLAGOJEVICH                      Mr. WELDON
Mr. SMITH                            Mrs. FOWLER
Mr. MALONEY                          Mr. TALENT
Mr. McINTYRE                         Mr. EVERETT
Mr. RODRIGUEZ                        Mr. GIBBONS
                                     Mr. SHERWOOD

----------
\1\ Mr. Bateman died September 11, 2000.
                   Military Research and Development

    Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4-Annual 
authorization for military research and development and related 
legislative oversight.

       Mr. WELDON, Chairman

Mr. PICKETT, Ranking Member          Mr. BARTLETT
Mr. TAYLOR                           Mr. KUYKENDALL
Mr. MEEHAN                           Mr. SHERWOOD
Mr. KENNEDY                          Mr. KASICH
Mr. REYES                            Mr. BATEMAN \1\
Mr. ALLEN                            Mr. HEFLEY
Mr. SNYDER                           Mr. McHUGH
Mr. TURNER                           Mr. McKEON
Ms. SANCHEZ                          Mr. HOSTETTLER, Vice Chairman
Mr. RODRIGUEZ                        Mr. CHAMBLISS
Mr. ANDREWS                          Mr. HILLEARY
Mr. HILL                             Mr. SCARBOROUGH
Mr. LARSON                           Mr. JONES
                                     Mr. RILEY

----------
\1\ Mr. Bateman died September 11, 2000.
                         FULL COMMITTEE PANELS

    The following full committee panels were appointed as 
follows:

       Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation

                            February 5, 1999

    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. McHUGH, Chairman

Mr. MEEHAN, Ranking Member           Mr. STUMP
Mr. SISISKY                          Mr. BATEMAN \1\
Mr. ORTIZ                            Mr. BARTLETT
Mr. PICKETT                          Mr. WATTS
Mr. UNDERWOOD                        Mr. CHAMBLISS
Mr. REYES                            Mr. SCARBOROUGH
Mr. ANDREWS                          Mr. JONES
(vacancy)                            Mr. RILEY, Vice Chairman
                                     Mr. HAYES

             Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine


                            February 5, 1999

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

     Mr. BATEMAN, Chairman \2\

Mr. UNDERWOOD, Ranking Member        Mr. HUNTER
Mr. TAYLOR                           Mr. WELDON
Mr. ABERCROMBIE                      Mr. SAXTON
Mr. ALLEN                            Mr. SCARBOROUGH
Mr. MALONEY                          Mr. JONES
                                     Mr. KUYKENDALL, Vice Chairman

----------
\1\ Mr. Bateman died September 11, 2000.
\2\ Mr. Bateman died September 11, 2000.
     Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization


                            October 8, 1999

    Purpose--Oversight responsibility for the implementation of 
the Department of Energy reorganization provisions contained in 
title 32 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65).

     Mr. THORNBERRY, Chairman

Ms. TAUSCHER, Ranking Member         Mr. HUNTER
Mr. SISISKY                          Mr. GRAHAM
Mr. SPRATT                           Mr. GIBBONS
Mr. SKELTON, Ex Officio              Mr. RYUN
                                     Mr. SPENCE, Ex Officio

                  Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism

    March 2, 2000
    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. SNYDER, Ranking Member           Mr. HUNTER
Mr. TAYLOR                           Mr. WELDON
Mr. MALONEY                          Mr. BATEMAN \1\
Mr. McINTYRE                         Mr. BARTLETT
Mr. ANDREWS                          Mr. CHAMBLISS
Mr. HILL                             Mr. GIBBONS
Mr. REYES                            Mr. HAYES
Mr. SKELTON, Ex Officio              Mr. PITTS
                                     Mr. SPENCE, Ex Officio
                                     (vacancy)

----------
\1\ Mr. Bateman died September 11, 2000.
                            COMMITTEE STAFF

    By committee resolution adopted at the organizational 
meeting on January 20, 1999, or by authority of the Chairman, 
the following persons were appointed to the staff of the 
committee during the 106th Congress:

 Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director 
     (resigned March 2, 2000)
 Robert S. Rangel, Staff Director
  Philip W. Grone, Deputy Staff 
             Director
  Rita D. Thompson, Professional 
           Staff Member
  Brenda J. Wright, Professional 
           Staff Member
Kathleen A. Lipovac, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Frank A. Barnes, Staff Assistant
  Betty B. Gray, Staff Assistant
 Peggy Cosseboom, Staff Assistant
  Peter M. Steffes, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Ernest B. Warrington, Jr., Staff 
             Assistant
 Diane W. Bowman, Staff Assistant
 Steven A. Thompson, Professional 
           Staff Member
 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
Douglas H. Necessary, Professional 
Staff Member (resigned January 30, 
               2000)
  Dionel M. Aviles, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Peter V. Pry, Professional Staff 
              Member
      David J. Trachtenberg, 
     Professional Staff Member
 Thomas M. Donnelly, Professional 
 Staff Member (resigned September 
             10, 1999)
    Rebecca J. Anfinson, Staff 
             Assistant
  Maureen P. Cragin, Director of 
          Communications
  Heather L. Hescheles, Research 
  Assistant (resigned April 30, 
               2000)
Roger M. Smith, Professional Staff 
              Member
B. Ryan Vaart, Professional Staff 
              Member
Peter J. Berry, Professional Staff 
              Member
  Mieke Y. Eoyang, Professional 
 Staff Member (resigned September 
             1, 1999)
 Robert W. Lautrup, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Joseph F. Boessen, Professional 
           Staff Member
  Christian P. Zur, Professional 
           Staff Member
  John F. Sullivan, Professional 
           Staff Member
 Nancy M. Warner, Staff Assistant
Brian R. Green, Professional Staff 
              Member
 Noah L. Simon, Research Assistant
 Michael A. Khatchadurian, Staff 
 Assistant (resigned January 30, 
               1999)
  Thomas E. Hawley, Professional 
           Staff Member
  Thomas P. Glakas, Professional 
Staff Member (resigned January 30, 
               2000)
  Michelle L. Spencer, Research 
 Assistant (resigned June 4, 1999)
Christopher T. Peace, Professional 
 Staff Member (resigned March 7, 
               1999)
 William H. Natter, Professional 
           Staff Member
   Monica M. Barron, Executive 
 Assistant to the Staff Director 
     (resigned March 27, 2000)
Jeremy D. Wagner, Staff Assistant 
     (resigned August 3, 1999)
   Sheila A. Dearybury, Counsel 
    (resigned October 6, 1999)
Erica A. Striebel, Staff Assistant 
     (resigned July 14, 2000)
  Ashley D. Godwin, Legislative 
         Operations Clerk
    Elizabeth A. Sharp, Staff 
             Assistant
   John J. Pollard III, Counsel
 James M. Lariviere, Professional 
 Staff Member (appointed January 
             19, 1999)
  Jesse D. Tolleson, Jr., Staff 
 Assistant (appointed February 9, 
               1999)
    Donna M. Mirandola, Staff 
Assistant (appointed February 10, 
 1999; resigned December 8, 1999)
    Mary Ellen Fraser, Counsel 
     (appointed March 8, 1999)
  Edward P. Wyatt, Professional 
Staff Member (appointed March 22, 
               1999)
Jessica R. Taylor, Staff Assistant 
   (appointed November 2, 1999; 
      resigned July 23, 2000)
Debra S. Wada, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed November 9, 
               1999)
John M. Bernards, Staff Assistant 
   (appointed December 1, 1999; 
      resigned July 7, 2000)
Lisa-Marie Wetzel, Staff Assistant 
   (appointed December 2, 1999; 
     resigned August 21, 2000)
   Henry J. Schweiter, Counsel 
    (appointed January 4, 2000)
 J.J. Gertler, Professional Staff 
  Member (appointed February 22, 
               2000)
Daniel T. Hilton, Staff Assistant 
   (appointed February 28, 2000)
Laura R. Haas, Executive Assistant 
    (appointed April 17, 2000)
    Laura C. Truesdell, Staff 
Assistant (appointed May 22, 2000)
    Christopher A. Kim, Staff 
  Assistant (appointed July 10, 
               2000)
     Eileen C. Harley, Intern 
(appointed July 10, 2000; resigned 
        September 15, 2000)
    Katherine K. Gordon, Staff 
 Assistant (appointed August 14, 
               2000)
Laura K. Hancock, Staff Assistant 
   (appointed November 6, 2000)
                           COMMITTEE MEETINGS

    A total of 135 meetings were held by the Committee on Armed 
Services, its subcommittees, and panels during the 106th 
Congress. The committee held 10 joint meetings. A breakdown of 
the meetings and briefings follows:

Full Committee....................................................    39
Subcommittees:
    Military Installations and Facilities.........................    10
    Military Personnel............................................    17
    Military Procurement..........................................    26
    Military Readiness............................................    20
    Military Research and Development.............................    19
Full Committee Panels:
    Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation.....     4
    Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine................     4
    Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization     3
    Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism..........................     3

                          LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS


                      Legislation Enacted Into Law


                       PUBLIC LAW 106-38 (H.R. 4)

    To declare it to be the policy of the United States to deploy a 
                        national missile defense

    H.R. 4, the National Missile Defense Act of 1999, declares 
it the policy of the United States to deploy as soon as 
technologically possible a National Missile Defense (NMD) 
system capable of defending U.S. territory against limited 
ballistic missile attack, with funding subject to the annual 
authorization of appropriations and the annual appropriation of 
funds for NMD, and to seek continued negotiated reductions in 
Russian nuclear forces. This measure was referred to the 
Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on International 
Relations. On February 25, 1999, the Committee on Armed 
Services ordered H.R. 4 reported favorably to the House. The 
bill passed the House on March 18, 1999, under suspension of 
the rules. H.R. 4 was subsequently amended by the Senate and 
passed on May 18, 1999, by unanimous consent. On May 20, 1999, 
the House agreed to the Senate amendment. H.R. 4 was signed by 
the President and became law on July 22, 1999.
    (H. Rept. 106-39, Part I)

                      PUBLIC LAW 106-65 (S. 1059)

     To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for military 
    activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military 
    personnel strengths for fiscal year 2000, and for other purposes

    Public Law 106-65 authorizes funds totaling 
$290,851,066,000 for national defense functions for fiscal year 
2000 and provides a budget authority level of $288,811,252,000.

Division A

    Division A of Public Law 106-65 authorizes funds for fiscal 
year 2000 for the Department of Defense.
    Subtitle A of Title I authorizes $56,067,483,000 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 E 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 Multiple Launch Rocket System, 
the Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft and Arleigh Burke 
class destroyer programs, the Air Force F-22 aircraft program, 
and other matters such as the chemical stockpile destruction 
program.
    Subtitle A of Title II authorizes $36,266,537,000 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 7 separate 
research and development-related matters.
    Subtitles C through E of Title II address ballistic missile 
defense programs, long-term military capabilities, and 
miscellaneous reports and other matters.
    Subtitle A of Title III authorizes $104,332,770,000 for 
operation and maintenance (O&M) and $375,044,000 for working 
capital funds for the armed forces and defense agencies, Armed 
Forces Retirement Home, and for the transfer from National 
Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
    Subtitles B through I of Title III address program 
requirements, restrictions, and limitations; environmental 
provisions; depot-level activities; performance of functions by 
private-sector sources; defense dependents education; military 
readiness issues; information technology issues; as well as 
other miscellaneous matters.
    Title IV provides military personnel authorizations for the 
active and reserve forces for fiscal year 2000 and authorizes 
appropriations of $73,723,293,000 for military personnel for 
fiscal year 2000. The end strengths for active duty personnel 
for fiscal year 2000 are as follows:
          Army, 480,000
          Navy, 372,037
          Marine Corps, 172,518
          Air Force, 360,877
    The Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2000 are 
as follows:
          Army National Guard, 350,000
          Army Reserve, 205,000
          Naval Reserve, 90,288
          Marine Corps Reserve, 39,624
          Air National Guard, 106,678
          Air Force Reserve, 73,708
          Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000
    The end strengths for reserves on active duty in support of 
the reserve components for fiscal year 2000 are as follows:
          Army National Guard, 22,430
          Army Reserve, 12,804
          Naval Reserve, 15,010
          Marine Corps Reserve, 2,272
          Air National Guard, 11,157
          Air Force Reserve, 1,134
    Title V sets military personnel policy, including 
provisions that address officer personnel policy; the reserve 
components; military technicians; service academies; education 
and training; reserve component management; decorations, 
awards, and commendations; recruiting matters; missing persons 
matters; domestic violence; and other matters such as funeral 
honors details for funerals of veterans.
    Title VI addresses compensation and other personnel 
benefits, including pay and allowances; bonuses and special and 
incentive pays; travel and transportation allowances; retired 
pay reform; retiree and survivor benefits; participation in 
Thrift Savings Plan; and related matters.
    Title VII contains military health care provisions, 
including health care services; the TRICARE program; and other 
healthcare matters.
    Title VIII addresses acquisition policy, acquisition 
management and related matters, including amendments to general 
contracting authorities, procedures, and limitations, and other 
matters such as Mentor-Protege Program improvements.
    Title IX contains Department of Defense organization and 
management provisions, including Department of Defense 
strategic planning, organization, personnel management, and 
other related matters such as management of the Civil Air 
Patrol.
    Title X addresses general provisions relating to financial 
matters; naval vessels and shipyards; civilian law enforcement 
and counter-drug activities; miscellaneous report requirements 
and repeals; information security; memorials and 
commemorations; and other matters.
    Title XI addresses Department of Defense civilian 
personnel.
    Title XII concerns matters relating to other nations 
including matters relating to the People's Republic of China; 
matters relating to the Balkans; matters relating to NATO and 
other Allies; and other matters such as limitations on 
deployments to Haiti.
    Title XIII addresses Cooperative Threat Reduction with 
states of the Former Soviet Union.
    Title XIV addresses proliferation and export controls.
    Title XV addresses arms control and counterproliferation 
matters.
    Title XVI addresses national security space matters such as 
the space technology guide; commercial space launch services; 
and the Commission to Assess United States National Security 
Space Management and Organization.
    Title XVII addresses the Troops-to-Teachers Program.

Division B

    Division B of Public Law 106-65 authorizes appropriations 
in the amount of $8,497,243,000 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 2000. In addition, Division B contains military 
construction program and military family housing changes; real 
property and facilities administration; defense base closure 
and realignment; miscellaneous land conveyances, and expansion 
of Arlington National Cemetery. Division B also addresses the 
Commission on the National Military Museum and military land 
withdrawals.

Division C

    Division C of Public Law 106-65 authorizes appropriations 
in the amount of $12,110,322 for Department of Energy national 
security programs for fiscal year 2000. Division C includes an 
authorization for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board; 
the National Defense Stockpile; the Panama Canal Commission; 
and the Maritime Administration.
    Title XXXII establishes the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) and designates the Under Secretary for 
Nuclear Security of the Department of Energy as the 
Administrator of the NNSA.
    The Senate Committee on Armed Services reported S. 1059 on 
May 17, 1999; H.R. 1401 was reported, amended, by the House 
Committee on Armed Services on May 24, 1999. S. 1059 passed the 
Senate, amended, on May 27, 1999, and the House, amended, on 
June 14, 1999, after all was struck after the enacting clause 
and the provisions of H.R. 1401 were inserted in lieu thereof. 
Conferees filed a conference report on August 6, 1999, which 
was agreed to in the House on September 15, 1999 and in the 
Senate on September 22, 1999. S. 1059 was signed by the 
President and became law on October 5, 1999.
    (S. Rept. 106-50; H. Rept. 106-162; H. Rept. 106-301; 
H.A.S.C. 106-2; H.A.S.C. 106-3; H.A.S.C. 106-4; H.A.S.C. 106-5; 
H.A.S.C. 106-6; H.A.S.C. 106-7; H.A.S.C. 106-8; H.A.S.C. 106-9; 
H.A.S.C. 106-15; H.A.S.C. 106-23)

                     PUBLIC LAW 106-120 (H.R. 1555)

 To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for intelligence and 
 intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the 
   Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency 
        Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes

    Public Law 106-120 authorizes appropriations for fiscal 
year 2000 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities 
of the United States Government, including Department of 
Defense intelligence-related activities within the jurisdiction 
shared by the Committee on Armed Services and the Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence.
    Among its provisions, Public Law 106-120 authorizes 
appropriations for the Intelligence Community Management 
Account of the Director of Central Intelligence and earmarks 
funds authorized for the National Drug Intelligence Center. 
Within the Department of Defense Intelligence Activities 
provisions is an amendment to the National Security Act of 1947 
to authorize the Director of the National Imagery and Mapping 
Agency (NIMA) to exempt NIMA operational files from provisions 
of the Freedom of Information Act, which require publication, 
disclosure, search, or review.
    Referred additionally to the Committee on Armed Services, 
the Committee was discharged from further consideration on May 
11, 1999. H.R. 1555 passed the House by voice vote on May 13, 
1999, and passed the Senate by voice vote on July 21, 1999. The 
bill was enacted into law on December 3, 1999, following 
conference between the House and Senate in which conferees were 
appointed from the Committee on Armed Services.
    (H. Rept. 106-130, Part I; H. Rept. 106-457 )

                   PUBLIC LAW 106-195 (H.J. RES. 86)

 Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Korean War and the service by 
  members of the Armed Forces during such war, and for other purposes

    H.J. Res. 86 recognizes the historic significance of the 
50th anniversary of the Korean War and honors the personal 
commitment and sacrifices of the members of the Armed Forces 
who served and fought in Korea to defeat the spread of 
communism. The joint resolution was passed by the House under 
suspension of the rules on March 8, 2000, and subsequently 
passed the Senate by unanimous consent on April 13, 2000. The 
measure was signed by the President and became law on May 2, 
2000.

