Mr. TURNER. We have a lot of them that cause quite a bit of administrative difficulty.

(Discussion off the record.)

MEMORANDUM ON PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED WHEN REQUESTING AND USING CONSTRUCTION FUNDS

Mr. DONNELLY. Mr. Chairman, I understand General Myers wants to offer for the record in further answer to Mr. Davis' question a copy of a memorandum dated September 21, 1951, for Mr. McNeil from Assistant Secretary Zuckert. That will be supplied in due time when the record reaches you.

(The matter referred to is as follows:)

Memorandum for Mr. McNeil

SEPTEMBER 21, 1951.

Reference is made to your memorandum for the Secretary of the Air Force dated August 14, 1951, which outlines the principles and procedures to be followed by this Department when requesting and using construction funds. Reference is also made to the recent supplementary discussions on this subject between members of this Department and your office.

The Department of the Air Force is in full accord with your stated desire that any procedures designed to govern the apportionment of construction funds should gant the maximum delegation of responsibility to each of the military services in the administration of such funds. Further, it is desired to emphasize the need for elimination of all unnecessary administrative work involved in any apportionment procedures that are devised. Both of these objectives must receive prime consideration before apportionment procedures are prescribed if the Department of the Air Force is to get the large construction program, now pending before the Congress, in place when required by operational demands. In general, the Department of the Air Force is in agreement with the principles and procedures outlined in your memorandum as further amplified by the referenced oral discussions with members of your staff. However, in the interest of eliminating time-consuming administrative details, the following comments and recommendations are submitted for consideration:

1. Paragraph b of your memorandum requires separate submission of all requests for the apportionment of funds needed in the construction of medical facilities. This procedure is considered to be in conflict with the intent of your paragraph a, which states that funds will be apportioned in bulk for those items for which either standard plans or preliminary drawings have been prepared. The construction of Air Force medical facilities, in most instances, is a part of the base construction program and therefore preliminary drawings or standard plans for such facilities are drawn simultaneously with all other base requirements. Also the construction of medical facilities is normally accomplished by a contractor hired to construct all facilities included in the base construction contract. Compliance with paragraph b will delay not only the construction of Air Force medical facilities, but all other urgent requirements included in the same base construction contract.

2. Paragraph c of your memorandum states that funds in support of community and recreational facilities will be made only in exceptional cases pending publication of Department of Defense policies in this regard and where urgent requirements do exist for such facilities, request for apportionment of construction funds for such purposes will be submitted separately. The Department of the Air Force considers all the community and recreational facilities requested in the fiscal year 1952 budget estimates as urgent requirements for support of troop morale, particularly in those isolated and desolate areas such as Iceland, French Morocco, Okinawa, and Alaska. This Department has notified the Department of Defense of the urgency for establishment of approved policies in this regard in order to expedite the construction of these urgently needed morale facilities. Also, the construction of community and recreational facilities is normally an integral part of the base construction program and therefore preliminary drawings or standard plans for such facilities are drawn simultaneously with all other base requirements. For this reason, and the reasons cited in the preceding paragraph, this Department desires to submit

construction requirements for he entire installation, as a single project, including medical and community and recreational facilities where such facilities are part of the base construction program.

