« PreviousContinue »
REMARKS AND REASONS FOR RESTORATION
.The three items listed above are critically needed at this location and have direct bearing on the success of the present logistical supply operations for our Middle East and Far East efforts. Under the semipeacetime period that these requests Were developed and presented, the urgent need for the facilities was demonstrated through various studies, engineering analysis, and actual flown mission problems. The requests were shown to be needed for an everyday operation and urgent for an emergency operation. Time and circumstances have Overtaken the preplanning. The emergency is here, and the safety of aircrews as Well as safe delivery of needed supplies in a timely manner now depend on providing adequate conditions for crew rest at this intermediate point. Approval of these projects would assure adequate rest for an average of 28 airCrews daily who arrive tired and in need of rest before completing their trip. Individual and central package type units were recommended after an engineering analysis of the air-conditioning projects indicated future maintenance and logistical problems of a central air-conditioning plant would cause long delays in needed repairs. Since there would be no backup air-conditioning available any shutdown of a central plant would eliminate air conditioning until the plant was repaired. Use of individual units, while not used as a general engineering policy, are considered to be the most acceptable at this location from a maintenance and Operation standpoint. The only power source at this location is the present FAA-operated central plant. This plant cannot supply the additional power needed by the Air Force for these projects without the additional power requested. In this case FAA has requested any addition of power to their central plant be made in increments of 800-kilowatt generators to match the present five generators. This type addition will reduce the maintenance and operation time and cost as well as assuring better power reliability at this distant station.
HOUSE REPORT STATEMENT
“The committee has approved the program estimate of $953,000 in support of a maintenance dock and dispensary at Prestwick Airfield, Scotland, and $954,000 for fuel storage facilities at Wake Island Air Force Station. The request of $437,000 for additions to the air conditioning for buildings at the latter station is denied. The committee agrees with the Air Force as to the need for such air conditioning, but feels that sufficient study has not been made as to the most economical and efficient way of meeting this requirement” (p. 28).
Colonel FENLoN. Our next item is on page 32 and concerns Wake Island in the Pacific, Mr. Chairman. There are three items: air conditioning of dormitory, airmen; officers quarters, and electric primary power generator which is brought about by the additional electrical load. The House, in rejecting these, questioned our study on the means of providing the air conditioning. In this particular instance we have a mix of small units and some central units but this is caused by the peculiar configuration of the facilities in that we feel that in some instances it is most economical and the best way to provide the air conditioning is by the small individual units.
Senator STENNIs. How many men do you have out there now? What is our function on Wake Island? What is the function of the Air Force, at least?
Colonel LUSCHEN. Col. Frank L. Luschen, Director of Program, SII’.
Wake Island is used as an en route base; it is for traffic to and from the Far East—Japan primarily. It has a requirement to support a number of contingency missions, and we would like to increase our traffic through there.
Senator STENNIs. How many men are there? Colonel FENLoN. Currently 713 personnel. Senator STENNIs. Just a minute, Colonel. Colonel FENLON. Eighty-three officers, one hundred and sixty-eight airmen, and four hundred and thirteen civilians, Mr. Chairman. Senator STENNIs. Why would you have so many people out there when the primary function, as I understand it, is just in case you have o opergency ? You say 413 civilian employees? How can you justify that? Go ahead, Colonel; I am talking to you, you are the head man. Colonel LUSCHEN. I may have caused a misinterpretation. It is not just in case we continue to have a lot of day-to-day traffic through Y. Island; it is a stopover point for refueling between Hawaii and 8,08, Il. enator SALTONSTALL. And also the Philippines. Colonel LUsch EN. A little north of the route to the Philippines, Sir. That is primarily through Guam.
WORK OF CIVILIANS
Senator STENNIs. What do those 413 civilians do out there now on Wake Island. Colonel FENLoN. Sir, some of those figures which I gave you I would like to correct them. Senator STENNIs. Thank you, Colonel. Colonel FENLoN. These are people who are supported. Actually in Air Force personnel themselves we are forecasting a total of 6 officers and 50 airmen. There are FAA people on the island which, of course, we in turn support. Senator STENNIS. Well, how many does the Air Force have? Do you have the figures there? Colonel FENLoN. Six officers and fifty airmen. Senator STENNIs. That is all you have stationed there? Colonel FENLoN. Yes, sir. Senator STENNIs. How many civilian employees does the Air Force have? Colonel LUsch FN. Mr. Chairman, the civilian employees are not Air Force employees; it is really a contract operation. I believe Pan American Airways was the last contractor that I was familiar with. They really provide the refueling support, the aircraft maintenance, housing, feeding, et cetera, for our people. Senator STENNIs. You are not responsible then for those people that work for Pan American? Colonel LUSCHEN. Yes, sir. Either we provide the facilities for the people there, or they provide their own and we pay in turn. Senator STENNIs. All right. Colonel LUscIII.N. This is a question of which pocket do you pay it out of 2 Senator STENNIS. So Pan Am runs the base, on a contract, is that right? Colonel LUSCHEN. That is correct, sir. Senator STENNIs. Then you pay the bill? Colonel LUsCHEN. Yes, sir; for the defense use of the field. FAA actually operates the airfield.
