volve all of these performers. The Navy already employs a number of strategies to shorten the time between R&D and acquisition efforts.

One step I have taken to ensure a more expeditious insertion of R&D into acquisition is to create the position of Navy Chief Technology Officer (CTO). The CTO will facilitate introduction of developing technologies into the Navy's major acquisition programs and will also assess the impact of developing technologies on the future of Naval warfare.

Another avenue we are taking to shorten R&D to acquisition time can be found in the joint management of the DD 21 related science and technology efforts by the DD 22 Program Executive Office and the Office of Naval Research. This relationship will allow the Navy to focus S&T development efforts, normally undertaken before acquisition, toward a common objective-DD 21. This initiative coordinates traditional pre-acquisition R&D, such as advanced technology demonstrations, with technology requirements.

The Navy Manufacturing Technology (MANTECH) program is an important element of our acquisition strategy to improve industrial productivity and make our weapon systems and platforms more affordable. Our goal is to reduce acquisition costs by developing and utilizing manufacturing, cost-containment, and life-cycle support technologies. Reducing risk inherent in the transition from R&D to production is the primary consideration of the MANTECH Centers of Excellence.

In the Navy technology transfer program, Navy developed technology is transferred to other government organizations, laboratories, contractors, or commercial enterprises. Emphasis is usually placed on the transfer of Navy, developed technology to commercial enterprises to strengthen the U.S. industrial base. Another aspect is the transfer and acceptance of commercial off-the-shelf technology for government use to reduce the cost of items purchased by the government. A final aspect of technology transfer is the development of Dual-Use S&T that provides incentive funding to attract commercial partners. The program satisfies both parties by sharing risks and costs and returning products and processes that have military and civilian uses.

Another avenue we take to bring S&T products to the Fleet and possibly into acquisition is found in the Naval Science Assistance Program (NSAP). NSAP serves as a two-way bridge between the warfighter and the technical community. NSAP rapidly transitions new technological capabilities that have successfully completed science and technology demonstrations but are not yet in the acquisition portfolio. Over the past 2 fiscal years, more than 90 products have been developed and inserted into the Fleets/Forces as a result of NSAP.

LABORATORY PERSONNEL REGULATIONS

Senator LIEBERMAN. Secretary Hoeper, The Defense Science Board report has criticized the lab-personnel regulations as being a major obstacle to the attraction and retention of talented individuals. With the industrial market for those individuals heating up substantially, particularly in such defense-critical fields as information technology, how can Department of Defense not only hold its own, but beat out the competition?

Secretary HOEPER. I would agree that personnel regulations have been perceived as the source of the quality problems that the Defense Science Board alludes to. However, the government pay scales, particularly those in the science and engineering fields of the Defense Department, did not keep pace with the severe inflation of the late seventies and eighties. We lost a lot of our talent during that period. The salary differentials resulting from that period were never fully narrowed. In addition, the market place has changed. As you rightfully point out, personnel with information technology backgrounds are in great demand today. We have, however, taken great strides within the last 2 years to improving the Title V Civil Service personnel regulations through our laboratory personnel demonstrations. The Army Team, which led this effort, won the coveted Hammer Award from Vice President Gore's National Performance Review for Reinventing Government. In addition, this problem has been addressed within other parts of the Federal Government. The Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as the Department of Defense, have faced shortages of physicians, dentists, and other medical skills. The law allows the government to pay market rates in those shortage categories. My staff is currently working closely with staff of the Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs and our laboratories to explore options, to include legislative proposals, to address this issue of comparability pay. We cannot contract out for all services, and we must retain our smart buyer capability, particularly in critical shortage categories such as the computer and information sciences.

[Whereupon, at 4:55 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM

TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 1999

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS

AND CAPABILITIES,

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES,

Washington, DC.

THE THREAT OF INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND THE ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE IN THE NATION'S WAR ON DRUGS

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:39 p.m., in room SR-222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Pat Roberts (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Committee members present: Senators Roberts, Snowe, and Bingaman.

Committee staff member present: Todd L. Payne, special assist

ant.

Professional staff member present: Cord A Sterling.

Minority staff members present: David S. Lyles, staff director for the minority, and Richard D. DeBobes, minority counsel.

Staff assistant present: Sharen E. Reaves.

Committee members' assistants present: Patrick F. McCartan, assistant to Senator Snowe; Robert Alan McCurry, assistant to Senator Roberts; Arch Galloway, II, assistant to Senator Sessions; G. Wayne Glass, assistant to Senator Bingaman; Terrence E. Sauvain, assistant to Senator Byrd; and Frederick M. Downey, assistant to Senator Lieberman.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PAT ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN Senator ROBERTS. The subcommittee will come to order.

Prior to my opening statement, let me say we feel very privileged to have in the audience Ambassador Enrique Ackerman, from Bolivia. Ambassador, would you stand so we could welcome you. Thank you, sir.

I have a prepared statement that should not go over 2 or 3 minutes, and then Senator Bingaman will be joining us and we will proceed with the hearing.

Over the past several years, the international trafficking of illegal narcotics has led to an increased threat to the vital national se

curity interests of the United States. Although narcotics have always posed a threat to American lives, with thousands of deaths each year linked to these controlled substances, this has largely been a threat that was best combatted by law enforcement, and law enforcement agencies and drug treatment programs.

