Library, deficiency replacement, $142,000 This project will provide an adequate library and replace the present facility, a mobilization-type structure which is too small. Base theater, deficiency replacement, $255,000 This item will provide an adequate theater and replace a 300-seat, World War II, mobilization-type structure that is outmoded. A number of the requests made for Hill stem from the fact that the base is being assigned new and additional workloads as a result of depot closures and workload consolidations. These items are: Shop, magnetic instrument overhaul, $347,000 This will provide the necessary repair and overhaul capability for navigational instruments, flight instruments, automatic pilot mechanisms, and component parts of aerial and ground photographic equipment. Shop, missile service, $734,000 This project is required for overhaul and repair of the Falcon, Sidewinder, and Bullpup missiles. Shop, communications and electronics, $392,000 This additional shop space is required to accommodate support type functions for the clean room controlled area and general electrical shop workloads. These functions are now performed in clean room areas which are now needed to accommodate new guided rocket and missile systems workloads being transferred to this depot. Shop, repair (conversion), $271,000 This conversion, by improving the heating, lighting, and electrical power systems, providing a hazardous test area and an industrial drain system in an existing building will accommodate new workloads associated with the Titan II systems and various other workloads being assigned to this depot. Logistical facility depot, $1,865,000 In addition to the 6,298 people currently engaged in administrative functions to support the present programs at this depot, it will be necessary to provide adequate space in this program for an additional 1,000 desk workers associated with new responsibilities being assigned. In addition to the request for Hill Air Force Base, there are two items for Army installations in Utah which I wish to mention : Tooele Army Depot, $340,000 This will provide a paved area for combat vehicle testing and will be used mainly for testing tanks. Dugway Proving Ground, $137,000 These funds will make possible an addition to the commissary including enlarged sales area. Since Dugway is located in a remote area of Tooele County, with no commercial facilities nearby, the commissary supplies the needs of personnel living there. I will appreciate the consideration of this justification of the items requested. Sincerely, FRANK E. Moss. Senator INOUYE. I thank all of you for appearing before this committee and assisting us on this problem. May we assure all of you that your testimony will be very seriously considered. We are adjourned. (Whereupon, at 4:55 p.m., the committee was adjourned.) MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1966 MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 1965 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 1114, New Senate Office Building, Hon. John Stennis, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding. Present: Senators Stennis, Proxmire, Yarborough, Saltonstall, and Thurmond. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY STATEMENTS OF MAJ. GEN. W. R. SHULER, DIRECTOR OF INSTALLATIONS, OFFICE, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR LOGISTICS; AND LT. COL. J. R. EVANS, CHIEF, AIR DEFENSE BRANCH, OFFICE, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR LOGISTICS PRIOR JOINT HEARINGS Senator STENNIS. The subcommittee will be in order. Gentlemen, we shall proceed in the regular way to consider the military construction appropriation bill for fiscal year 1966. I would like to welcome you gentlemen from the Department of Defense. I have a very brief opening statement which I shall read. First, however, let me express the hope that all witnesses will be as brief as possible and to the point. Due to the fact that the Appropriations Subcommittee members participated in the construction authorization hearings of the Armed Service Committee, it is not our intent to hear again those projects about which there is no controversy. It is our intent to hear first those items from previous years' authorizations. Then, we will continue with the items that the services are appealing from the House appropriation action. I wish to say it is not our intent here to cut any of the testimony short in any manner. I want everyone to have his say and bring up any problems and items he feels the subcommittee should hear. However, I must point out that the subcommittee has in its possession, and will print as a part of its hearings, the complete testimony taken before the Armed Services Committee. It is my feeling that we have plenty of data and information upon which to mark up this bill when combined with the testimony which we will take during these hearings. 49-369-65-56 879 1966 BUDGET REQUESTS To outline briefly, the budget estimates as submitted by the Department of Defense in January included Army, $441.4 million; Navy, $338.3 million; Air Force, $422 million; Defense agencies, $83 million; Navy Reserve, $9.5 million; Air Force Reserve, $4 million; Air National Guard, $10 million; loran stations, $4 million. This makes a total construction budget of $1,313,400,000. The family housing total is $735.6 million. This makes a total request of $2,049,000,000. The House Appropriations Committee approved for military construction $1,755,495,000, and for family housing $683,960,000. Included in the House reductions are $131,817,000 for construction and $51,212,000 for family housing made by the military construction authorization bill for fiscal year 1966. We will first hear from the Army. General Shuler, you may proceed. Gentlemen, we will go into all these matters as we come to them. Of course as you know we have had these matters up in the authorization bill and the House and Senate has acted on this bill. We had a long conference on the authorization bill this year. Members of the subcommittee feel that we have given all items a clear review. We have duplicate membership on the Armed Services and Appropriations Committees, on this side