                   PUBLIC LAW 106-227 (H.J. RES. 101)

        Recognizing the 225th birthday of the United States Army

    H.J. Res. 101 expresses the appreciation of the people of 
the United States to the Army and the dedicated soldiers who 
have served in it, and honors the valor, commitment, and 
sacrifice that American soldiers have displayed throughout the 
225-year history of the Army. The joint resolution was referred 
to the Committee on Armed Services on June 8, 2000, and was 
considered and passed under suspension of the rules on June 13, 
2000. H.J. Res. 101 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on 
June 15, 2000, and was signed by the President and became law 
on June 29, 2000.

                     PUBLIC LAW 106-398 (H.R. 4205)

     To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 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 106-398, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, authorizes funds 
totaling $310,681,100,000 for national defense functions for 
fiscal year 2001 and provides a budget authority level of 
$309,900,320,000.

Division A

    Division A of Public Law 106-398 authorizes funds for 
fiscal year 2001 for the Department of Defense.
    Subtitle A of Title I authorizes $63,166,621,000 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 F 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 reports and limitations relating 
to Army transformation; Navy CVNX-1 nuclear aircraft carrier 
and Virginia class submarine programs; Air Force report on the 
B-2 bomber, and other matters such as chemical 
demilitarization.
    Subtitle A of Title II authorizes $38,936,673,000 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 12 separate 
research and development-related matters.
    Subtitles C through E of Title II address Ballistic Missile 
Defense, high energy laser programs, and other matters such as 
Air Force science and technology planning.
    Subtitle A of Title III authorizes $109,750,164,000 for 
operation and maintenance (O&M) and $1,154,434,000 for working 
capital funds for the armed forces and defense agencies, 
including the Armed Forces Retirement Home, transfer from 
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund, and joint 
warfighting capabilities assessment teams.
    Subtitles B through H of Title III address environmental 
provisions; commissaries and nonappropriated fund 
instrumentalities; Department of Defense industrial facilities; 
performance of functions by private-sector sources; defense 
dependents education; military readiness issues; as well as 
other miscellaneous matters.
    Title IV provides military personnel authorizations for the 
active and reserve forces for fiscal year 2001 and authorizes 
appropriations of $75,801,666,000 for military personnel for 
fiscal year 2001. The end strengths for active duty personnel 
for fiscal year 2001 are as follows:
          Army, 480,000
          Navy, 372,642
          Marine Corps, 172,600
          Air Force, 357,000
    The Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2001 are 
as follows:
          Army National Guard, 350,526
          Army Reserve, 205,300
          Naval Reserve, 88,900
          Marine Corps Reserve, 39,558
          Air National Guard, 108,022
          Air Force Reserve, 74,358
          Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000
    The end strengths for reserves on active duty in support of 
the reserve components for fiscal year 2001 are as follows:
          Army National Guard, 22,974
          Army Reserve, 13,106
          Naval Reserve, 14,649
          Marine Corps Reserve, 2,261
          Air National Guard, 11,170
          Air Force Reserve, 1,336
    Title V sets military personnel policy, including 
provisions that address officer personnel policy; reserve 
component matters; military education and training; 
decorations, awards and commendations; military justice and 
legal assistance matters; recruiting matters; and other matters 
such as the National Guard Challenge Program.
    Title VI addresses compensation and other personnel 
benefits, including pay and allowances; bonus and special and 
incentive pays; travel and transportation allowances; retired 
pay, survivor benefits and related matters.
    Title VII contains military health care provisions, 
including health care services; senior health care; the TRICARE 
program; demonstration projects; joint initiatives with the 
Department of Veterans Affairs; and other matters such as the 
management of the anthrax vaccine immunization program.
    Title VIII addresses acquisition policy, acquisition 
management and related matters, including amendments to general 
contracting authorities, information technology, studies and 
reports, and other acquisition-related matters.
    Title IX contains Department of Defense organization and 
management provisions, including duties and functions of 
Department of Defense officers, Department of Defense 
organizations, information security, reports and other matters.
    Title X addresses general provisions relating to financial 
matters; naval vessels and shipyards; counter-drug activities; 
counterterrorism and domestic preparedness; strategic forces; 
miscellaneous report requirements and repeals; government 
information security reform; security matters; and other 
matters such as the Commission on the Future of the United 
States Aerospace Industry.
    Title XI addresses Department of Defense civilian 
personnel.
    Title XII addresses matters relating to other nations 
including matters relating to arms control; matters relating to 
the Balkans; NATO and United States Forces in Europe; and other 
matters such as the adjustment of composite theoretical 
performance levels of high-performance computers.
    Title XIII concerns Cooperative Threat Reduction with 
states of the Former Soviet Union.
    Title XIV establishes the Commission to Assess the Threat 
to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack.
    Title XV concerns matters relating to Navy activities on 
the Island of Vieques, Puerto Rico.
    Title XVI addresses GI Bill educational assistance and 
Department of Veterans Affairs duty to assist.
    Title XVII concerns assistance to firefighters.
    Title XVIII contains provisions that address impact aid.

Division B

    Division B of Public Law 106-398 authorizes appropriations 
in the amount of $8,821,172,000 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; defense base closure and realignment; land 
conveyances; and other matters.

Division C

    Division C of Public Law 106-398 authorizes appropriations 
in the amount of $13,050,370 for Department of Energy national 
security programs for fiscal year 2001. Division C includes 
authorization for the National Nuclear Security Administration; 
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board; National Defense 
Stockpile; Naval Petroleum Reserves; Maritime Administration; 
and Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program.
    The Committee on Armed Services reported H.R. 4205, 
amended, to the House on May 12, 2000. The measure passed the 
House, amended, on May 18, 2000 and passed the Senate in lieu 
of S. 2549, as amended, on July 13, 2000. The House agreed to a 
conference report on October 11, 2000, and the Senate on 
October 12, 2000, both by recorded vote. H.R. 4205 was signed 
by the President and became law on October 30, 2000.
    (H. Rept. 106-616; S. Rept. 106-292; H. Rept. 106-945; 
H.A.S.C. 106-37; H.A.S.C. 106-38; H.A.S.C. 106-39; H.A.S.C. 
106-40; H.A.S.C. 106-41; H.A.S.C. 106-42; H.A.S.C. 106-43; 
H.A.S.C. 106-45; H.A.S.C. 106-49; H.A.S.C. 106-50)

                      PUBLIC LAW 106-419 (S. 1402)

 An Act to amend title 38, United States Code, to increase amounts of 
educational assistance for veterans under the Montgomery GI Bill and to 
 enhance programs providing educational benefits under that title, and 
                           for other purposes

    S. 1402, the Veterans and Dependents Millennium Education 
Act, increases, as of October 1, 2002, the rates of veterans' 
basic educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill. S. 
1402 was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services and 
the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs on July 27, 1999. The 
measure passed the House, amended, under suspension of the 
rules on May 23, 1999, and passed the Senate, with amendment, 
by unanimous consent on October 12, 2000. The House concurred 
in the Senate amendment and passed the bill on October 17, 
2000. S. 1402 was signed by the President and became law on 
November 1, 2000.
    (S. Rept. 106-114)

                     PUBLIC LAW 106-446 (H.R. 5314)

   To require the immediate termination of the Department of Defense 
   practice of euthanizing military working dogs at the end of their 
useful working life and to facilitate the adoption of retired military 
  working dogs by law enforcement agencies, former handlers of these 
        dogs, and other persons capable of caring for these dogs

    H.R. 5314 requires the Secretary of Defense to make a 
military working dog available for adoption by law enforcement 
agencies, former handlers, and other persons capable of 
humanely caring for such dogs at the end of such dog's useful 
working life or when the dog is otherwise excess to the needs 
of the Department of Defense. The bill also holds harmless the 
United States from any damages or injury caused by a dog after 
such transfer.
    H.R. 5314 was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 
and passed the House on October 10, 2000 under suspension of 
the rules. Amended and agreed to in the Senate by unanimous 
consent, the House agreed to the Senate amendment under 
suspension of the rules. H.R. 5314 was signed by the President 
and became law on November 6, 2000.

                  LEGISLATION REPORTED BUT NOT ENACTED


                              H. Res. 534

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the recent 
  nuclear weapons security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory 
  demonstrate that security policy and security procedures within the 
 National Nuclear Security Administration remain inadequate, that the 
  individuals responsible for such policy and procedures must be held 
 accountable for their performance, and that immediate action must be 
                 taken to correct security deficiencies

    H. Res. 534 expresses the sense of the House that certain 
security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrate 
continued inadequacy of nuclear weapons security policy and 
procedures within the National Nuclear Security Administration 
and its facilities and that the individuals responsible for the 
implementation, oversight, and management of nuclear weapons 
security policy and procedures within the Administration and 
its facilities must be held accountable for their performance. 
The resolution also stresses that the Administrator for Nuclear 
Security must take immediate action to improve safeguard 
procedures for classified nuclear weapons information and 
correct all identified nuclear weapons security deficiencies 
within the Administration.
    H. Res. 534 was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 
and ordered to be reported favorably on July 12, 2000. The 
resolution was agreed to in the House under suspension of the 
Rules on July 17, 2000. No further action was taken on the 
resolution.
    (H. Rept. 106-730)

                                H.R. 850

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to affirm the rights of United 
States persons to use and sell encryption and to relax export controls 
                             on encryption

    H.R. 850, the Security and Freedom through Encryption 
(SAFE) Act of 1999, would have recognized the potential threat 
to national security posed by relaxed export controls and 
provided measures to ensure that the federal government retains 
the ability to review encryption exports. At the same time the 
resolution would have provided sufficient flexibility to permit 
the government policy to stay current with the rapid pace of 
technological advances in this area.
    H.R. 850 was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, 
as well as the Committees on Judiciary, International 
Relations, Commerce and the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence. H.R. 850 was reported, amended, to the House by 
the Committee on Armed Services on July 23, 1999. It was placed 
on the union calendar on July 23, 1999. No further action was 
taken.
    (H. Rept. 106-117, Parts I-V; H.A.S.C. No. 106-16)

                               H.R. 3383

To amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to remove separate treatment or 
   exemption for nuclear safety violations by nonprofit institutions

    H.R. 3383 would have amended the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 
pertaining to civil monetary penalties for violations of 
nuclear safety regulations to repeal the directive to the 
Secretary of Energy to determine by rule whether nonprofit 
educational institutions should receive automatic remission of 
any such penalties and the exemption from such penalties 
granted to designated research institutions. The bill would 
have also limited the maximum civil penalty that may be imposed 
upon certain tax-exempt nonprofit contractors, subcontractors, 
or suppliers to the amount of any discretionary fee paid to 
them under the contract under which such violation occurs.
    On June 23, 2000, H.R. 3383 was referred additionally to 
the Committee on Armed Services after the bill was reported, as 
amended, by the Committee on Commerce on May 17, 2000. The 
Committee on Armed Services held a mark-up session on June 28, 
2000 and reported the bill, as reported by the Committee on 
Commerce, on July 21, 2000. H.R. 3383 was placed on the Union 
Calendar and no further action was taken.
    (H. Rept. 106-695, Parts I-II)

                               H.R. 3906

 To ensure that the Department of Energy has appropriate mechanisms to 
     independently assess the effectiveness of its policy and site 
 performance in the areas of safeguards and security and cyber security

    H.R. 3906, the National Nuclear Security Administration 
Security Oversight Improvement Act of 2000, would have amended 
the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (Public Law 
106-65) to direct the Administrator of the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) to establish an Office of 
Independent Security Oversight headed by a Director appointed 
by the Administrator and solely under the Administrator's 
supervision. The Office of Independent Security Oversight would 
have been responsible for the independent evaluation of the 
effectiveness of safeguards and security policies and 
procedures of the NNSA.
    H.R. 3906 was referred to the Committees on Armed Services, 
Commerce, and Science. H.R. 3906 was reported, as amended, from 
the Committee on Commerce on June 23, 2000. The Committee on 
Science was discharged from further consideration of the bill 
that same day. On June 28, 2000, the Committee on Armed 
Services held a markup session to consider H.R. 3906. The 
committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute by 
a voice vote and the bill, as amended, was ordered reported 
favorably to the House. No further action was taken.
    (H. Rept. 106-696, Parts I-II)

                               H.R. 4446

To ensure that the Secretary of Energy may continue to exercise certain 
    authorities under the Price-Anderson Act through the Assistant 
        Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and Health

    H.R. 4446, as reported by the Committee on Armed Services, 
would have required the Secretary of Energy to exercise the 
authorities to assess penalties on Department of Energy (DOE) 
contractors who violate DOE nuclear safety rules and 
regulations at the National Security Laboratories of the 
Department of Energy in a manner consistent with the 
establishment of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA) authorized by title 32 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). 
H.R. 4446 would have authorized the Secretary to delegate the 
exercise of these authorities, as they pertain to the NNSA, to 
the Administrator for Nuclear Security only and prohibit 
delegation of these authorities, as they pertain to the NNSA, 
to the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety 
and Health.
    On June 23, 2000, H.R. 4446 was referred additionally to 
the Committee on Armed Services after being reported by the 
Committee on Commerce. On July 21, 2000, the Committee on Armed 
Services reported the measure, as amended, to the House. No 
further action was taken.
    (H. Rept. 106-694, Parts I-II)

                               H.R. 4737

To require an inventory of documents and devices containing Restricted 
Data at the national security laboratories of the Department of Energy, 
  to improve security procedures for access to the vaults containing 
     Restricted Data at those laboratories, and for other purposes

    H.R. 4737 would have enhanced security controls over the 
handling of classified nuclear weapons information at the 
national security laboratories of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA) of the Department of Energy. The bill 
would have required the Administrator for Nuclear Security to 
conduct an inventory of each document or device containing 
classified nuclear weapons information and to assess the use of 
polygraphic examinations as a prerequisite to access to such 
information. H.R. 4737 would also have specified the procedures 
required to gain access to document storage vaults at the 
national security laboratories and would have established 
minimum standards for electronic locks for use in the 
safeguarding of classified nuclear weapons information.
    H.R. 4737 was introduced on June 23, 2000, and referred to 
the Committee on Armed Services. On June 28, 2000, the 
Committee held a markup session to consider H.R. 4737 and an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute was adopted by a voice 
vote. The bill was ordered reported, as amended, favorably to 
the House by a voice vote. No further action was taken.
    (H. Rept. 106-1035, Part I)
                          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 Department of Defense's 
nearly $300 billion annual budget 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

    The committee continued its oversight and assessment of 
threats to U.S. national security and interests and the 
preparedness of America's armed forces to address them. To aid 
in this effort, the committee received classified and 
unclassified briefings on the international threat environment 
throughout the 106th Congress. In consideration of the fiscal 
years 2000 and 2001 defense budget requests, the committee 
conducted oversight hearings with the Secretary of Defense, 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, service Secretaries and 
Chiefs of Staff, regional Commanders-in-Chief, and officials of 
the Department of Defense, military departments, Central 
Intelligence Agency, defense-related intelligence agencies, and 
Department of Energy. The committee also received the views and 
perspectives of outside experts in academia, industry, and 
associations on 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 106th Congress:

                            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 
the following: conditions of facilities where service personnel 
and their families live and work, including the investment 
strategy of the Department of Defense for maintaining adequate 
facilities; cost, accessibility, and quality of peacetime 
military health care, including the adequacy and relevance of 
military health care facilities construction to the health care 
objectives of the Department of Defense; research and health 
care issues related to the care of veterans of the Persian Gulf 
War; policies, procedures and systems of the Department of 
Defense and the military departments related to sexual 
misconduct; 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 (section 2801 of 
Public Law 104-106, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996); and backlogs in the repair and maintenance 
of military housing.
    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. These efforts resulted 
in a number of initiatives contained in the National Defense 
Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 (Public Laws 
106-65 and 106-398, respectively) to protect commissary funds 
used for modernization and replacement of facilities and to 
expand the types of merchandise sold at military exchanges and 
commissaries.