However, with the growing links between the large narcotics traffickers and other criminal and terrorist organizations, the threat has now evolved into a national security problem. Let me repeat that, a national security problem. It requires the combined efforts of many local, State and Federal agencies, including the United States armed forces.

The requirement for military participation is particularly true today, as revenues from the narcotics trade are providing the means by which many organizations, such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-the acronym there is FARC—is challenging the control of elected governments over their sovereign territory. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for these governments to protect individuals and lives and property.

For example, in Colombia, the FARC has been linked to the killing of Colombian citizens, as well as Americans. Furthermore, the FARC has attacked oil pipelines in the region, resulting in the destruction of countless barrels of oil. With the increasing regional power and influence of the FARC, in particular, as its operations spread into Ecuador and Venezuela, America's foreign supplier of oil, it will be able to significantly disrupt U.S. energy supply.

Moreover, with the expansion of the FARC into Panama, it is quickly placing itself in a position, with the departure of U.S. military forces from the Canal Zone, to disrupt the operations of the Panama Canal if it so desires.

Finally, the lure of significant profits from narcotrafficking has helped to build smuggling operations that could be used by terrorists seeking to introduce all sorts of weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, into the United States. As a matter of fact, as an aside, several weeks ago, when I went into the Southern Command area, I asked one of the military officers there how best would a foreign entity, or even a non-nation-state actor, how best could they smuggle a weapon of mass destruction into the country. He said: With a cocaine shipment. I think that really demonstrates how serious it is.

Dismantling these operations, whether they are of Latin American or Asia origin, is instrumental in ensuring the safety and security of Americans at home. In order to disable these smuggling operations and disrupt narco-funded attacks on American citizens and energy supplies and essential transportation networks, it is necessary to increase the cost dramatically-increase the cost-of drug trafficking and thereby reduce its attraction.

To achieve this, a combination of demand reduction, drug interdiction, and source zone eradication, which can only be achieved by host nations with sovereign control of their territory, is required. The armed forces of the United States are in a unique position to assist America's counternarcotics efforts in both drug interdiction and source zone eradication. For interdiction activities, the military services have the necessary assets to provide for the detection and monitoring of suspected narcotraffickers in the source and in the

transit zone. The military also has the assets to assist the Coast Guard where necessary in the interdiction of these suspected traffickers.

In order to facilitate source zone eradication, the military services have the skills necessary to help train appropriate foreign security forces so that they are able to defeat the narcotraffickers and their allies, and thus regain and retain control of their territory. On our first panel, we are pleased to have General Barry McCaffrey, the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. General McCaffrey is in a unique position to outline the threat of drug trafficking in general, and the appropriate role that he, as the individual responsible for the coordination of America's counternarcotics efforts and visions for the U.S. military.

We will then here from General Charles Wilhelm, the Commander-in-Chief of the United States Southern Command; and also Brian Sheridan, the acting assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, to outline the specific counternarcotics operations of the Department of Defense.

General McCaffrey, thank you for the job that you are doing. Thank you for taking time out of your busy and important schedule to appear. Please, proceed. Your entire statement will be made part of the record. You should certainly feel free to summarize your comments as you see fit.

Please, proceed.

[The prepared statement of Senator Roberts follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT BY SENATOR PAT ROBERTS

Over the past several years, the international trafficking of illegal narcotics has led to an increasing threat to the vital national security interests of the United States. Although narcotics have always posed a threat to American lives, with thousands of deaths each year linked to the abuse of these controlled substances, this has largely been a threat that was best combated by law enforcement agencies and drug treatment programs. However, with the growing links between the large narcotics traffickers and other criminal and terrorist organizations, the threat has evolved into a national security problem that requires the combined efforts of many local, state, and federal agencies, including the United States Armed Forces.

The requirement for military participation is particularly true today as revenues from the narcotics trade are providing the means by which organizations such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) is challenging the control of elected governments over their sovereign territory. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for these governments to protect individuals and property.

For example, in Colombia the FARC has been linked to the killing of Colombian citizens as well as Americans. Furthermore, the FARC has attacked oil pipelines in the region resulting in the destruction of countless barrels of oil. With the increasing regional power and influence of the FARC, particularly as its operations spread into Ecuador and Venezuela, America's largest foreign supplier of oil, it will be able to significantly disrupt U.S. energy supplies. Moreover, with the expansion of the FARC into Panama, it is quickly placing itself in a position, with the departure of U.S. military forces from the Canal Zone, to disrupt the operations of the Panama Canal, if it so desires.

Finally, the lure of significant profits from narcotrafficking has helped to build smuggling operations that could be used by terrorists seeking to introduce weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, into the United States. Dismantling these operations, whether they are of Latin American or Asia origin, is instrumental in ensuring the safety and security of Americans at home.

In order to disable these smuggling operations and disrupt narco-funded attacks on American citizens, energy supplies, and essential transportation networks, it is necessary to increase the cost of drug trafficking and thereby reduce its attraction. To achieve this, a combination of demand reduction, drug interdiction,, and source zone eradication, which can only be achieved by host nations with sovereign control of their territory, is required.