REQUEST FOR OVERALL REPORT ON WAKE ISLAND
Senator STENNIs. Members of the committee, let's ask the Department of Defense—and I say the Department of Defense because they can get the report from all the services—let us get the whole picture here on Wake Island; what the mission is, what we are doing, what We plan to do, how many Navy personnel, Air Force personnel, Army, Marine Corps, and how many civilians that are employed by the Government that we have there and how many additional civilians that We are responsible for. Let’s get the whole picture. I would ask to have that in by tomorrow if you can get it in, and if not by the next day.
(Theinformation requested follows:)
Wake Island is operated under the jurisdiction of the FAA. Although MATS is military host at Wake Island, the FAA island manager supervises the airfield and island activities.
Wake is a major en route refueling and rest stop for transport aircraft, both military and civilian. Current (June and July 1965) workload is approximately 1,000 military aircraft per month, of which 775 are heavy transports. General war plans provide for a considerably increased tempo of activities. Minimum facilities are provided for crews and personnel required to layover for rest. The projects in the fiscal year 1966 MCP are to upgrade the facilities so as to better provide for crew rest and to provide necessary electric power for communications and increased activity.
DOD (USAF) units and personnel at Wake Island are as follows:
OfficerS Airmen MATS------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 19 1957 Comm GP, Det-----------------------------------------------------|---------------- 23 1156 Tech Ops Sq, Det (classified mission).------------------------------ 2 21 Total-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 63
Support services on the island are provided primarily by civilian contract personnel in such fields as en route aircraft maintenance, facilities maintenance, messing, and housing, etc. The Facilities Management Corp., employing 490 personnel, performs these services for MATS.
The FAA personnel complement and employees consist of approximately 296 men. FAA-Pan American Airways operates services and facilities for commercial airline operations transiting the island.
Senator STENNIs. Anything else you want to say, gentlemen?
Colonel FENLON. No, sir; Mr. Chairman,
Senator STENNIS. This thing goes by geometric proportion, these activities. I just do not believe there is enough money in the world to weigh all the bills indefinitely.
All right. Next item.
AVIANO AIR FORCE BASE, ITALY: INCIRLIK AIR FORCE BASE, TURKEY ; LAKENHEATH AIR FORCE BASE, ENGLAND
Base Budget House Restoration request action requested Aviao Airbase----------------------------------------------- $1,704,000 —$504,000 +$504,000 Incirlik Airbose.---------------------------------------------- 1,669,000 –669,000 +669,000 Lakenheath Airbase------------------------------------------ 3,612,000 –670,000 +670,000
REMARKS/REASONS FOR RESTORATION
The reductions in the Air Force, Europe requirements presuppose that NATO funding will be available at the time construction is ready for contract award. Experience has proven that this is not the case. It has been necessary for the Air Force to file a prefinancing statement with NATO authorities and fund the full cost of the project with appropriated funds. Itecoupment, in whole or in part, is dependent upon the approval of the funding and finance committee of NATO and the consent of the countries involved. The Air Force is, therefore, not in a position to predetermine what portion of the cost NATO will share and must request the appropriation of the full cost of each project. Procedures will be energetically followed to obtain equitable recoupment.