                            force readiness

    The committee continued its assessment of the readiness of 
U.S. armed forces and the adequacy of the Administration's 
defense spending priorities to sustain readiness and 
modernization of U.S. military forces. Since 1995, the 
committee's ongoing investigations into the status of military 
readiness have revealed contradictions between official reports 
and the reality confronting military personnel on a day-to-day 
basis in the field. During the 106th Congress, the committee 
continued its annual series of hearings to receive the views of 
operational unit commanders and senior non-commissioned 
officers on military readiness. Their testimony confirmed 
concerns that the readiness of U.S. military forces is in 
decline, and provided the committee with vital information 
about how best to slow the erosion of military readiness. 
Accordingly, the committee targeted additional funds at 
critical accounts for training, recruiting, base operations, 
spare parts, and real property maintenance in the annual 
Defense authorization bills.
    In addition, the committee focused on: the effectiveness of 
congressionally-revised methods of measuring the readiness of 
military units; assessing 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.

                         military modernization

    In late 1995, then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
General John Shalikashvili, advised the Secretary of Defense 
that $60 billion would be required annually by fiscal year 1998 
to recapitalize the United States military. More than four 
years after this pronouncement, and three years after its 
subsequent endorsement by the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review, 
the fiscal year 2001 procurement budget request finally reached 
this level. As a result of this delay, the military service 
chiefs testified during the 106th Congress that many of their 
modernization needs have gone unmet. To address the most 
pressing of these unfunded requirements, the committee 
increased the President's military procurement budget requests 
by more than $20 billion over the past six years, including $5 
billion added by the 106th Congress through the annual defense 
authorization process.
    Also during the 106th Congress, the committee continued its 
assessment of the modernization requirements of the Department 
of Defense 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 submarine modernization plans of the Navy; the status of 
the National Missile Defense program; critical infrastructure 
protection andinformation assurance; shipbuilding requirements; 
assessing the threat posed by the proliferation of chemical and 
biological weapons to U.S. forces; and the performance of U.S. military 
equipment in the Balkan conflicts.

             national military strategy and force structure

    The committee paid particular attention to the following: 
the strategic and tactical assumptions supporting the national 
military strategy of the United States; the role of contingency 
operations in the execution of the national military strategy 
and the force structure required to sustain such operations; 
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 active 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.

                       ballistic missile defense

    The committee placed the highest priority on ensuring that 
U.S. ballistic missile defense programs, including national 
missile defense and theater 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 106th Congress, the 
committee conducted oversight of missile defense research and 
development efforts, plans for deployment of national missile 
defenses and advanced theater missile defenses, and the rapid 
evolution of theater and long-range ballistic missile threats. 
Noting significant funding shortfalls, the committee approved 
substantial increases to the President's requests for theater 
and national missile defense programs including an additional 
$352 million for fiscal year 2000 and $358.6 million for fiscal 
year 2001.
    The committee also took actions to ensure that ballistic 
missile defense architectures and programs are well 
coordinated. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) and the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398) 
moved program management for the Space Based Infrared System-
Low program (a sensor system critical to missile defense 
systems) from the Air Force to the Ballistic Missile Defense 
Organization (BMDO). Furthermore, Public Law 106-398 provided 
the director of BMDO a significant management role in the 
Airborne Laser program and required a plan to address 
intermediate range missile threats.
    Also during the 106th Congress, the committee reinvigorated 
high-energy laser research relevant to missile defense and 
other military applications. Public Law 106-65 mandated that 
the Department of Defense develop a high-energy laser master 
plan and Public Law 106-398 required the Department to 
implement the plan and established incentives for the military 
departments to fund high-energy laser research and development 
more adequately.

                  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.

                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 nuclear 
weapons complex to sustain the nuclear weapons stockpile; the 
Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative; 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 gave special emphasis to oversight of the 
National Ignition Facility project because of significant 
schedule delays and cost growth. The committee also addressed 
serious organizational issues and management and security 
deficiencies at the Department of Energy and 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 a semi-autonomous organization to manage the 
nuclear weapons complex. The committee also took steps to 
ensure better planning and fiscal discipline within the nuclear 
weapons activities of the Department of Energy.

        organization and management of the department of defense

    Despite significant progress in recent years to force 
organizational and management reforms on the Department of 
Defense through workforce reductions, common-sense business 
practice reforms, and pilot programs to test new business 
concepts, waste and inefficiency remain part of the 
Department's business culture. Wasteful practices at the 
Department must be eliminated, and savings must be redirected 
to meet important priorities such as critical shortfalls in 
modernization and readiness accounts. As such, the committee 
continued to pursue efforts to decrease the costs associated 
with the defense service support infrastructure and to 
encourage the Department of Defense to comply with established 
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.

                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. In particular, the committee focused on 
the following: the impact of U.S. policy regarding the export 
of sophisticated encryption products on U.S. national security; 
implementation of requirements related to the export of high 
performance computers (so-called ``supercomputers'') contained 
in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 
(Public Law 105-85); the results and impact of the licensing 
jurisdiction changes related to the export of U.S. satellites 
mandated by the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261); and assessing 
the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Select 
Committee on U.S. National Security and Military/
CommercialConcerns With the People's Republic of China with a view 
toward developing appropriate legislative remedies to prevent the 
unauthorized or dangerous transfer of military-related U.S. technology 
to China.

                   INDUSTRIAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL BASE

    The committee assessed the following: current budget and 
policy priorities of the Department of Defense 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.

                         ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

    The committee paid particular attention to the following: 
current federal, state, and local environmental compliance, 
remediation, and restoration requirements imposed on the 
Department of Defense, the military services, and the 
Department of Energy; current and planned funding requirements 
for environmental programs of the Department of Defense and the 
Department of Energy, including the cost effectiveness of such 
programs; and the diversion of military training and operations 
and maintenance funds to meet unfunded environmental 
requirements and the impact of such diversions on training and 
readiness.

                    ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES


               THE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS ACT

    The committee paid close attention to mandates placed on 
executive departments and agencies by the Government 
Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-62). In so 
doing, the committee closely observed Department of Defense, 
military departments, and Department of Energy efforts to 
comply with Public Law 103-62 to include the use of 
performance-based budgeting techniques and five-year strategic 
planning documents.

                        RECRUITING AND RETENTION

    During the 105th Congress, the committee discovered 
worrisome trends in efforts to recruit and retain critical 
military personnel. In fact, the Army, Navy, and Air Force all 
missed recruiting goals for fiscal year 1999, and several of 
the reserve components missed fiscal year 1999 recruiting goals 
by sizeable margins. These figures caused great concern within 
the committee, resulting in persistent congressional efforts to 
continually reassess the condition of the services' recruiting 
and retention efforts by conducting hearings both in 
Washington, D.C., and at military facilities around the 
country.
    Fortunately, substantial and sustained congressional 
support for recruiting and retention efforts by the committee, 
including more than $500 million in additional funding from 
fiscal year 1998 through fiscal year 2001, began to have 
results, as all of the services reported significant 
improvements in recruiting efforts during fiscal year 2000. 
Likewise, congressional efforts to retain key military 
personnel through increased pay and improved benefits also 
resulted in improved retention rates. Though each of the 
services continue to struggle to meet retention goals, reports 
at the end of calendar year 2000 indicate an increasing number 
of critical personnel are choosing to remain in the force. To a 
large extent, these successes may be attributed to additional 
funding for recruiting and retention efforts combined with 
compensation and retirement reforms enacted in the fiscal years 
2000 and 2001 defense authorization bills.

                  MILITARY RETIREMENT AND COMPENSATION

    The committee examined a wide range of compensation issues 
during the 106th 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, 
and the adequacy of pay during deployments. This review 
resulted in legislation in the fiscal years 2000 and 2001 
defense authorization bills to increase basic, special, and 
incentive pays, reform pay tables, and reduce out-of-pocket 
housing costs for military personnel. In addition, the 
committee closed the gap between military and civilian pay 
levels by requiring that future military pay increases exceed 
the rate of inflation by one-half percent.
    During the 105th Congress, the committee heard evidence 
that the reduction in military retirement benefits enacted in 
1986 was hampering the ability of the services to recruit and 
retain quality personnel. Testimony received during the 106th 
Congress further supported this position, and led the committee 
to enact a comprehensive reform of the military retirement 
system in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). In addition, the committee 
recognized the value of 401(k)-type retirement savings plans to 
recruiting and retention efforts, and authorized military 
participation in the Federal Thrift Savings Plan through the 
fiscal years 2000 and 2001 defense authorization bills.

                      MILITARY HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

    In several hearings held during the second session of the 
106th Congress, service members and their families testified 
that the existing health care benefit for military personnel 
was insufficient and an eroding benefit. Accordingly, the 
committee took numerous actions to ensure that military 
members, retirees, and their families have access to quality 
health care, and to improve the military heath care system. 
Through the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398), the committee 
restructured the military health care program and provided 
permanent lifetime TRICARE eligibility to Medicare-eligible 
military retirees and their family members beginning in fiscal 
year 2002. In addition, the committee expanded the mail order 
and network retail pharmacy programs of the Department of 
Defense to ensure that all Medicare-eligible military retirees 
and family members have access to reduced-cost prescription 
drugs. To ensure that the costs of the expanded senior retiree 
health care benefit does not compete for funding with other 
critical defense priorities within the Department of Defense 
budget, the committee reformed the financing process for the 
Defense Health Program. This reform established an accrual 
funding mechanism, similar to that used for military retired 
pay benefits, to pay for senior retiree health care.
    The committee also took steps to eliminate inequities in 
health care costs for military personnel, protect retirees from 
excessive medical expenses by reducing the maximum annual out-
of-pocket medical expense level for retired TRICARE 
beneficiaries, and provide additional funds to implement good 
business practices and technologies that have the potential to 
improve the military health care system.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT, COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY, AND 
                              ORGANIZATION

    At the beginning of the 106th Congress, the Select 
Committee on U.S. National Security and Military/Commercial 
Concerns with the People's Republic of China (known as the 
``Cox Committee'') released a bipartisan report entitled U.S. 
National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns with the 
People's Republic of China. The report revealed that the 
People's Republic of China (PRC) has obtained classified 
information on all of the United States most advanced 
thermonuclear warheads. Drawing on the findings of that select 
committee, the committee conducted hearings concerning the 
compromised nuclear weapon design information, and the 
information security and physical security measures implemented 
by the Department of Energy to prevent future compromise of 
nuclear weapons information.
    In June 1999, the committee received testimony from Warren 
Rudman, chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence 
Advisory Board (PFIAB), on an inquiry the Board undertook on 
security problems at the DOE weapons laboratories and the 
adequacy of the measures undertaken by the Department of Energy 
to address them. The PFIAB found a 25-year history of reports, 
studies, and inquiries identifying chronic management, 
security, and counterintelligence problems at the weapons labs, 
and attempted but aborted reforms. The Board reported that the 
Department of Energy and the weapons laboratories suffer from a 
lack of mission focus, unclear lines of authority, and a deeply 
rooted culture of low regard for security issues and concluded 
that the Department is a dysfunctional bureaucracy that has 
proven incapable of reforming itself. The PFIAB recommended 
reorganization of the nuclear weapons functions of the 
Department of Energy by establishing either a new independent 
agency or a new semi-autonomous agency within the Department of 
Energy to manage those functions.
    The reports of the Cox Committee and the PFIAB, reinforced 
by hearings of the committee, led to the reorganization of 
these functions within the Department of Energy and significant 
security and counterintelligence legislation. The National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) created a semi-autonomous agency within the Department of 
Energy with responsibility for all nuclear weapons, naval 
nuclear propulsion, and nonproliferation work. The legislation:
          (1) established a new position of Administrator for 
        Nuclear Security who, while serving under the 
        direction, control, and authority of the Secretary of 
        Energy, may establish NNSA-unique policy;
          (2) established DOE Offices of Intelligence and 
        Counterintelligence and NNSA Offices of Defense Nuclear 
        Security and Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence;
          (3) established clear lines of authority for both 
        NNSA personnel and NNSA contractor personnel and 
        personnel policies to reshape the NNSA workforce; and
          (4) required that the NNSA forward a budget and a 
        future year nuclear security plan that provides more 
        fiscal discipline and better congressional oversight.
    In April 1999, and later in November 1999, the committee 
held hearings on alleged espionage activities at the Los Alamos 
National Laboratory that may have contributed to the loss of 
design information for the W-88 and other U.S. nuclear warheads 
to the PRC. One of these hearings centered on the initial 
failure of the Department of Energy to inform the committee 
about this extremely significant counterintelligence loss. The 
other hearing was focused on why the Department of Energy and 
the Los Alamos Laboratory allowed continued access to 
classified nuclear weapon information by the main suspect in 
this espionage case.
    In June 2000, the Department of Energy informed the 
committee that two removable computer hard drives containing 
highly classified nuclear weapons information were missing from 
the Los Alamos national laboratory. The committee held a 
hearing to examine the content of the hard drives and the 
management problems that led to their initial loss.

                 U.S. POLICY TOWARD THE BALKANS REGION

    On March 24, 1999, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
(NATO) undertook military action against Yugoslavia, beginning 
a three-month air war against Yugoslavia's integrated air 
defense system and command and control systems. The committee 
held hearings and received classified intelligence and 
operations briefings on various aspects of the air campaign and 
the option to use ground troops for the mission. The committee 
prepared a series of reports outlining and analyzing U.S. 
policy toward Bosnia and the Balkans and a number of 
Congressional fact-finding delegations traveled to the region 
to focus on Kosovo operations and associated diplomatic, 
military, and humanitarian relief issues. In an effort to gain 
a comprehensive understanding of U.S. policy toward Bosnia and 
to ensure oversight of U.S. military deployments to the 
Balkans, the committee received testimony from the Secretary of 
Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, various 
defense officials, and numerous distinguished retired officers 
and analysts.

                        BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT

    Over the past six years, the committee has become 
increasingly concerned by the vulnerability of the United 
States to ballistic missile attack. In addition to the 1998 
findings of the bipartisan and independent Commission to Assess 
the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, the spread 
of ballistic missile technology without the prior knowledge of 
U.S. intelligence organizations has raised serious questions 
about the ability of the intelligence community to foresee the 
emergence of ballistic missile threats. Furthermore, the 
Administration has displayed a disinclination to move forward 
with the rapid development of technologies to defend against 
such threats. The committee's concern about the threat of 
ballistic missile attack led the committee to increase funding 
for ballistic missile defense programs beyond amounts requested 
by the President and to pass the National Missile Defense Act 
of 1999 (Public Law 106-38) making it the policy of the United 
States to deploy a national missile defense.

              INVESTIGATION INTO MILITARY ABSENTEE BALLOTS

    In the wake of allegations raised during the November 2000 
election that both the Department of Defense and state election 
boards mishandled the ballots of overseas military personnel, 
the committee undertook an initial review of the absentee 
balloting process, the Federal Voter Assistance Program, and 
the Department of Defense mail system. The committee also 
called upon the 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 the 
Congress. The committee aggressively investigated complaints 
about groups of service members serving at sea or assigned to 
remote locations that 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 were rejected by election officials 
inFlorida to determine how the overseas voting process can be 
improved. The committee expects to continue oversight of the matter 
during the 107th Congress.

