AIR FORCE RESERVE Fiscal year 1966 military construction program Location and project 1. Dobbins AFB, Ga.: (a) Maintenance dock (large). 2. Greater Pittsburgh Apt., Pa.: (a) Apron (strengthen) 70,000 square (b) Operation and training facility, 16,560 square feet- Estimated 440 550 1, 142 300 392 450 1,275 3, 407 4. McGuire, AFB, N.J.: (a) Consolidated maintenance facility, 74,800 square feet__. Total___. Senator STENNIS. All right. Now suppose we call on whoever represents the Army Reserve to speak. Anything special you have to say? STATEMENT OF LT. COL. DONALD S. MARSHALL, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF RESERVE COMPONENTS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Colonel MARSHALL. No, sir. We have no prepared statement at this time. However, we are prepared to answer any questions you or the commitee would like to ask. Senator STENNIS. Who represents the Navy? STATEMENT OF COMDR. PAUL P. BERMAN, U.S. NAVAL RESERVE, ASSISTANT FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, NAVAL RESERVE, OFFICE OF CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS Commander BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have a prepared statement which I would like to insert in the record at this time. Senator STENNIS. All right. Give your name to the young lady. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF REAR ADM. HARRY HULL, DIRECTOR, SHORE ACTIVITIES DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL DIVISION IN THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to present to you the military construction naval reserve program for fiscal year 1966, a program vital to the capability and training effectiveness of our reserve components. The mission of the Naval and Marine Corps Reserve is to augment the active naval forces with trained personnel manning the ASW ships, air squadrons, and combat units in the event of any declared national emergency. To perform this mission and at the same time be immediately responsive to the overall defense effort, the Reserve units are organized into a selective reserve force. These units comprise some 126,000 Naval and 45,500 Marine Corps Reserve personnel who are instantly available for automatic integration into the regular active forces. In addition, we have 9,000 officers and enlisted men who participate in a nondrill pay status but who also hold mobilization orders. We are pleased to report that we are at 100 percent of our allowable strength. As you know, these Reserve units have frequently justified their reputation of being a truly ready force, and as such, are playing an essential part in our readiness to respond at once to defense emergencies of any magnitude. This Ready Reserve cannot be maintained without the essential facilities required for the training and operation of a force that is subject to continuous modernization. This year's construction program will provide a portion of the up-dated facilities needed to administer, train, and otherwise support these units in the accomplishment of their assigned mission. During the past year, Air Reserve and Surface Reserve personnel have been actively participating in fleet exercises and have been integrated into fleet evolutions at every opportunity. As an example, each weekend the Reserve ASW squadrons, based on both east and west coasts, are flyins ASW and shipping surveillance sorties in conjunction with, and in some instances, in place of, the active forces of the antisubmaraine forces of the Atlantic and Pacific Fleets. In addition, the ASW Reserve crews are continuously taking part in fleet exercises. The Marine Corps Reserve this past year has continued to place increased emphasis on amphibious training, with units participating in three major airground maneuvers. During these maneuvers, the Reserve units were completely integrated with the active forces. To support these forces, the Navy is requesting approval of lump-sum authorization in the amount of $8,800,000 for fiscal year 1966. We have no plans to increase the unmber of air station or surface training facilities this year. Through increased efficiency, previous consolidations, and general improvements, the Navy has been able to make its Reserve facilities accessible to approximately 75 percent of the male population throughout the country. Practiced frugality has enabled us to acquire and use the maximum number of facilities at minimum cost. However, facilities that are of a temporary nature are deteriorating at a faster rate than they can be replaced, and a number of leases are being terminated with no opportunity of renewal. These facts, coupled with the assignment of more complex and sophisticated weapons systems have created an urgency in the requirements for modernizing our facilities if we are to continue to meet our Reserve commitments in quantity and quality. The facility requirements to be met by this year's tentative program are limited to replacement for the most critically needed training centers for the surface and ground forces. Again, as in the past year, personnel support facilities, as well as training facilities, at the air stations are receiving a high priority. We have found that the young men that we want and need will not affiliate with an organization when the