3. Paragraph e of your memorandum states that the initial apportionment for any one station will not exceed the appropriated amount for the station and any required overrun will be borne by application or more severe criteria, by underruns, or by deletion of parts or the whole of other facilities at the same station. It is believed that compliance with this principle will, of necessity, only increase the administrative workload of this Department and will require a greater number of discussions with your office and the Bureau of the Budget, with the resultant delay in final construction of those vitally needed facilities and accommodations. The fiscal year 1952 Air Force budget estimate for construction funds was prepared by applying an average zone of interior construction cost per facility. Therefore the cost estimate for a particular installation as contained in the budget, does not reflect the true construction cost. For this reason it is anticipated that overruns will occur at some installations and compensating underruns will occur at other installations where actual costs fall below the normal average zone of interior cost. Compliance with the principle outlined in your paragraph e will prevent the Department of the Air Force from constructing those facilities considered most urgent, regardless of their location. It is anticipated that this situation will be found at those installations where actual construction costs exceed the normal average zone of interior costs. At this particular installation, the lowest priority facilities will be Ideleted in order that total construction costs will not exceed the amount estimated for the installation. However, the items so deleted may be considered of greater value to the Air Force than the construction of some facility at another location where estimated costs were below the average zone of interior costs. 4. The procedure as prescribed by your memorandum requires the preparation and submission of a completed Form 132, each time a construction project or group of construction projects reaches the stage where the apportionment of funds is required. It is requested that consideration be given to revising this prescribed procedure to provide for the requirement for preparation and submission of Form 132 for a lump-sum amount prior to program clearance by your office. Such funds will only be obligated as authorized by your office in accordance with approved construction programs. It is the opinion of this Department that by adopting this recommended procedure, much time and administrative work will be saved within each of the military services and your office without sacrificing any of the desired controls.

Under the Deputy Chief of Staff, Comptroller, the Director of Budget is responsible for the receipt of fund apportionments covering construction of Air Force facilities and for allocation and monitoring of such funds to and within the using agencies. Within the Directorate of Budget, the Chief of the Military Requirements and Construction Division has and will continue to be designated as the individual charged with the responsibility for compliance with established principles and procedures pertaining to the use of construction funds. A review of all construction activities within the Air Force will continue to be the responsibility of the Directorate of Installations, Deputy Chief of Staff, Matériel, to insure maximum economical use of construction funds. Also this agency has and will continue to maintain a construction priority list of items within each station, as well as a priority list of construction items between various Air Force stations.

It is requested that the principles and procedures outlined in your memorandum be revised by incorporating the recommendations presented above. To comply with your principles and procedures, revised as recommended, no internal organizational changes need be made within this Department.

EUGENE M. ZUCKERT, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force.

APPROPRIATIONS, APPORTIONMENT, OBLIGATIONS, COMMITMENTS, ETC.

Mr. DONNELLY. Mr. Chairman, may I ask that there be inserted in the record at this point this chart showing appropriations, apportionments, obligations, commitments, allotments, and so forth, prepared jointly by the district engineer and by the Office of Secretary of Defense?

Mr. RILEY. Without objection, it may be made a part of the rec at this point.

(The chart faces this page.)

ACTIONS TAKEN BY BUDGET BUREAU ON AUTHORIZATIONS, APPROP TIONS, APPORTIONMENTS, ETC.

Mr. DONNELLY. May I also offer for the record at this time record of authorization, appropriation, apportionment action in nection with construction of facilities in Morocco, prepared by Bureau of the Budget, which is this document here.

Mr. RILEY. Without objection it may be placed in the recore this point.

(The matter referred to is as follows:)

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington 25, D. C., May 28, 19,

Memorandum for: Mr. George Y. Harvey, House Appropriations Committee In accordance with your request of May 22, 1952, there it attached an ex of the records of the Bureau of the Budget relating to actions taken in conne with requests for authorization, appropriation and apportionment of fund construction of United States Air Force facilities in French Morocco.

Sincerely yours,

W. F. SCHAUB, Chief, Military Divisi

RECORD OF AUTHORIZATION, APPROPRIATION, AND APPORTIONMENT ACTION IN NECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES FOR THE UNITED STATES AIR IN FRENCH MOROCCO

The clause, "including construction authorized by law," in Public Law 843, 81st Cong., whic to Public Law 703, 76th Cong., of July 2, 1940, has the effect of making the appropriation act Law 843, 81st Cong., constitute authorization for construction at certain of the locations justified appropriation.

2 Public Law 155, 82d Cong., Sept. 28, 1951: The justification was for a total of $296,960,800 at 71 plus area POL facilities. This was offset by the amount of fiscal year 1951 funding in French $73,599,800, to give the net new authorization required, $223,361,000.