                        u.s. policy toward iraq

    During the 106th Congress, the committee continued to 
exercise its oversight role with respect to military 
deployments in the Persian Gulf region, especially the 
continued enforcement of the ``no-fly zones'' over northern and 
southern Iraq. During 1999 and 2000, the committee held a 
number of hearings to explore U.S. policy toward Iraq and the 
prospects for re-establishing a weapons inspections regime to 
prevent Iraq from acquiring additional weapons of mass 
destruction. In particular, on March 10, 1999, and March 11, 
1999, the committee held separate hearings on U.S. policy 
toward Iraq and U.S. activities in the Persian Gulf. 
Furthermore, the committee received testimony from the 
Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Central Command on March 15, 2000, 
in connection with the annual defense budget request, regarding 
the situation in Iraq and the continuing U.S. military activity 
in the region. Finally, in both the fiscal year 2000 and fiscal 
year 2001 Defense authorization bills, the committee extended 
the Department of Defense's authority to support the re-
establishment of a United Nations weapons inspection regime in 
Iraq by providing expertise, equipment, and materiel in support 
of the UN-mandated weapons inspection mission.

       investigation into the terrorist attack on the u.s.s. cole

    On October 12, 2000, a small boat exploded along the port 
side of the U.S.S. 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 three-dozen more. In the aftermath of the attack, 
the committee initiated oversight of the incident and received 
a classified briefing from Department of Defense officials on 
the initial reports surrounding the attack. Subsequently, the 
committee met in both open and closed sessions to receive 
testimony on the attack on the U.S.S. Cole. The committee also 
initiated an investigation of the incident. As part of this 
investigation, the committee reviewed general and specific 
force protection issues with the staff of the Commander-in-
Chief, Atlantic Fleet, the Commander-in-Chief, Central Command, 
the U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, the Defense Intelligence 
Agency, the National Security Agency, the Office of the Chief 
of Naval Operations, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, 
and the Defense Energy Support Activity. The committee intends 
to publish its findings on the attack early in the 107th 
Congress.

                       encryption control policy

    Information warfare has become a critical element of U.S. 
military strategy--the United States must be able to protect 
its own communications from interception while exploiting the 
weaknesses in the information systems and communications of its 
potential adversaries. However, the explosive growth of the 
internet and electronic commerce in recent years has increased 
concerns about information security as a growing number of 
individuals and businesses now have access to the information 
superhighway and the ability to transmit volumes of personal 
and proprietary data from one user to another nearly 
instantaneously. As technology advances, the risk that the 
secure transmission of information may be compromised by 
computer ``hackers'' increases, resulting in calls for improved 
encryption capabilities.
    During the first session of the 106th Congress, H.R. 850, 
the ``Security and Freedom Through Encryption (SAFE) Act'' was 
introduced and sequentially referred to the House Committee on 
Armed Services. The committee was concerned that this 
legislation, similar to legislation introduced during the 105th 
Congress, would liberalize U.S. encryption policy by allowing 
commercially-available encryption software--along with any 
computers containing such software (including supercomputers)--
to be exported without a government-issued export license. 
Furthermore, the committee believed that this legislation would 
nullify the supercomputer provisions of National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). As 
such, the committee took testimony from the Deputy Director of 
the National Security Agency Barbara McNamara and Deputy 
Secretary of Defense John Hamre on the national security 
implications of H.R. 850 on July 1, 1999. Based in part on such 
testimony, the committee amended H.R. 850 to preserve 
encryption software export controls by a committee vote of 47-
6.

                           reserve components

    The Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398) marked the third 
consecutive year that the grades limits were increased for 
reserve members authorized to serve on active duty or on full-
time national guard duty for administration of the reserves or 
the national guard, also known as active guard reserve (AGR) 
members. The role of AGRs was expanded by section 555 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public 
Law 106-65), resulting in a need for new career progression 
opportunities. Accordingly, the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2001 includes a requirement for the 
Secretary of Defense to study the grade structure requirements 
of the AGR force and provide a comprehensive plan to manage AGR 
controlled grades not later than March 31, 2001.
    The committee also considered a number of reforms to 
improve the welfare of reservists and enhance compensation 
programs. The committee included several initiatives in Public 
Law 106-398, including authority:
          (1) for reservists to travel on military aircraft on 
        a space available basis when traveling to inactive duty 
        training;
          (2) to exempt reserve officers from consideration for 
        promotion with active duty officers when serving on 
        active duty for less than three years;
          (3) for reserve officers to obtain military legal 
        assistance following separation from active duty;
          (4) for reservists to be paid the full amount based 
        on grade for a training period when they participate in 
        details providing military honors at funerals of 
        veterans;
          (5) for reservists not on active duty to receive 
        special duty assignment pay; and
          (6) for an increase in the number of reserve 
        retirement points that may be earned in a year from 75 
        to 90.
    In addition, the committee continued oversight of the 
management by the Department of Defense of its full-time 
support force. Although the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) required the 
Department of Defense to submit a plan to eliminate non-dual 
status military technicians, the Department did not comply with 
the law. As such, the committee included several provisions in 
Public Law 106-65 to strengthen the military technician 
program. These provisions included legislation to provide for 
mandatory civil service retirement for certain non-dual status 
military technicians and to reduce the number of non-dualstatus 
military technicians in the Army and Air Force Reserve to no more than 
175 by October 1, 2007. The committee also provided for early civil 
service retirement for reserve and national guard military technicians 
hired after February 10, 1996, in recognition that these dual status 
military technicians must retain dual status or forfeit their jobs. 
Additionally, the committee recognized the unique nature of some 
national guard military technician positions and provided authority for 
the national guard to retain no more than 1,950 non-dual status 
military technicians.

                  anthrax vaccine immunization program

    The committee continued oversight of the Department of 
Defense Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program (AVIP), amid 
concerns over the inability of the sole manufacturer of the 
vaccine to achieve Food and Drug Administration approval for 
production of vaccine in its rebuilt manufacturing facility. 
The committee conducted two oversight hearings in Washington, 
D.C. and included the AVIP program in discussion with soldiers 
and sailors during focus group sessions at several military 
installations. In addition, the committee conducted two 
oversight inspections at Bioport, the DOD contractor for 
producing the vaccine, and reviewed in detail the Food and Drug 
Administration's plans for inspection and final approval of 
Bioport's rebuilt manufacturing facility. Based on these 
efforts, the committee remained concerned that the Department 
of Defense has not adequately addressed service members' 
concerns about the potency and purity of the vaccine. To 
address these concerns, the committee included requirements in 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 
(Public Law 106-398) to establish uniform guidelines to be 
applied by each of the four services when determining 
vaccination exemption policies and several reporting 
requirements to facilitate the committee future oversight of 
the AVIP program.

                    merchant marine and panama canal

    The committee paid particular attention to the following: 
examination of 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 
ability to meet surge requirements; and the scrapping of 
obsolete vessels under the control of the Maritime 
Administration. The committee also continued its oversight of 
the Panama Canal Commission until the transfer of the canal to 
the government of Panama in December 1999.

                 chemical stockpile destruction program

    The committee continued its oversight of the Department of 
Defense program for destruction of the U.S. stockpile of lethal 
chemical agents and munitions in such a manner as to ensure the 
maximum protection of the general public, the personnel 
involved in the program, and the environment.
    Reflecting long-term concern over the growing cost of the 
program, the committee initiated legislation in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) that resulted in direction to the Secretary of Defense to 
assess measures for reducing the cost of the program and 
ensuring its completion in accordance with the obligations of 
the United States under the Chemical Weapons Convention. 
Additionally, to provide flexibility in the future use of 
chemical stockpile destruction facilities, Public Law 106-65 
provided that non-stockpile chemical agents, munitions, or 
related materials could be destroyed in chemical stockpile 
destruction facilities, on the basis of a site-specific 
agreement between the Department and the governor of the state 
in which the destruction facility is located. The legislation 
also provided that chemical stockpile destruction facilities 
will be disposed of in accordance with such agreements 
following completion of the chemical stockpile destruction 
program.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 
(Public Law 106-398) continued support for the program and 
included provisions to restrict the chemical stockpile 
destruction technologies which may be considered for use at 
Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado, limit destruction of non-
stockpile chemical warfare material at the Anniston Chemical 
Stockpile Disposal Facility, Alabama, and direct a report by 
the Secretary of Defense on the need for federal economic 
assistance for communities that have been impacted by chemical 
weapons stockpile storage sites and their associated chemical 
agent and munitions destruction activities. During an oversight 
hearing prior to enactment of Public Law 106-398, the committee 
noted progress in the destruction of the chemical agents and 
munitions stockpiles on Johnston Atoll in the Pacific and 
Tooele Chemical Depot, Utah, and at other chemical stockpile 
disposal sites; the lessons learned and corrective actions 
being taken in response release of a small amount of agent from 
the destruction facility at Tooele; the status of the chemical 
stockpile emergency preparedness program; and concerns, 
including the potential economic impact of the program, raised 
by local communities.

            review of radio frequency spectrum reallocation

    Several reports by the Department of Defense highlight the 
historical importance of military access to the radio frequency 
spectrum. Furthermore, in testimony before a joint hearing of 
the Subcommittees on Military Procurement and Military Research 
and Development on February 23, 1999, Department of Defense 
witnesses indicated that the planned reallocation of portions 
of the frequency spectrum that were reserved for military 
purposes could significantly degrade the capabilities of many 
major weapons systems and cost the Department hundreds of 
millions of dollars, and recommended a review of national radio 
frequency spectrum policy. Accordingly, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) 
limited the surrender of those portions of the frequency 
spectrum assigned primarily for use by the Department and 
directed the return of eight megahertz of previously 
reallocated spectrum to the Department of Defense. Public Law 
106-65 also directed an interagency review of progress in 
implementation of national spectrum planning, reallocation of 
federal spectrum to non-federal use, and implications of such 
reallocation to the affected federal executive agencies.
                 OTHER ACTIVITIES OF THE FULL COMMITTEE

                            Budget Activity

    On March 2, 1999, the committee forwarded its views and 
estimates regarding the budget for National Defense (function 
050) for fiscal year 2000 to the Committee on the Budget. The 
committee noted that budget request fell approximately $17 
billion short of the requirements identified by the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff for fiscal year 2000, and the committee again 
expressed concern over the Administration's underestimation of 
defense outlays in the President's Budget. The committee noted 
that should the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget fail to 
provide sufficient defense outlays to reconcile the 
Administration's underestimation, severe reductions in defense 
spending would be necessary. 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 
recruiting and retention needs, such as retirement and pay 
reforms.
    On February 25, 2000, the committee forwarded its views and 
estimates regarding the budget for National Defense (function 
050) for fiscal year 2001 to the Committee on the Budget. The 
committee expressed its concern about 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. The committee's views and 
estimates were provided before the Congressional Budget Office 
had completed its independent estimate of the President's 
Budget so the committee did not recommend specific National 
Defense (function 050) authorization levels for budget 
authority and outlays. The committee noted that the budget 
request fell approximately $16.0 billion short of the 
requirements identified by the Joint Chiefs of Staff for fiscal 
year 2001 and that this estimate was over $5 billion higher 
than the preceding year's estimate of the shortfall for fiscal 
year 2001. Although the committee did not recommend specific 
National Defense (function 050) authorization levels for the 
reason noted above, it did seek additional discretionary and 
mandatory resources to address critical unfunded requirements, 
military participation in the Thrift Savings Program, and 
military health care reform.

                        Full Committee Hearings

    During the 106th Congress, the Committee on Armed Services 
held numerous hearings in accordance with its legislative and 
oversight roles. An examination of existing and emerging 
threats to the United States and its global national security 
interests provided the thematic overlay for the committee's 
consideration of the fiscal years 2000 and 2001 defense budget 
requests. Other full committee hearings focused on U.S. 
national security strategy; the deployment and employment of 
U.S. military forces abroad in the Balkans, including on 
peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo and in support of 
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization military air campaign 
against Yugoslavia (Operation Allied Force); U.S. policy in the 
Persian Gulf; nuclear security at Department of Energy (DOE) 
laboratories and DOE reorganization; encryption, high-
performance computers and export controls; national missile 
defense; relations with the People's Republic of China; the 
situation in Colombia; and the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-1; H.A.S.C. 106-2; H.A.S.C. 106-10; H.A.S.C. 
106-12; H.A.S.C. 106-13; H.A.S.C. 106-14; H.A.S.C. 106-16; 
H.A.S.C. 106-17; H.A.S.C. 106-20; H.A.S.C. 106-33; H.A.S.C. 
106-34; H.A.S.C. 106-35; H.A.S.C. 37; H.A.S.C. 106-44; H.A.S.C. 
106-46; H.A.S.C. 106-47; H.A.S.C. 106-53; H.A.S.C. 106-54; 
H.A.S.C. 106-60; H.A.S.C. 106-61; H.A.S.C. 106-65)

                            posture hearings

    In exercising its oversight obligations, the committee 
sought and received testimony early in each session of the 
106th Congress from Administration officials with respect to 
the Administration's overall national security policy, plans, 
and programs, and the budget proposals requested to implement 
them. As part of its review of these issues, the committee 
requested and received posture statements from the Secretary of 
Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the 
uniformed service chiefs, and the service Secretaries.
    In the first session, during deliberations on the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (H.R. 1401), the 
committee received testimony from Secretary of Defense William 
S. Cohen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Henry 
H. Shelton, and Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/Chief 
Financial Officer) William J. Lynn, III on February 2, 1999. 
Subsequently, the committee received testimony from the 
uniformed service chiefs; Gen. Dennis J. Reimer, Chief of Staff 
of the Army; Adm. Jay L. Johnson, Chief of Naval Operations; 
Gen. Charles C. Krulak, Commandant of the Marine Corps; and 
Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, Vice-Chief of Staff of the Air Force, 
on February 24, 1999. The committee received testimony from the 
service secretaries; Louis Caldera, Secretary of the Army; 
Richard Danzig, Secretary of the Navy; and F. Whitten Peters, 
Acting Secretary of the Air Force, on March 25, 1999.
    In addition, the committee heard from regional commanders-
in-chief. On March 3, 1999, the committee met to receive 
testimony from Adm. Dennis C. Blair, USN, Commander in Chief, 
U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM); and Gen. John Tilelli, USA, 
Commander in Chief, U.S. Forces Korea (USFK). On March 11, 
1999, the committee received testimony from Gen. Anthony C. 
Zinni, USMC, Commander in Chief, U.S. Central Command 
(CENTCOM); and on March 17, 1999, the committee heard from Gen. 
Wesley K. Clark, USA, Commander in Chief, U.S. European Command 
(EUCOM).
    During the second session, the committee began its 
deliberations on the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2001 (H.R. 4205) with an initial posture hearing on 
February 9, 2000, receiving testimony from Secretary Cohen and 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Shelton. This was 
followed on February 10, 2000, with testimony from the 
uniformed service chiefs; Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, Chief of Staff 
of the Army; Adm. Jay L. Johnson, Chief of Naval Operations; 
Gen. Michael E. Ryan, Chief of Staff of the Air Force; and Gen. 
James L. Jones, Commandant of the Marine Corps. Subsequently, 
the committee received testimony from regional commanders-in-
chief. On February 17, 2000, the committee heard from Gen. 
Wesley K. Clark, USA, Commander in Chief, EUCOM; and on March 
15, 2000 from Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, USMC, Commander in Chief, 
CENTCOM; Adm. Dennis C. Blair, USN, Commander in Chief, PACOM; 
and Gen. Thomas A. Schwartz, USA, Commander in Chief, USFK. On 
March 22, 2000, the committee heard from the service 
secretaries; Louis Caldera, Secretary of the Army; Richard 
Danzig, Secretary of the Navy; and F. Whitten Peters, Secretary 
of the Air Force.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-2, H.A.S.C. 106-37)