of the Congress anyway. So, we are generally familiar with the projects in this bill. Also, we have been hearing the matter on the large appropriation bill which brings us your general problems. General Shuler, we are glad to have you, sir. We have heard you in the authorization hearing. Do you have a general statement, General Shuler? PREPARED STATEMENT General SHULER. Yes, sir; I have a prepared statement, that I would like to file for the record with your permission, sir, and to brief you shortly on the contents thereof. Senator STENNIS. I wish you would, please. Place the statement in the record, Mr. Reporter. General, we will be glad to hear you speak on any part you wish to emphasize. Then we will get down to line items as soon as we can. General SHULER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a pleasure to present the Army's fiscal year 1966 appropriation program for military construction. My prepared statement is essentially the same as the one presented at your joint hearings with the Armed Services Committee, except for prior-year authorization and general authorization. Consequently Mr. Chairman, with your permission I would place my statement in the record and proceed with a brief summary. (The prepared statement of General Shuler follows:) Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Maj. Gen. William R. Shuler, director of installation, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Department of the Army. It is a pleasure for me to present to you the Army's fiscal year 1966 military construction appropriation program. The funding plan for fiscal year 1966 MCA is $448.9 million total obligational authority. However, because $7.5 milion is available from fiscal year 1965 funding, the appropriation request is for $441.4 million. The funding plan consists of $381.6 million for new authorization items, $30.9 million of prior year's authorized items, and $36.4 million of continuing authorization items. The prior year authorization includes $7.8 million deficiency funding at the U.S. Military Academy for the Washington Hall-barracks complex authorized by Public Law 88-390 as proposed for amendment in H.R. 8439 this year's authorization bill. The projects comprising this year's appropriation request include our most pressing construction needs. The personnel, materiel, and research and development programs of the Army have dictated most of our priority requirements. In developing this construction program, emphasis was given to those projects which are needed for direct support to missions, for deployment of tactical units, and for research and development. Adequate troop housing and supporting facilities are a continuing priority objective. Again we are emphasizing replacement of inadequate temporary facilities. Approximately one-quarter of the Army's physical plant at our permanent stations is comprised of World War II temporary structures. These facilities were hastily constructed more than 20 years ago for rapid mobilization of World War II using criteria, designs, and materials for a design life of 5 years. In the category of troop housing, we have succeeded in reaching an adequate annual rate or level for replacing these facilities, which have already served over four times their 5-year design life. Sustaining the troop housing level attained last year will replace the old temporary barracks by about fiscal year 1973. The Army is now endeavoring to establish comparable rates for other categories to allow replacement and modernization within about 10 years. If an adequate annual level of replacement is not established and maintained, we will arrive at a time when structural failures will require replacements on such a scale for a 1- or 2-year program that the cost will be prohibitive. Although last year's and this year's appropriation requests provide increases in the rate, additional increase will be required in future-year programs over the $260 million for replacement and moderr.ization of facilities within this request. The various items that will be considered by the committee support one or more of the following Department of Defense programs: Program II-Continental air and missile defense forces_. Program III-General purpose forces___ Program IV-Airlift and sealift forces. Program VI-Research and development-----. Program VII-General support__. Funding program. $8,785, 000 89, 162, 000 5, 606, 000 49, 316, 000 296, 067, 000 448, 936, 000 There are eight facility classes included in the Army's fiscal year 1966 program which I will summarize briefly : Troop housing and community facilities, $140,939,000 These include enlisted men's barracks complexes (or part complexes) at eight stations, medical barracks adjacent to three station hospitals, the third increment of triservice barracks at Fort Meyer, and other small increments of barracks in the United States. Permanent spaces in the United States total 23,682; spaces overseas total 1,031. The total number of bachelor officer quarters spaces proposed at 12 installations in the United States is 2,081, plus 68 spaces overseas. For community support, 22 items are considered to be of particular importance for inclusion this year. The Army believes that in order to promote health, welfare, and morale, a modest number of these support facilities must be provided each year. Operational and training facilities, $107,601,000 The 60 items in this category will provide the first increment of a DOD classified project, airfield facilities, the final phase of construction for the Southeastern Signal School at Fort Gordon, facilities for the Army Field Medical School, communications and operational facilities including support items for ASA, the Whittier-Anchorage POL pipeline and miscellaneous POL facilities, air defense items, a classified construction project for deploying a NIKE-HERCULES battalion, and protective construction for NIKE-HERCULES sites. Maintenance and production facilities, $36,162,000 This includes a consolidated field maintenance shop at Fort Carson, 16 tactical equipment shop projects (including 5 at ASA locations), 7 aircraft maintenance facilities, 2 missile maintenance projects, plus other maintenance items. |