HOUSE REPORT STATEMENT (P. 28)
“The committee has approved $12,167,000 in support of various Air Force installations in Europe, including fighter aircraft support facilities, communication facilities and other facilities in support of the base operating mission requirements in this area.” (p. 28). Colonel, FENLON. Page 34. This was a reduction in amounts; Aviano Air Force Base, in Italy, Incirlik Air Force Base in Turkey and Lakenheath Air Force Base in England. The reductions in the Air Force, Europe requirements presupposes that NATO funding will be available at the time construction is ready for contract award. Experience has shown that this is not the case. It has been necessary for the Air Force to file a prefinancing statement with NATO authorities and recoupment in whole or in part is dependent upon the approval of the funding and finance committee of NATO at a much later date than when the projects are actually constructed and occupied. Senator SALTONSTALL. In other words, you have to prefinance it and you hope that NATO will pay you back? Colonel FENLoN. Yes, Senator Saltonstall. What occurs here is that none of these items at these stations are pure NATO fundable under current criteria. If they were, they would not be in here, they would be in the NATO slice program. In many cases we would be building a facility which we require because of our type of aircraft and our operation, which there might be a certain small percentage that we may be able to recoup as a NATO requirement under their criteria. It will be some small portion of the project. To be able to do this we have to do it with a prefinancing statement and recoup the moneys at a later date and go ahead and construct. Senator STENNIs. Have you ever recouped any that way? Colonel FENLoN. Yes. I do not have the figures but I know we have recouped. Senator STENNIS. Give us the names, places, dates, and amounts on that. Colonel FENLON. All right. Senator STENNIs. We may want to close this record tomorrow if you get it in by tomorrow.
The Air Force programs its requirements for the construction of facilities on NATO installations on the basis of needs to satisfy the aircraft and supporting personnel assigned to those installations. If the facilities are not covered by NATO criteria, such as personnel facilities, they are included in the Air Force budget and appropriations are requested for their construction. If the facilities are covered by NATO criteria, a request is made to NATO for their inclusion in the NATO budget and if approved, Subsequent financing is obtained through NATO sources. However, in many instances financing through NATO sources is not compatible timewise with the need for the facility. In these instances inancing is requested in the military construction appropriation on the basis hat a recoupment will be obtained from NATO sources and when the recouplent is realized the U.S. funds are returned to the U.S. Treasury. In those nstances, where NATO criteria does not cover the total requirement based upon J.S. standards the construction of projects is accomplished with both U.S. and NATO financing, again because of timing, U.S. funds may be requested to contruct the entire project on the basis that a recoupment will be obtained from NATO for that portion of the project covered by NATO criteria. As NATO riteria changes to the advantage of U.S. financing, recoupment is sought for 'rojects financed from U.S. funds on the basis of the latest criteria. Records are ot readily available for all the U.S. financing recoupments paid into the U.S. Creasury. However, this example is available. Between 1952 and 1958 construcion was performed on 12 airfields in France, at a cost of about $235 million. NATO financed this program in the amount of $99 million, France in the amount »f $3 million, and the United States in the amount $136 million. After the com\letion of construction the United States filed claims for recoupments from NATO .nancing sources in the amount of $12.7 million. It was determined that $3.9 million of this amount of construction was not eligible for NATO financing. However, $8.8 million was recognized as valid. Provisional settlements of this ‘laim resulted in payments to the United States in November 1692 and June 1963 n the amount of about $8 million. These moneys were placed in the miscellaneus receipts account of the U.S. Treasury.
WHITE HOUSE ATTITUDE
Senator SALTONSTALL. What the House says in substance, Colonel, is that $12,167,000 has been approved for various Air Force base installations in Europe and they have gone far enough this year. That s about the size of it. is it not? Colonel FENLoN. Yes, sir. They did identify dollars and amounts in these bases, Senator Saltonstall. Senator STENNIS. The first one there is what would you use this money for now? I did not catch that fully. The $504,000. Colonel FENLON. That would be at Aviano and we have a total pro3ram there. We ask for a total program there, Mr. Chairman, of $1,700,000. Now we are not able to identify right now exactly what projects would have to be dropped, the figure does not correspond :o any particular project. Senator STENNIs. All right. What about the next one, Incirlik? Colonel FENLON. The same is true at the other two bases also. The igure is just a cut, it does not tie to any particular item. Senator STENNIs. All right. Next item.
TOUL ROSIERES AIR FORCE BASE, FRANCE
Line items Budget House Restoration request action requested Radar relay facility------------------------------------------- $92,000 —$92,000 +$92,000 Water storage facility----------------------------------------- 91,000 –91, 000 +91, 000
REMARKS REASONS FOR RESTORATION
The two items listed above are urgently needed to support the current mission at this location.
A new radio relay facility is required to replace the temporary trailers that are currently used to house the sensitive communication equipment. The use of these mobile Vans are considered to be an interim measure and must be replaced with permanent facilities as soon as possible to insure reliable and economical operation of the system. This site located at Planty, France, is a Vital