                   Threats to u.s. national security

    During the 106th Congress, the committee's review of the 
Administration's defense budget proposals was framed by an 
assessment and evaluation of the threats to U.S. national 
security. On February 3, 1999, the committee received testimony 
in closed session from the Director of Central Intelligence, 
George Tenet, and the Director of the Defense Intelligence 
Agency, Lt. Gen. Patrick M. Hughes. On February 4, 1999, the 
committee heard from Mr. John Gannon, Chairman, National 
Intelligence Council; Mr. Robert Walpole, National Intelligence 
Officer for Strategic & Nuclear Programs; Mr. Ben Bonk, 
National Intelligence Officer for Near East & South Asia; Mr. 
Barry Lowenkron, National Intelligence Officer for Europe; and 
Ms. Mary Tighe, National Intelligence Officer for East Asia. 
The information received provided important context for the 
committee's consideration of the Administration's fiscal year 
2000 defense budget request. This approach was repeated during 
the committee's consideration of the fiscal year 2001 budget 
request, as General John A. Gordon, Deputy Director of Central 
Intelligence and Admiral Thomas R. Wilson, Director, Defense 
Intelligence Agency, appeared before the committee on February 
16, 2000 to discuss worldwide threats to the United States and 
U.S. global interests. The committee also received a classified 
briefing from the Joint Staff on global hot spots and threats 
to U.S. interests on September 29, 1999.

                    u.s. national security strategy

    The committee continued its examination of U.S. national 
security strategy and the national military strategy during the 
106th Congress with a view toward judging the appropriateness 
of U.S. strategy and the adequacy of defense resources being 
applied to execute it.
    On October 5, 1999, 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. The commission's 
``Phase One'' report outlining its view of anticipated 
challenges provided the backdrop for the committee's hearing. 
In addition, the committee began the second session of the 
106th Congress by holding a hearing on the relationship between 
U.S. military strategy and defense resources. On February 8, 
2000, the committee took testimony from former Secretary of 
Defense James R. Schlesinger and analysts from the Center for 
Strategic and International Studies with respect to the 
Administration's defense budget requests and the need for 
significantly increased resources for defense. Secretary 
Schlesinger's testimony that the United States faces a coming 
``train wreck'' in defense and that the United States ``simply 
cannot continue to play the global leadership role envisioned 
by the current national security strategy without a substantial 
increase in defense spending'' formed the basis for the 
committee's efforts during the second session of the 106th 
Congress to increase the defense budget topline and to ensure 
that the military services received the resources necessary to 
successfully carry out their missions at the lowest possible 
level of risk.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-20; H.A.S.C. 106-46)

                       u.s. policy in the balkans

    During the 106th Congress, the committee continued its 
oversight of U.S. policy in the Balkans, focusing on both the 
peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Kosovo, and the allied 
military operation against Yugoslavia (Operation Allied Force). 
The committee held numerous hearings and received classified 
intelligence and operations briefings on the situation on the 
ground with respect to ongoing peacekeeping operations in the 
region and the conduct of the 78-day NATO air campaign led by 
the United States. In particular, the committee focused its 
attention on the continuing rotation of U.S. military forces to 
Bosnia as part of the multinational Stabilization Force (SFOR) 
and the impact of such troop rotations on the overall readiness 
of the armed forces to execute the requirements of the national 
military strategy. The committee's examination of U.S. Balkans 
policy exposed continuing strains in the ability of the armed 
forces to meet their warfighting requirements as a result of 
the extended peacekeeping mission in Bosnia. Moreover, the 
committee's review of Operation Allied Force reignited debate 
over the issues of NATO burdensharing, military and 
technological interoperability and standardization among NATO 
members, the political constraints on conducting alliance 
warfare, and the post-Cold War mission of the alliance. In the 
wake of the termination of the air campaign and the removal by 
Serbia of its military forces from Kosovo, the committee 
reviewed the Administration's plan for U.S. participation in 
the multinational Kosovo Force (KFOR) peacekeeping operation 
and the additional strains the Kosovo deployment imposed on the 
warfighting readiness of U.S. forces. The committee also hosted 
a series of classified briefings for all Members of the House 
of Representatives on the Kosovo deployment.
    As part of its effort to provide comprehensive oversight of 
U.S. military deployments to the Balkans region, the committee 
received testimony from the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Department of Defense officials, 
the intelligence community, former military officials, and non-
governmental experts.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-2; H.A.S.C. 106-12; H.A.S.C. 106-13; H.A.S.C. 
106-37)

                    u.s. policy in the persian gulf

    During the 106th Congress, the committee continued to 
exercise its oversight role with respect to U.S. military 
deployments in the Persian Gulf region. In particular, the 
committee focused its oversight efforts on the continuing 
deployment of U.S. forces in the region as part of the mission 
to contain Iraq from acquiring weapons of mass destruction and 
to prevent it from posing a military threat to its neighbors, 
including Kuwait. The committee reviewed U.S. policy with 
respect to the ``no-fly zones'' over Iraq and the ability of 
U.S. forces to continue to enforce the Operation Southern Watch 
mission at minimal risk, receiving a series of operational and 
intelligence briefings on the situation. In addition, the 
committee held hearings on March 10, 1999 and March 11, 1999 
with Department of Defense and former government officials, and 
outside experts, to explore U.S. policy toward Iraq. On March 
15, 2000, the committee took testimony from the Commander in 
Chief, U.S. Central Command, on the situation within the 
Central Command area of responsibility and, in particular, 
ongoing military operations with respect to Iraq.
    Although the Persian Gulf War ended nearly a decade ago, 
the continuing deployment of U.S. military forces in the region 
in support of Operation Southern Watch poses additional strains 
on the personnel and equipment involved in the enforcement 
operation. Moreover, the risk to U.S. forces has increased as 
Iraq has become more defiant, challenging the air exclusion 
zones and allied aircraft patrolling them. In addition, the UN-
sanctioned weapons inspection regime established after the 
Persian Gulf War was thwarted by Iraq when it expelled weapons 
inspectors in October 1998. Although no weapons inspections 
have occurred in Iraq since then, the committee has continued 
to support Department of Defense efforts to provide support to 
a reconstituted weapons inspection regime in short order. 
Accordingly, in both the fiscal years 2000 and 2001 defense 
authorization bills, the committee extended the authority of 
the Secretaryof Defense to provide UN weapons inspectors in 
Iraq with expertise, equipment, and materiel in support of the UN-
mandated weapons inspection mission.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-2; H.A.S.C. 106-10; H.A.S.C. 106-37)

                 department of energy nuclear security

    In the wake of serious concerns over lax security at the 
nuclear weapons laboratories of the Department of Energy and 
the loss of U.S. nuclear secrets by the People's Republic of 
China, the committee initiated a series of efforts to improve 
security and management procedures of the Department of Energy. 
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 
(Public Law 106-65) included provisions that would establish a 
semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration with 
clearer lines of authority and responsibility, and provided for 
improvements to the counterintelligence procedures of the 
Department of Energy. In addition, the committee included 
provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398) to further improve the 
management and operations of the Department of Energy's nuclear 
weapons laboratories and to ensure that U.S. nuclear secrets 
are effectively safeguarded.
    In addition, the committee held a series of hearings on the 
security procedures at DOE laboratories. On June 24, 1999, the 
committee took testimony from the Chairman of the President's 
Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board on the Board's 
investigation into the security situation at DOE laboratories 
and its recommendations for improving DOE security and 
counterintelligence procedures. On July 14, 1999, the committee 
took testimony from Victor H. Reis, Assistant Secretary of 
Energy for Defense Programs, on reorganization plans for the 
Department of Energy. On March 2, 2000, the committee took 
testimony from Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson regarding 
implementation of DOE reorganization and the reforms contained 
in Title 32 of Public Law 106-65. Additionally, on June 14, 
2000, the committee took testimony from DOE officials on 
security failures at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
    On June 28, 2000, the committee marked up several pieces of 
legislation related to DOE safety and security, including: H. 
Res. 534, a resolution expressing the sense of the House on the 
security situation involving missing computer hard drives at 
Los Alamos National Laboratory; H.R. 3906, a bill to codify the 
authority of the Secretary of Energy to conduct independent 
assessments of safeguards and security at all DOE facilities, 
including facilities of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA); H.R. 4446, a bill to permit the 
Secretary of Energy to assess civil penalties resulting from 
Price-Anderson Act violations against NNSA contractors through 
the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety and 
Health; H.R. 3383, a bill to eliminate the existing statutory 
exemption for certain NNSA and DOE contractors from Price-
Anderson Act civil penalties; and H.R. 4737, a bill to make a 
number of improvements in the classified material handling 
procedures of the national security laboratories.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-17; H.A.S.C. 106-47; H.A.S.C. 106-54)

         ENCRYPTION, EXPORT CONTROLS, AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFERS

    During the 106th 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 concern have been 
progressively loosened in recent years as rapid technological 
advances have increased the ability of other countries to 
acquire militarily useful technologies through commercial 
means.
    The committee sought a better understanding of the 
Administration's rationale for 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. In particular, the committee continued 
to assess the Administration's decision to progressively relax 
restrictions on the export of high-performance computers to 
countries of proliferation concern. In accordance with the 
mechanism for relaxing such controls established by the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public 
Law 105-85) and subsequent amendments, the committee focused 
its oversight effort on assessing each Administration-proposed 
adjustment to the notification threshold established by law. On 
October 28, 1999, the committee held a hearing to receive 
testimony from the U.S. General Accounting Office, government 
and former government officials, and industry and outside 
experts on U.S. policy regarding high-performance computer 
exports.
    In addition, the committee assessed the impact of changes 
to U.S. policy regarding the export of sophisticated encryption 
products. On July 1, 1999, the committee held a hearing to 
receive testimony from John J. Hamre, Deputy Secretary of 
Defense, and Barbara A. McNamara, Deputy Director of the 
National Security Agency, with respect to H.R. 850, the 
Security and Freedom Through Encryption (SAFE) Act, a bill to 
relax export restrictions on encryption products. The committee 
continued its examination of the impact of H.R. 850 on U.S. 
national security with a hearing on July 13, 1999, taking 
testimony from Attorney General Janet Reno, Federal Bureau of 
Investigation Director Louis J. Freeh, Department of Commerce 
officials and industry representatives. In light of the 
testimony received and the committee's assessment of the risks 
to U.S. national security posed by the global spread of 
sophisticated encryption technology, the committee 
significantly amended H.R. 850 in a mark-up session on July 21, 
1999.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-16; H.A.S.C. 106-35)

                        national missile defense

    The committee continued its oversight of U.S. national 
missile defense (NMD) policy and programs during the 106th 
Congress, holding hearings and marking up legislation in an 
effort to assess the Administration's NMD plans and 
architecture and to accelerate the eventual deployment of a 
national missile defense system designed to protect Americans 
against the growing threat of ballistic missile attack. The 
committee's actions were fueled by a growing recognition of the 
seriousness of the ballistic missile threat to the United 
States and the acknowledgement of the Secretary of Defense 
William Cohen, that ballistic missiles will soon pose a danger 
to both U.S, forces overseas and to Americans domestically.
    On February 25, 1999, the committee marked up H.R. 4, the 
National Missile Defense Act of 1999, which declared it to be 
the policy of the United States to deploy a national missile 
defense as soon as is technologically possible. H.R. 4 
subsequently passed both Houses of Congress and was signed into 
law by the President (Public Law 106-38) on July 22, 1999.
    On October 13, 1999, the committee received testimony from 
Department of Defense and Department of State officials on 
Administration plans for national missile defense. The 
committee also heard from former government and outside experts 
regarding the arms control implications of the Administration's 
NMD program and constraints placed on the deployment of a 
national missile defense by the 1972 U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic 
Missile (ABM) Treaty. On June 28, 2000, the committee took 
testimony from Department of Defense officials on the current 
status of the NMD program and possible alternative NMD 
deployment architectures.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-33; H.A.S.C. 106-60)

             RELATIONS WITH THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

    During the 106th Congress, the committee began a 
systematic, in-depth examination of U.S. relations with the 
People's Republic of China and, in particular, the threat posed 
by the growing military capabilities of the People's Liberation 
Army to the United States and U.S. interests.
    On March 3, 1999, as part of the series of posture hearings 
on the Administration's defense budget request, the committee 
took testimony from Adm. Dennis C. Blair, Commander-in-Chief of 
U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), regarding the situation in 
PACOM's area of responsibility and with particular emphasis on 
China. On March 15, 2000, Adm. Blair again testified on this 
topic in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief, PACOM.
    During the second session, the committee intensified its 
look at China's military strategy, policies, and programs. On 
June 21, 2000, the committee held a hearing to focus on China's 
overall strategic intentions and goals, receiving testimony 
from Department of Defense, former military, and outside 
experts. On July 19, 2000, the committee took testimony from 
independent analysts on China's military modernization programs 
and capabilities and the threat posed to the United States and 
U.S. interests in the region, including the security of Taiwan.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-2; H.A.S.C. 106-37; H.A.S.C. 106-53; H.A.S.C. 
106-61)

                       THE SITUATION IN COLOMBIA

    In light of growing concerns over the situation in Colombia 
and Administration plans to increase the level of U.S. military 
support to Colombia's counter-drug effort, the committee 
received a briefing in closed session on October 6, 1999, from 
officials of the intelligence community, Department of Defense, 
and Department of State. The briefing provided the committee 
with a detailed understanding of the drug trafficking threat in 
Colombia and associated threats in the region. In addition, the 
committee held an open hearing on March 23, 2000, to examine 
U.S. policy toward Colombia, receiving testimony from 
Department of Defense and Department of State officials.

                   THE BOMBING OF THE U.S.S. ``COLE''

    The bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Aden, Yemen on October 
12, 2000, again focused the committee's attention on the threat 
of international terrorism directed against American forces, 
citizens, and interests. Subsequent to the bombing, the 
committee received a series of classified briefings from 
Department of Defense officials on the situation. On October 
25, 2000, the committee held an open hearing with Department of 
Defense and Department of State officials, followed by a closed 
executive session. On October 18, 2000, the House unanimously 
approved a resolution discharged from the committee, H. Res. 
631, honoring the members of the crew of the guided missile 
destroyer U.S.S. Cole who were killed or wounded in the 
terrorist bombing attack on that vessel in Aden, Yemen, on 
October 12, 2000, expressing the sympathies of the House of 
Representatives to the families of those crew members, 
commending the ship's crew for their heroic damage control 
efforts, and condemning the bombing of that ship.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-65)

       Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation

    The Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and 
Recreation was appointed for the 106th Congress on February 5, 
1999.
    The panel conducted two oversight hearings during the 106th 
Congress. The panel's review of the fiscal year 2000 budget 
request for morale, welfare and recreation (MWR) programs was 
conducted on March 10, 1999, while the review of the fiscal 
year 2001 budget request was conducted on March 15, 2000. 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 2000 and 2001 (Public Laws 106-65 and 106-398). These 
included requiring that surcharge trust funds generated by 
commissary patron purchases be used solely for the construction 
and renovation of commissary stores; directing the Department 
of Defense to consider establishing combined exchange and 
commissary stores at closed bases; encouraging service 
secretaries to increase funding for MWR activities; directing a 
review of the impact of slot machine use on military personnel; 
and preventing the Department of Defense from tampering with 
long established nonappropriated fund employee retirement 
programs. Other panel initiatives included expanding of types 
of merchandise that military exchanges may sell; examining 
DeCA's plans to sell scanner data; and reviewing military 
exchange use of consultant services. The panel also continued 
its annual review of the commissary surcharge and 
nonappropriated fund construction program.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-8; H.A.S.C. 106-43)

             Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine

    The Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine was 
appointed for the 106th Congress on February 5, 1999.
    On March 16, 1999, the panel held a hearing to receive 
testimony on the budget request for fiscal year 2000 for the 
Panama Canal Commission and legislative proposals to facilitate 
the orderly transfer of the canal to the government of Panama 
in December 1999. Representatives from the Panama Canal 
Commission testified on these matters. The panel's 
recommendations were adopted by the committee on May 19, 1999 
by voice vote, and were subsequently included, with amendments, 
in title XXXV of Division C of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65).
    During the March 16, 1999, hearing, the panel also received 
testimony on the budget request for the Maritime Administration 
for fiscal year 2000 and legislative proposals. The panel's 
recommendations were adopted by the committee on May 19, 1999, 
by voice vote, and were subsequently included, with amendments, 
in title XXXIV of Division C of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65).
    The panel's oversight responsibilities for the Panama Canal 
Commission ended with the transfer of the canal to the 
government of Panama in December 1999. On February 29, 2000, 
the panel held a hearing to receive testimony on the budget 
request for fiscal year 2001 for the Maritime Administration 
and legislative proposals to facilitate its national defense 
mission. On May 10, 2000, the panel's recommendations on 
authorization levels and legislative provisions affecting the 
Maritime Administration were adopted by voice vote, and were 
subsequentlyincluded with amendments in provisions of the Floyd 
D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 
(Public Law 106-398).
    (H.A.S.C. 106-9, H.A.S.C. 106-49)

     Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization

    The Special Oversight Panel on Department of Energy 
Reorganization was appointed on October 8, 1999, 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 sought to determine whether DOE establishment of 
the NNSA complied with the requirements of the NNSA Act and to 
encourage more complete compliance when the Department's 
actions were found wanting. The Secretary of Energy strongly 
opposed some of the provisions of the NNSA Act, and argued that 
the Act did not provide him enough authority to manage the 
Administration. The President's decision in October 1999 to 
assign the roles and functions of the NNSA Administrator to the 
Secretary indefinitely and to assign other Department of Energy 
personnel to serve concurrently in the Administration (a 
practice known as ``dual-hatting'') reflected this opposition. 
The panel solicited an analysis of these actions by the 
Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS concluded in a report 
submitted to the panel November 1, 1999, that the President was 
legally required to forward a nomination for Administrator in a 
timely fashion, and that dual-hatting ``is plainly contrary to 
the letter and intent of the law.''
    On March 2, 2000, the panel held a hearing with witnesses 
from CRS, the General Accounting Office, and Center for 
Strategic and International Studies. On March 16, 2000, the 
panel took testimony concerning the implementation of Public 
Law 106-65 from the Deputy Secretary of Energy and the Director 
of the Office of Management and Administration of the 
Department of Energy.
    In early June 2000, DOE informed the committee of a new 
security breach at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico. 
This breach led to hearings regarding the management of the 
nuclear weapons complex and implementation of Public Law 106-65 
by the Secretary of Energy. While the special oversight panel 
has no legislative authority, the panel supported full 
committee efforts to craft an effective ban on dual-hatting, 
and other provisions to provide a fixed term of office for the 
first Administrator of the NNSA and restrict the ability of the 
Secretary to reorganize NNSA. These provisions were adopted in 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 
(Public Law 106-398).
    On July 11, 2000, the panel held a hearing with the new 
Administrator of the NNSA. He indicated in his testimony that 
he planned to eliminate dual-hatting, streamline NNSA 
management, and put into place more effective planning, 
programming and budgeting procedures.
    On October 13, 2000, the panel issued a report assessing 
progress toward establishment of the NNSA in the year since 
enactment of Public Law 106-65. The report concluded that 
progress toward full implementation of the law was inhibited by 
obstacles erected by DOE leadership, but that confirmation of 
the Administrator of the NNSA and the removal of some of the 
obstacles established the conditions under which progress could 
be made.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-48; H.A.S.C. 106-58)

                  Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism

    The Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism was appointed for 
the 106th Congress on March 2, 2000. The panel was charged with 
responsibility for conducting oversight on the nature of the 
terrorist threat facing the U.S. national security interests 
and the armed forces, including the threat of terrorism using 
weapons of mass destruction. During the year, the panel focused 
its activities on gaining a greater understanding of 
unconventional terrorist threats, including biological, 
nuclear, and cyberterrorism threats. In addition, the panel 
sought to explore the regional underpinnings of terrorism and 
the threats posed to U.S. interests in various regions of the 
world.
    The panel conducted three closed briefings and three open 
hearings during the 106th Congress. After an initial 
organizational meeting on March 16, 2000, the panel held a 
closed briefing on terrorist threats to the United States on 
May 23, 2000. Additional closed briefings took place on June 
20, 2000, and July 11, 2000, with testimony taken from the U.S. 
intelligence community on regional terrorist threats to U.S. 
interests. The panel also convened in closed session on October 
18, 2000, to take testimony from the intelligence community 
regarding the terrorist attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen. The 
panel's three open hearings were held on May 23, 2000, June 29, 
2000, and July 13, 2000, concerning biological, nuclear, and 
cyberterrorism threats, and threats to U.S. interests in Latin 
America and the Middle East, respectively.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-52; H.A.S.C. 106-56; H.A.S.C. 106-59)
                   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 2000 and fiscal year 2001 budget request 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 106th Congress, which was included in 
division B of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) and division B of the National 
Defense Authorization for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398). 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 on the disposition 
of real property. The subcommittee reported legislation to 
reauthorize the Sikes Act. In its consideration of that 
legislation, the subcommittee took testimony from senior 
officials of the Department of Defense and senior officials and 
active and reserve component officers of the Department of 
Defense, the Department of the Army, the Department of the 
Navy, including the Marine Corps, the Department of the Air 
Force, the General Accounting Office, and members of Congress.
    The subcommittee met on March 9, 1999, and March 16, 2000, 
to conduct oversight hearings on the implementation by the 
Department of Defense and the military departments of the 
Military Housing Privatization Initiative (subchapter IV, 
chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code). In its hearing of 
March 16, 2000, the subcommittee also considered, as a matter 
of oversight, the implementation by the Department of Defense 
and military departments of the utilities infrastructure 
privatization and asset management practices. In both stances, 
the subcommittee took testimony from senior officials of the 
Department of Defense and the military services.
    The subcommittee met on March 16, 1999, to conduct an 
oversight hearing to assess the military construction component 
of the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) and the adequacy of the 
FYDP in addressing future facilities recapitalization and 
modernization requirements. The subcommittee took testimony 
from a senior official of the Department of Defense and senior 
officers of the military services and Admiral Jack E. 
Buffington (retired), Department of Civil Engineering, 
University of Arkansas.
    The subcommittee met on March 16, 1999, to conduct an 
oversight hearing on the use of economic development 
conveyances in the reuse of former military installations and 
proposals to improve the base reuse process. The subcommittee 
took testimony from senior officials from the Department of 
Defense, the General Accounting Office, Mr. Michael Houlemard, 
Executive Officer, Fort Ord Reuse Authority, Mr. Jeffery Simon, 
Board President, National Association of Installation 
Developers, Honorable Gene Stedham, Mayor of the City of 
Anniston, Alabama, Mr. Chris Waddle, Past President, Anniston/
Calhoun County Council of Unified Leadership and members of 
Congress.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-7; H.A.S.C. 106-42)

                    Military Personnel Subcommittee

    The Subcommittee on Military Personnel held a series of 
hearings to review the manpower portion of the fiscal years 
2000 and 2001 defense budget requests and to conduct oversight: 
February 22, 1999, understanding the retention issues; February 
25, 1999, pay and retirement reform issues; March 4, 1999, 
pilot retention--issues and possible solutions; March 10, 1999, 
pharmacy redesign and TRICARE claims processing; March 17, 
1999, report of the Congressional Commission on Military 
Training and Gender-Related Issues; March 18, 1999, recruiting 
issues; September 30, 1999; Department of Defense Anthrax 
Vaccine Immunization Program (AVIP); November 4, 1999, report 
of the United States Commission on National Security/21st 
Century; February 25, 2000, February 28, 2000 and March 15, 
2000, removing the barriers to TRICARE; March 8, 2000 and March 
17, 2000, sustaining the all volunteer force and reserve 
component issues; July 13, 2000, Department of Defense Anthrax 
Vaccine Immunization Program (AVIP); November 28, 2000, 
proposals to transform the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine 
Command (TRADOC). Staff briefings held: February 5, 1999, 
domestic violence in the military service; February 26, 1999, 
military child development system; and September 16, 1999, 
Department of Defense Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program 
(AVIP).
    (H.A.S.C. 106-6; H.A.S.C. 106-22; H.A.S.C. 106-26; H.A.S.C. 
106-41; H.A.S.C. 106-62; H.A.S.C. 106-66)

                   Military Procurement Subcommittee

    The Subcommittee on Military Procurement addressed the 
Department of Defense's (DOD) modernization shortfalls and the 
Department of Energy's (DOE) management and security problems 
by conducting numerous oversight hearings during its 
consideration of the fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001 
budget requests, including: February 11, 1999, protection 
equipment and countermeasure devices; February 23, 1999 (joint 
hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Research and 
Development), information superiority and information 
assurance; February 24, 1999, aging military equipment; March 
3, 1999 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military 
Research and Development), aviation modernization plans; March 
4, 1999, and March 21, 2000, DOE programs; March 9, 1999, 
littoral warfare protection and ship recapitalization; April 
15, 1999, counterintelligence problems at DOE laboratories; 
June 30, 1999, performance of the B-2 bomber in the Kosovo air 
campaign; October 19, 1999, lessons learned from the Kosovo 
conflict-implications for future modernization plans; October 
20, 1999 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military 
Research and Development), chemical and biological weapons 
threat to U.S. forces; October 20, 1999, DOE security issues; 
February 16, 2000 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on 
Military Research and Development), ballistic missile defense 
programs; February 29, 2000, shipbuilding programs; March 9, 
2000 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Research 
and Development), Army programs and transformation; March 14, 
2000 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Military Research 
and Development), Navy programs; March 16, 2000 (joint hearing 
with the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development), 
Air Force programs; June 27, 2000, attack submarine force 
structure modernization plans; September 21, 2000, DOD 
procurement requirements and funding; and September 21, 2000, 
chemical agents and munitions destruction program.
    In addition to these oversight hearings, on June 29, 1999, 
the subcommittee held a joint hearing with the Subcommittee on 
Military Research and Development and with the Subcommittee on 
Space and Aeronautics, Committee on Science, on space range 
modernization.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-3; H.A.S.C. 106-11; H.A.S.C. 106-15; H.A.S.C. 
106-21; H.A.S.C. 106-23; H.A.S.C. 106-24; H.A.S.C. 106-28; 
H.A.S.C. 106-29; H.A.S.C. 106-30; H.A.S.C. 106-36; H.A.S.C. 
106-38; H.A.S.C. 106-50; H.A.S.C. 106-63; 106-64)

                    Military Readiness Subcommittee

    During the 106th Congress, the Subcommittee on Military 
Readiness reviewed the operations and maintenance portion of 
the fiscal years 2000 and 2001 Department of Defense 
authorization requests and held numerous hearings within its 
jurisdiction. Major areas of the subcommittee's examinations 
included: military readiness trends and perspectives; military 
readiness reporting systems and procedures; defense reform 
initiatives; contracting out and privatization initiatives of 
the Department of Defense; repair depot and shipyard 
maintenance issues; Department of Defense acquisition 
workforce; operation and maintenance financial management 
issues; mission capability rates; spare and repair parts 
shortfalls; improving readiness capabilities; military training 
and combat training facilities issues; quarterly readiness 
reports; assessing the readiness of reserve forces; 
environmental restoration and compliance issues; Armed Forces 
Retirement Homes issues; a review of proposed changes and pilot 
programs concerning the movement of household goods of military 
personnel; and issues concerning the Naval Petroleum and Oil 
Shale Reserves and the National Defense Stockpile of strategic 
and critical materials. In addition, the subcommittee conducted 
a series of field hearings at the following locations: Norfolk 
Naval Station, Virginia; Naples, Italy; and Nellis Air Force 
Base, Nevada.
    The subcommittee undertook a detailed and extensive 
examination of issues concerning the outsourcing of information 
technology by the Navy and the Marine Corps to the private 
sector which culminated in a major legislative initiative in 
this area. In addition, the subcommittee conducted an in-depth 
review of the quality of training at the military services' 
combat training centers which culminated in the recommendation 
of significant additional funding for these training centers; 
and a review of the issues concerning the aging civilian 
workforce of the Department of Defense.
    In the second session of the 106th Congress, the 
subcommittee approved a legislative package to permit the 
transfer of the Naval Oil Shale Reserve numbered 2, located in 
Utah, to the Ute Indian Tribe which also provided for the 
potential cleanup of hazardous materials at a former uranium 
mining site at Moab, Utah.
    (H.A.S.C. 106-5; H.A.S.C. 106-18; H.A.S.C. 106-19; H.A.S.C. 
106-25; H.A.S.C. 106-27; H.A.S.C. 106-40; H.A.S.C. 106-45; 
H.A.S.C. 106-57)

             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 2000 and 2001 during the 106th 
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.
    The subcommittee held the following hearings: Defense 
Information Superiority and Information Assurance--Entering the 
21st Century, Ballistic Missile Defense Programs, Service 
Aviation Modernization Plans (joint hearing with the 
Subcommittee on Procurement), Domestic Emergency Preparedness 
for Response to Threats of Terrorist Use of Weapons of Mass 
Destruction, Range modernization (joint hearing with the 
Subcommittee on Procurement and the Committee on Science), 
Range Modernization (joint hearing with the Committee on 
Science), Electromagnetic Pulse Threats to U.S. Military and 
Civilian Infrastructure, Chemical/Biological Defense for U.S. 
Forces, Russian Threat Perceptions And Plans For Sabotage 
Against The United States, Ballistic Missile Defense Programs, 
Defense Wide Research & Development Programs, Information 
Assurance and Information Superiority: Meeting the Challenges 
of the 21st Century, Army Programs and Transformation for 
Fiscal Year 2001 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on 
Procurement), Navy and Marine Corps Modernization Programs for 
Fiscal Year 2001 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on 
Procurement), Air Force Modernization Programs for Fiscal Year 
2001 (joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Procurement), 
Oversight Hearing on the National Ocean Research Leadership 
Council Report, An Integrated Ocean Observing System (joint 
hearing with the Committee on Resources), and National Missile 
Defense--Reviewing the Technical Status.
    The subcommittee also conducted hearings and briefings 
during the 106th Congress to address concerns over inadequate 
future year funding for the service's science and technology 
programs and to conclude efforts initiated during the 104th 
Congress to streamline the Department's ineffective Defense 
Airborne Reconnaissance Office and revitalize the military 
service unmanned aerial vehicles programs. The subcommittee 
also 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 about the serious decline in research and development 
funding, specifically science and technology accounts, which 
are critical to maintaining US 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. 106-4; H.A.S.C. 106-31; H.A.S.C. 106-32; H.A.S.C. 
106-36; H.A.S.C. 106-39; H.A.S.C. 106-45; H.A.S.C. 106-50; 
H.A.S.C. 106-51; H.A.S.C. 106-55)
                              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 106th Congress:
          Title 10, United States Code--Armed Forces (as 
        amended through December 31, 1998).
          Compilation of Defense-Related Federal Laws (other 
        than title 10, United States Code) (as amended through 
        December 31, 1998).
          Laws Relating to Federal Procurement (as amended 
        through December 31, 1999).
    (Committee Prints 2, 3 and 4)

                            Committee Prints

    1. Committee rules, adopted January--20, 1999.
    2. Title 10, United States Code--Armed Forces (as amended 
through December 31, 1998). February 1999.
    3. Compilation of Defense-Related Federal Laws (other than 
title 10, United States Code) (as amended through December 31, 
1998). February 1999.
    4. Laws Relating to Federal Procurement (as amended through 
December 31, 1999). February 2000.
    5. A Ceremony Unveiling the Portrait of The Honorable Floyd 
D. Spence. September 25, 2000.

                         Published Proceedings

    H.A.S.C. 106-1--Full committee hearing on committee 
organization. January 20, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-2--Full Committee hearings on National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000--H.R. 1401 and Oversight 
of Previously Authorized Programs. February 2, 24, March 3, 11, 
17, and 25, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-3--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearings 
on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000--
H.R. 1401 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, 
Title I--Procurement. February 24 and March 9, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-4--Military Research and Development 
Subcommittee hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000--H.R. 1401 and Oversight of Previously 
Authorized Programs, Title II--Research and Development, Test, 
and Evaluation. February 25 and March 11, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-5--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearings on 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000--H.R. 
1401 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, Title 
III--Operation and Maintenance, Volumes 1 and 2. February 24, 
25, 26, March 2, 4, 8, 17, 18, and 22, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-6--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearings on 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000--H.R. 
1401 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. February 22, 25, March 
4, 10, 17, and 18, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-7--Military Installations and Facilities 
Subcommittee hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000--H.R. 1401 and Oversight of Previously 
Authorized Programs, Division B--Military Construction 
Authorizations. February 25, March 2, 9, 16, and July 1, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-8--Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare, 
and Recreation hearing on National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2000--H.R. 1401 and Oversight of Previously 
Authorized Programs. March 10, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-9--Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant 
Marine hearing on the Fiscal Year 2000 Maritime Administration 
request and related matters and the Fiscal Year 2000 (First 
Quarter) Panama Canal Commission authorization request and 
related matters. March 16, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-10--Full Committee hearing on United States 
policy toward Iraq. March 10, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-11--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on protection equipment and countermeasure devices. February 
11, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-12--Full Committee hearing on the United 
States and NATO military operations against the Federal 
Republic of Yugoslavia. April 28, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-13--Full Committee hearing on the United 
States policy toward Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. April 15, 
1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-14--Full Committee hearing on the state of 
United States military forces. January 20, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-15--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on the Department of Defense activities budget for Fiscal Year 
2000 and related matters. March 4, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-16--Full Committee hearing on U.S. encryption 
policy. July 1 and 13, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-17--Full Committee hearing on Department of 
Energy reorganization. June 24 and July 14, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-18--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on 
the readiness of Army AH-64 Apache helicopter fleet. July 1, 
1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-19--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on 
implications concerning the Atlantic Fleet Training Center, 
Vieques, Puerto Rico. September 22, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-20--Full Committee hearing on the Phase One 
Report of the United States Commission on National Security/
21st Century. October 5, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-21--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on the recent counterintelligence problems at Department of 
Energy laboratories. April 15, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-22--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on 
the Department of Defense Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program. 
September 30, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-23--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearings 
on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000--
H.R. 1401 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs. 
February 23 and March 3, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-24--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on the performance of the B-2 Bomber in the Kosovo Air 
Campaign. June 30, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-25--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on 
spare and repair parts shortages. October 7, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-26--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on 
the trends in the U.S. domestic future and implications for 
national security--A report on the National Security Study 
Group, United States Commission on National Security/21st 
Century. November 4, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-27--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on 
operations in Kosovo: problems encountered and lessons learned 
and reconstruction. October 26, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-28--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on Department of Energy security issues. October 20, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-29--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on lessons learned from the Kosovo conflict--the effect of the 
operation on both deployed/non-deployed forces and on future 
modernization plans. October 19, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-30--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on the results of Department of Energy's Inspector General 
inquiries into specific aspects of the espionage investigation 
at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. November 10, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-31--Military Research and Development 
Subcommittee hearing on the electromagnetic pulse threats to 
U.S. military and civilian infrastructure. October 7, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-32--Military Research and Development 
Subcommittee hearing on Russian threat perceptions and plans 
for sabotage against the United States. October 26, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-33--Full Committee hearing on U.S. National 
Missile Defense policy and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. 
October 13, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-34--Full Committee hearing on Military 
Services' posture, readiness, and budget issues. October 21, 
1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-35--Full Committee hearing on U.S. policy 
regarding high-performance computer exports. October 28, 1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-36--Military Research and Development and 
Military Procurement Subcommittees, and Space and Aeronautics 
Subcommittee of the Committee on Science joint hearings on 
range modernization, Parts 1 and 2. March 24, and June 29, 
1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-37--Full Committee hearings on National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--H.R. 4205, and 
Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs. February 9, 10, 
17, March 15, 22, and 23, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-38--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearings 
on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--
H.R. 4205 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, 
Title I--Procurement. February 29 and June 27, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-39--Military Research and Development 
Subcommittee hearing on National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2001--H.R. 4205 and Oversight of Previously 
Authorized Programs, Title II--Research, Development, Test, and 
Evaluation. March 1, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-40--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearings 
on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--
H.R. 4205 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, 
Title III--Operation and Maintenance. February 29, March 1, and 
9, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-41--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearings 
on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--
H.R. 4205 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. February 25, 28, March 
8, 15, and 17, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-42--Military Installations and Facilities 
Subcommittee hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2001--H.R. 4205 and Oversight of Previously 
Authorized Programs, Division B--Military Construction 
Authorizations. March 2, 9, and 16, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-43--Special Oversight Panel on Morale, 
Welfare, and Recreation hearing on National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--H.R. 4205 and Oversight 
of Previously Authorized Programs. March 15, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-44--Full Committee hearing on Military 
Services' posture, readiness, and budget issues. September 27, 
2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-45--Military Research and Development 
Subcommittee and Military Readiness Subcommittee joint hearing 
on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--
H.R. 4205 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs, 
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation and Title 
III--Operation and Maintenance. March 8, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-46--Full Committee hearing on the adequacy of 
the defense budget. February 8, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-47--Full Committee hearing on the 
implementation of Title XXXII of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000. March 2, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-48--Special Oversight Panel on Department of 
Energy Reorganization hearings on National Nuclear Security 
Administration. March 2 and 16, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-49--Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant 
Marine hearing on Fiscal Year 2001 Maritime Administration 
authorization request and related matters. February 29, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-50--Military Procurement Subcommittee and 
Military Research and Development Subcommittee joint hearing on 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--Title 
I--Procurement and Title II--Research, Development, Test, and 
Evaluation. February 16, March 9, 14, and 16, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-51--Military Procurement Subcommittee and 
Military Research and Development Subcommittee joint hearing on 
chemical and biological defense for U.S. forces. October 20, 
1999.
    H.A.S.C. 106-52--Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism 
hearing on terrorist threats to the United States. May 23, 
2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-53--Full Committee hearing on China's 
strategic intentions and goals. June 21, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-54--Full Committee hearing on security 
failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory. June 14, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-55--Military Research and Development 
Subcommittee hearing on National Missile Defense: Reviewing its 
technical status. June 22, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-56--Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism 
hearing on terrorism and threats to U.S. interests in Latin 
America. June 29, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-57--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on 
defense logistics reengineering initiatives. June 27, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-58--Special Oversight Panel on Department of 
Energy Reorganization hearing on status of National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA). July 11, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-59--Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism 
hearing on terrorism and threats to U.S. interests in the 
Middle East. July 13, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-60--Full Committee hearing on U.S. plans and 
policy regarding National Missile Defense. June 28, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-61--Full Committee hearing on military 
capabilities of the People's Republic of China. July 19, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-62--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on 
Department of Defense Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program 
(AVIP). July 13, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-63--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on the status of military procurement requirements and funding. 
September 21, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-64--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing 
on Department of Defense Chemical Agents and Munitions 
Destruction Program. September 21, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-65--Full Committee hearing on the attack on 
U.S.S. Cole. October 25, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-66--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on 
proposals to transform the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine 
Command (TRADOC). November 28, 2000.
    H.A.S.C. 106-67--Department of Energy budget request 
(defense programs) for fiscal year 2001 and related matters. 
March 21, 2000.
                             HOUSE REPORTS


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Report number                    Date filed                    Bill number                  Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
106-39, part 1...............  Mar. 2, 1999.................  H.R. 4......................  To declare it to be
                                                                                             the policy of the
                                                                                             United States to
                                                                                             deploy a national
                                                                                             missile defense.
106-117, part 4..............  July 23, 1999................  H.R. 850....................  To amend title 18,
                                                                                             United States Code,
                                                                                             to affirm the
                                                                                             rights of United
                                                                                             States persons to
                                                                                             use and sell
                                                                                             Encryption and to
                                                                                             relax export
                                                                                             Controls on
                                                                                             encryption.
106-162......................  May 24, 1999.................  H.R. 1401...................  To authorize
                                                                                             appropriations for
                                                                                             fiscal years 2000
                                                                                             and 2001 for
                                                                                             military activities
                                                                                             of the Department
                                                                                             of Defense, to
                                                                                             prescribe military
                                                                                             personnel strengths
                                                                                             for fiscal years
                                                                                             2000 and 2001, and
                                                                                             for other purposes.
106-301......................  Aug. 6, 1999.................  H.R. 1401 Conf. Rept........  To authorize
                                                                                             appropriations for
                                                                                             fiscal years 2000
                                                                                             and 2001 for
                                                                                             military activities
                                                                                             of the Department
                                                                                             of Defense, to
                                                                                             prescribe military
                                                                                             personnel strengths
                                                                                             for fiscal years
                                                                                             2000 and 2001, and
                                                                                             for other purposes.
106-616......................  May 12, 1999.................  H.R. 4205...................  To authorize
                                                                                             appropriations for
                                                                                             fiscal year 2001
                                                                                             for military
                                                                                             activities of the
                                                                                             Department of
                                                                                             Defense, to
                                                                                             prescribe military
                                                                                             Personnel strengths
                                                                                             for fiscal year
                                                                                             2001, and for other
                                                                                             purposes.
106-694, part 2..............  July 21, 1999................  H.R. 4446...................  To ensure that the
                                                                                             Secretary of Energy
                                                                                             may continue to
                                                                                             exercise Certain
                                                                                             authorities under
                                                                                             the Price-Anderson
                                                                                             Act through the
                                                                                             Assistant Secretary
                                                                                             of Energy for
                                                                                             Environment,
                                                                                             Safety, and Health.
106-695, part 2..............  July 21, 1999................  H.R. 3383...................  To amend the Atomic
                                                                                             Energy Act of 1954
                                                                                             to remove separate
                                                                                             treatment or
                                                                                             exemption for
                                                                                             nuclear safety
                                                                                             violations by
                                                                                             nonprofit
                                                                                             institutions.
106-696, part 2..............  July 12, 1999................  H.R. 3906...................  To ensure that the
                                                                                             Department of
                                                                                             Energy has
                                                                                             appropriate
                                                                                             mechanisms to
                                                                                             independently
                                                                                             assess the
                                                                                             effectiveness of
                                                                                             its policy and site
                                                                                             performance in the
                                                                                             areas of safeguards
                                                                                             and security and
                                                                                             cyber security
106-730......................  July 12, 2000................  H. Res. 534.................  Expressing the sense
                                                                                             of the House of
                                                                                             Representatives
                                                                                             that the recent
                                                                                             nuclear weapons
                                                                                             security failures
                                                                                             at Los Alamos
                                                                                             National Laboratory
                                                                                             demonstrate that
                                                                                             security policy and
                                                                                             security procedures
                                                                                             within the National
                                                                                             Nuclear Security
                                                                                             Administration
                                                                                             remain inadequate,
                                                                                             that the
                                                                                             individuals
                                                                                             responsible for
                                                                                             such policy and
                                                                                             procedure must be
                                                                                             held accountable
                                                                                             for their
                                                                                             performance, and
                                                                                             that immediate
                                                                                             action must be
                                                                                             taken to correct
                                                                                             security
                                                                                             deficiencies.
106-945......................  Oct. 6, 2000.................  H.R. 4205 Conf. Rept........  To authorize
                                                                                             appropriations for
                                                                                             fiscal year 2001
                                                                                             for military
                                                                                             activities of the
                                                                                             Department of
                                                                                             Defense, to
                                                                                             prescribe military
                                                                                             Personnel strengths
                                                                                             for fiscal year
                                                                                             2001, and for other
                                                                                             purposes.
106-1035, part 1.............  Dec. 15, 2000................  H.R. 4737...................  To require an
                                                                                             inventory of
                                                                                             documents and
                                                                                             devices containing
                                                                                             Restricted Data at
                                                                                             the national
                                                                                             security
                                                                                             laboratories of the
                                                                                             Department of
                                                                                             Energy, to improve
                                                                                             security procedures
                                                                                             for access to the
                                                                                             vaults containing
                                                                                             Restricted Data at
                                                                                             those laboratories,
                                                                                             and for other
                                                                                             purposes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Public Laws


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Law number                   Date approved                   Bill number                  Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
106-38.......................  July 22, 1999................  H.R. 4......................  To declare it to be
                                                                                             the policy of the
                                                                                             United States to
                                                                                             deploy a national
                                                                                             missile defense.
106-65.......................  Oct. 5, 1999.................  H.R. 1401 (S. 1059).........  To authorize
                                                                                             appropriations for
                                                                                             fiscal years 2000
                                                                                             and 2001 for
                                                                                             military activities
                                                                                             of the Department
                                                                                             of Defense, to
                                                                                             prescribe military
                                                                                             personnel strengths
                                                                                             for fiscal years
                                                                                             2000 and 2001, and
                                                                                             for other purposes
106-120......................  Dec. 3, 1999.................  H.R. 1555...................  To authorize
                                                                                             appropriations for
                                                                                             fiscal year 2000
                                                                                             for intelligence
                                                                                             and intelligence-
                                                                                             related activities
                                                                                             of the United
                                                                                             States Government,
                                                                                             the Community
                                                                                             Management Account,
                                                                                             and the Central
                                                                                             Intelligence Agency
                                                                                             Retirement and
                                                                                             Disability System,
                                                                                             and for other
                                                                                             purposes.
106-195......................  May 2, 2000..................  H.J. Res. 86................  Recognizing the 50th
                                                                                             anniversary of the
                                                                                             Korean War and the
                                                                                             service by members
                                                                                             of the Armed
                                                                                             Services during
                                                                                             such war, and for
                                                                                             other purposes.
106-227......................  June 29, 2000................  H.J. Res. 101...............  Recognizing the
                                                                                             225th Birthday of
                                                                                             the United States
                                                                                             Army.
106-398......................  Oct. 30, 2000................  H.R. 4205...................  To authorize
                                                                                             appropriations for
                                                                                             fiscal year 2001
                                                                                             for military
                                                                                             activities of the
                                                                                             Department of
                                                                                             Defense, for
                                                                                             military
                                                                                             construction, and
                                                                                             for defense
                                                                                             activities for the
                                                                                             Department of
                                                                                             Energy, to
                                                                                             prescribe personnel
                                                                                             strengths for such
                                                                                             fiscal year of the
                                                                                             Armed Forces, and
                                                                                             for other purposes.
106-419......................  Nov. 1, 2000.................  S. 1402.....................  To amend title 38,
                                                                                             United States Code,
                                                                                             to enhance programs
                                                                                             providing education
                                                                                             benefits for
                                                                                             veterans, and for
                                                                                             other purposes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             PRESS RELEASES

                             First Session

    January 7, 1999--Chairman Spence Announces Leadership of 
the House Armed Services Committee.
    January 20, 1999--Chairman Spence's Remarks upon 
Organization of the Armed Services Committee.
    January 20, 1999--Chairman Spence's Opening Statement at 
Full Committee Hearing with General Shelton and the Service 
Chiefs.
    January 25, 1999--Chairman Spence and Ranking Member 
Skelton Announce Subcommittee Assignments.
    February 1999--National Security Report--The FY2000 Defense 
Budget: Gambling with America's Defense.
    February 1, 1999--The President's Defense Budget: Short of 
the Requirement and High on Risk.
    February 2, 1999--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full 
Committee Hearing on FY 2000 Budget Hearing with Secretary 
Cohen and General Shelton.
    February 5, 1999--Chairman Spence and Ranking Member 
Skelton Announce Panel Assignments.
    February 18, 1999--Press Advisory: House Armed Services 
Subcommittee to Conduct Field Hearing in Norfolk, VA.
    February 19, 1999--Press Advisory: House Armed Services 
Subcommittee to Conduct Field Hearing at Nellis, Air Force 
Base.
    February 24, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing with Service Chiefs.
    February 24, 1999--Chairman Spence Calls State of Aging and 
Obsolete Equipment ``Irresponsible''.
    February 25, 1999--Service Chiefs: Ability to Execute 
National Military Strategy Remains ``High-Risk''.
    February 25, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Markup of H.R. 4.
    February 25, 1999--Armed Services Committee Reports 
Bipartisan National Missile Defense Policy Bill.
    February 25, 1999--H.R. 4: A Bill Declaring it to be the 
Policy of the United States to Deploy a National Missile 
Defense.
    March 2, 1999--House Armed Services Subcommittee to Assess 
the Readiness of U.S. Military Forces in Europe at Field 
Hearing at Naples, Italy.
    March 3, 1999--Chairman Spence Calls for Increased Defense 
Spending to Address Critical Unfunded Requirements.
    March 3, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Hearing with Admiral Blair and General Tilelli.
    March 10, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy on Iraq (Day 1 of 2).
    March 11, 1999--Spence on Kosovo: ``The Wrong Commitment at 
the Wrong Time for the Wrong Reasons''.
    March 11, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy on Iraq (Day 2 of 2).
    March 11, 1999--Chairman Spence Appoints House Armed 
Services Committee Vice-Chairs.
    March 16, 1999--House Armed Services Subcommittee to 
Conduct Field Hearing in Norfolk.
    March 17, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy in the Balkans.
    March 24, 1999--Floor Statement of Chairman Spence on the 
Resolution in Support of U.S. Troops in Operations Against 
Yugoslavia.
    March 25, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing with Service Secretaries.
    April 1999--Military Readiness Review--Kosovo and the 
National Military Strategy: The costs of doing more with less.
    April 10, 1999--Chairman Spence Leads Delegation to 
Macedonia.
    April 15, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing with Secretary Cohen and General Shelton 
on Kosovo.
    April 28, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing with Outside Witnesses on Options in 
Kosovo.
    April 28, 1999--Floor Statement of Chairman Spence on H.R. 
1569: A Bill Prohibiting the use of DOD Funds for U.S. Ground 
Forces in Yugoslavia.
    May 1999--Defense Quotables--Military Readiness: The Strain 
is Showing.
    May 5, 1999--Spence Questions Utility of Some Cooperative 
Threat Reduction Projects.
    May 19, 1999--House Armed Services Committee Reports H.R. 
1401: FY 2000 National Defense Authorization Bill.
    May 19, 1999--Chairman Spence's Statement and Summary of 
H.R. 1401 as Reported.
    May 19, 1999--Correction to Summary of H.R. 1401.
    May 19, 1999--H.R. 1401 as Reported by the House Armed 
Services Committee.
    May 20, 1999--Statement of Chairman Spence on H.R. 4: The 
National Missile Defense Act of 1999.
    May 25, 1999--Spence Reaction on Release of the Cox 
Committee Report.
    June 9, 1999--Floor Statement of Chairman Spence on H.R. 
1401: FY 2000 National Defense Authorization Act.
    June 10, 1999--House Approves Funding to Improve Military 
Quality of Life, Readiness and Equipment Modernization 
Programs.
    June 24, 1999--Statement of Chairman Spence on the 
President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board on the Security 
Problems at the U.S. Department of Energy.
    June 30, 1999--Kosovo Backgrounder.
    July 1999--Military Readiness Review--The U.S. Air Force 
and Kosovo: Readiness strained to the limit.
    July 1, 1999--Statement of Chairman Spence on H.R. 850: a 
Bill to Amend Title 18, United States Code, to Affirm the 
Rights of United States Persons to Use and Sell Encryption and 
to Relax Export Controls on Encryption.
    July 13, 1999--Statement of Chairman Spence on H.R. 850, a 
bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to affirm the 
rights of United States persons to use and sell encryption and 
to relax export controls on encryption.
    July 14, 1999--Statement of Chairman Spence on Department 
of Energy Reorganization.
    July 21, 1999--Armed Services Committee Adopts Amendment to 
Encryption Bill Ensuring That National Security, Law 
Enforcement Remain Priority.
    July 21, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Markup of H.R. 850.
    July 21, 1999--Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to 
H.R. 850 Adopted by the House Armed Services Committee.
    August 1999--National Security Report--Communiques and 
Treaties are Poor Shields: Implications of the U.S.-Russian 
Joint Statement on the ABM and START III Treaties.
    August 5, 1999--Conferees Reach Agreement on FY 2000 
Defense Authorization Bill.
    August 5, 1999--House, Senate Reach Agreement on Energy 
Department Reorganization.
    September 1999--National Security Report--Reforming the 
Department of Energy: Safeguarding America's Nuclear Secrets.
    September 1999--Defense Quotables--Department of Energy: 
Time for Reform.
    September 15, 1999--Prepared Remarks of Chairman Floyd 
Spence on Conference Report.
    October 5, 1999--President Endorses Congressional Actions 
on Defense Bill.
    October 5, 1999--Spence Appoints Panel to Oversee 
Implementation of DOE Reorganization.
    October 5, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on Hart-Rudman Commission Report.
    October 12, 1999--Spence to President: Signing Statement 
Inconsistent with Law, Will Delay Overdue DOE Management and 
Nuclear Security Reforms.
    October 13, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on U.S National Missile Defense Policy 
and the ABM Treaty.
    October 19, 1999--Statement of Chairman Spence on Vieques: 
Critical to Military Readiness.
    October 20, 1999--Statement of Chairman Spence: 
Supercomputer Export Review Process Works.
    October 20, 1999--GAO Report NSIAD-99-208--Export Controls: 
1998 Legislative Mandate for High Performance Computers.
    October 21, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing with Military Service Chiefs.
    October 28, 1999--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy on Supercomputer Exports.
    November 18, 1999--Defense Accomplishments of the 104th, 
105th, and 106th Congresses.

                             Second Session

    February 2000--Department of Energy National Nuclear 
Security Administration Implementation Plan: An Assessment.
    February 2000--National Security Report--The Fiscal Year 
2001 Defense Budget: The Mismatch between Strategy, Resources, 
and Forces Continues.
    February 2, 2000--Spence Announces HASC Staff Director's 
Departure.
    February 8, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on the CSIS ``Defense Train Wreck'' 
Report.
    February 9, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2001 National Defense 
Authorization Budget Request.
    February 10, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
the Full Committee Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2001 National 
Defense Authorization Budget Request with Military Service 
Chiefs.
    February 16, 2000--Opening Statement of Subcommittee 
Chairman Weldon at the Joint Procurement and Research & 
Development Subcommittees Hearing on Ballistic Missile Defense 
Programs.
    February 17, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
the Full Committee Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2001 National 
Defense Authorization Budget Request with General Wesley Clark.
    February 18, 2000--House Armed Services Committee to 
Conduct Field Hearing at Grissom Air Force Base, Indiana.
    February 22, 2000--House Armed Services Committee to 
Conduct Field Hearing at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
    February 28, 2000--Spence Calls for Increased Defense 
Spending to Address Critical Unfunded Requirements.
    February 29, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Bateman at 
Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine hearing on the 
FY 2001 Maritime Administration Authorization Request and 
Related Matters.
    February 29, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Bateman at 
Military Readiness Subcommittee Hearing on the Adequacy of the 
FY 2001 Budget Request to Meet Readiness Needs.
    February 29, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Military Procurement Subcommittee Hearing on Navy Shipbuilding 
Programs.
    March 2000--Military Readiness Review--Vieques Training 
Facilities: Vital to U.S. military readiness.
    March 1, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Weldon at 
Military Research & Development Hearing on Defense-Wide 
Research and Development Programs.
    March 1, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Bateman at 
Military Readiness Subcommittee Hearing on Real Property 
Maintenance and Infrastructure Funding.
    March 3, 2000--Chairman Spence Appoints Committee Panel to 
Assess Terrorist Threats.
    March 3, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hefley at 
Military Installations & Facilities Subcommittee Hearing on the 
FY 2001 Budget Request for Military Construction and Military 
Family Housing of the Department of Defense.
    March 3, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Hearing on Implementation of Department of Energy 
Reorganization and Reforms Contained in Title XXXII of the FY 
2000 National Defense Authorization Act.
    March 8, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Bateman at 
Military Readiness and Research & Development Subcommittees 
Hearing on Information Superiority and Information Assurance.
    March 8, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Weldon at 
Military Readiness and Research & Development Subcommittees 
Hearing on Information Superiority and Information Assurance.
    March 8, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Buyer at 
Military Personnel Subcommittee Hearing on the All Volunteer 
Force and Reserve Component Overview.
    March 9, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Military Procurement and Research & Development Subcommittees 
Hearing on Army Programs and Transformation.
    March 9, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Weldon at 
Military Procurement and Research & Development Subcommittees 
Hearing on Army Programs and Transformation.
    March 9, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Bateman at 
Military Readiness and Civil Service Subcommittees Hearing on 
Civilian Personnel Readiness.
    March 9, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hefley at 
Military Installations & Facilities Subcommittee Hearing on the 
FY 2001 Budget Request for DOD Military Construction and Family 
Housing Programs.
    March 14, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Military Procurement and Research & Development Subcommittees 
Hearing on Navy and Marine Corps Programs.
    March 15, 2000--GAO Report Raises Questions About Usage of 
Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds.
    March 15, 2000--GAO Report--Cooperative Threat Reduction: 
DOD's 1997-98 Reports on Accounting for Assistance were Late 
and Incomplete.
    March 15, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing with the Regional Commanders on the FY 
2001 Budget Request.
    March 15, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman McHugh at 
Morale, Welfare & Recreation Panel Hearing on Resale Systems 
and Programs.
    March 15, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Buyer at 
Personnel Subcommittee Hearing on Removing the Barriers to 
TRICARE.
    March 16, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hefley at 
Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee Hearing on 
Implementation of the Military Housing Privatization 
Initiative, Utilities Infrastructure Privatization, and Asset 
Management Practices of the Military Departments.
    March 16, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Military Procurement and Research & Development Subcommittees 
Hearing on Air Force Programs.
    March 16, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Weldon at 
Military Procurement and Research & Development Subcommittees 
Hearing on Air Force Programs.
    March 21, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Military Procurement Subcommittee Hearing on the Department of 
Energy FY 2001 Budget Request for Defense Programs and Related 
Matters.
    March 22, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on the FY 2001 National Defense 
Authorization Act.
    March 23, 2000--Spence Reacts to Patriot Missile (PAC-2) 
Failure.
    March 23, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy Towards Colombia.
    April 13, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman McHugh at 
Morale, Welfare & Recreation Panel Consideration of H.R. 4205: 
FY 2001 National Defense Authorization Act.
    April 19, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence on Release of 
the Commission on National Security/21st Century Phase II 
Report.
    May 2000--National Security Report--China in the 
Ascendancy: A Growing Threat to U.S. Security?
    May 2, 2000--Statement of Chairman Hefley at Military 
Installations and Facilities Subcommittee Markup of H.R. 4205.
    May 3, 2000--GAO Report: CTR Biological Weapon 
Proliferation Prevention Program ``Poses New Risks'' to the 
United States.
    May 3, 2000--GAO Report: Biological Weapons: Effort to 
Reduce Former Soviet Threat Offers Benefits, Poses New Risks.
    May 4, 2000--Statement of Chairman Bateman at Military 
Readiness Subcommittee Markup of H.R. 4205.
    May 4, 2000--Statement of Chairman Buyer at Military 
Personnel Subcommittee Markup of H.R. 4205.
    May 4, 2000--Chart Summary of Personnel Subcommittee Mark.
    May 9, 2000--Statement of Chairman Hunter at Military 
Procurement Subcommittee Markup of H.R. 4205.
    May 9, 2000--Statement of Chairman Weldon at Military 
Research & Development Subcommittee Markup of H.R. 4205.
    May 10, 2000--H.R. 4205: The National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2001--Summary of Committee Markup.
    May 10, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence at Markup.
    May 10, 2000--Statement of Chairman Hefley at Markup.
    May 10, 2000--Statement of Chairman McHugh at Markup.
    May 10, 2000--Statement of Chairman Bateman at Markup.
    May 10, 2000--Statement of Chairman Buyer at Markup.
    May 15, 2000--GAO Report on ``Volatile'' Balkans Raises 
Further Questions About U.S. Military Involvement in the 
Region.
    May 15, 2000--GAO Report: Balkans Security--Current and 
Projected Factors Affecting Regional Stability.
    May 17, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence at General Floor 
Debate on H.R. 4205.
    May 17, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence on Dreier 
Amendment at General Floor Debate on H.R. 4205.
    May 18, 2000--House Approves Funding to Improve Military 
Quality of Life, Readiness and Equipment Modernization 
Programs.
    May 18, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence on Moakley 
Amendment at General Floor Debate on H.R. 4205.
    May 23, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Saxton at 
Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism Hearing on Terrorist 
Threats to the United States.
    May 25, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Weldon at Joint 
Military Research & Development and Fisheries, Conservation, 
Wildlife & Oceans (Resources Committee) Hearing on the 
Integrated Ocean Observing System.
    June 5, 2000--Congress Appoints Members to Commission to 
Assess United States National Security Space Management and 
Organization.
    June 13, 2000--Statement of Chairman Floyd Spence on H.J. 
Res. 101: Commemorating the Army's 225th Birthday.
    June 14, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Hearing on Security Failures at the Los Alamos 
National Laboratory.
    June 21, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Hearing on Strategic Intentions and Goals of China.
    June 21, 2000--Press Advisory: Press Conference on DOD 
Management of Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program.
    June 22, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Weldon at 
Research & Development Subcommittee Hearing on the Technical 
Status of the National Missile Defense Program.
    June 27, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Bateman at 
Readiness Subcommittee Hearing on Defense Logistics 
Reengineering Initiatives.
    June 27, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Procurement Subcommittee Hearing on Submarine Force Structure 
and Modernization.
    June 28, 2000--Armed Services Committee Calls for Clear 
Accountability on Nuclear Weapons Security.
    June 28, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Mark Up of H. Res. 534 and H.R. 3906, 4446, 3383 and 
4737.
    June 28, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence on H. Res. 534.
    June 28, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence on H.R. 3906.
    June 28, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence on H.R. 4446.
    June 28, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Hearing on the National Missile Defense Program.
    July 13, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Buyer at 
Military Personnel Hearing on DOD Management of the Anthrax 
Vaccine Immunization Program.
    July 13, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Saxton at 
Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism Hearing on Threats to U.S. 
Interests in the Middle East.
    July 17, 2000--House Committed to Protecting Nuclear Weapon 
Secrets at the Department of Energy.
    July 17, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
House Floor Consideration of H. Res. 534.
    July 19, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at Full 
Committee Hearing on Military Capabilities of the People's 
Republic of China.
    August 17, 2000--GAO Report ``Heightens Concerns'' about 
Stockpile Stewardship Program and Department of Energy 
Management of National Ignition Facility.
    August 17, 2000--GAO Report: National Ignition Facility--
Management and Oversight Failures Caused Major Cost Overruns 
and Schedule Delays.
    September 2000--National Security Report--National Missile 
Defense: Countering the Ballistic Missile Threat.
    September 1, 2000--Delay of National Missile Defense System 
will ``Increase Risk to Americans''.
    September 11, 2000--Chairman Spence on the Death of 
Representative Herb Bateman.
    September 21, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Military Procurement Hearing on the DOD Chemical Agents and 
Munitions Destruction Program.
    September 21, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Hunter at 
Military Procurement Hearing on the Status of Military 
Procurement Requirements and Funding.
    September 27, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on Readiness and Service Budgets.
    October 5, 2000--GAO Report: Department of Defense Fails to 
Cut Headquarters Staff Levels.
    October 5, 2000--GAO Report: Defense Headquarters--Status 
of Efforts to Redefine and Reduce Headquarters Staff.
    October 6, 2000--H.R. 4205: The National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001--Summary of Conference 
Agreement.
    October 6, 2000--Keeping Faith with America's Veterans.
    October 6, 2000--Congress Approves Compensation Plan for 
Nuclear Weapons Workers.
    October 11, 2000--Floor Statement of Chairman Floyd Spence 
on the Conference Report on H.R. 4205--FY 2001 National Defense 
Authorization Act.
    October 12, 2000--House Armed Services Committee Adopts 
Motion Condemning Attack on U.S.S. Cole.
    October 13, 2000--``One Year Later, Slow Progress for DOE 
Reform,'' says Special Nuclear Security Oversight Panel.
    October 13, 2000--Panel Report: Establishing the National 
Nuclear Security Administration: A Year of Obstacles and 
Opportunities.
    October 18, 2000--Prepared Floor Statement of Chairman 
Spence-Resolution Regarding the Attack on the U.S.S. Cole.
    October 25, 2000--Opening Statement of Chairman Spence at 
Full Committee Hearing on the Bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.
    November 21, 2000--Statement of Chairman Spence on Florida 
Disqualified Military Absentee Ballots.
    November 28, 2000--Statement of Chairman Buyer at Personnel 
Subcommittee Hearing on Proposals to Transform TRADOC.

                                