facilities in which they must live and train are badly deteriorated. Being mindful of congressional desires and of prudent planning we are continuing to pursue a policy of joint utilization. To exemplify this, all Air Reserve activities support both naval and Marine Corps units and several provide support to Reserve units of other services. To further this end, Naval Air Station, Grosse Ile, Mich., is scheduled to be closed in fiscal year 1967 and its activities to be moved to Selfridge Air Force Base. In addition, 9 of the 15 projects scheduled for the surface and ground forces are joint usage facilities representing approximately 65 percent of the dollar volume for these two categories alone. Approximately 58 percent of all surface and ground forces facilities are utilized jointly. It is our purpose to insure that only items of definite and continuing necessity are presented for your approval. To this end, the program will be carefully screened to insure that only items of the greatest urgency are included. This concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I shall try to provide any further information about the program which you may desire. Senator STENNIS. General Wilson. STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. WINSTON P. WILSON, CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE General WILSON. Mr. Chairman, I have a prepared statement I would like to place in the record pertaining to the Air National Guard program, sir. Senator STENNIS. All right. Anything you wish to say in addi General WILSON. Not a thing except to thank the committee for the support it has always given to the National Guard, both Army and Air, in providing the adequate facilities for the proper training of the forces. Senator STENNIS. Did you get everything you wanted in the budget this year? General WILSON. We never get everything we want, Mr. Chairman, we have a phased program that will meet the commitments of the requirements for conversions of aircraft and other things in the program which will satisfy our requirements for fiscal year 1966. Senator STENNIS. All right. Thank you, General. (The statement referred to follows:) Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege again this year to appear before this committee for the purpose of presenting the Air National Guard military construction program for fiscal year 1966. As always we enjoy and maintain close and cooperative relationship with Headquarters, U.S. Air Force and the Office of the Secretary of Defense in developing and reviewing our annual construction program. Although optimum mission facility requirements for our essential operations and training indicate that we need increased construction funding, we have appraised our anticipated allocations of funds and, by careful review, with USAFOSD assistance, are inserting only our most urgent requirements into each annual military construction program. We believe this will permit us to meet programed operational dates with minimum but generally acceptable standards. Therefore, what you review in the fiscal year 1966 program are projects phased into previous and subsequent programs that are vital to the current and the ultimate long-range mission of the Air National Guard for accomplishing its portion of the joint mission with the entire Defense Department. Facilities contained in the listing are either for operation of aircraft or in direct support of aircraft operations. Where a usable substandard facility is available, we have included projects for repair, modification, or strengthening at a much lesser cost than new construction. This is possible, of course. to a limited degree only, because where joint use has been required on municipal airfield facilities, there are generally few suitable substandard facilities available for rehabilitation. I would like to review for you some of the factors affecting the Air National Guard construction programs that are quite different from some of those that apply to other major or subordinate air commands. Normally, other air commands are specialized, in that they have primarily either bombers and tankers, tactical air support, defense fighters and aircraft warning services, or transports, as unit equipment. In the Air National Guard we have units stationed at 92 bases for air operations, and 46 without air operation. Our aircraft unit equipment, although usually specialized at each base, includes among all of our bases such diversified missions as combat-ready tactical air support, air defense fighters, heavy transport, reconnaissance, and aircraft control and warning services; and in our inventory we have 14 major and distinct types of aircraft. This contributes to some variables in requirements for such items as operational aprons, weapons calibration and storage facilities, engine test facilities, alert hangars, simulators, and the like. But, of course, as opposed to this, we provide a minimum of administrative support facilities because the ground support crews and combat crews live in the adjacent community (and are a part of the local economy. We are also able, for example, to provide a direct saving of Federal expenditures at municipal airports where varied land interests are acquired at a minimum cost through the action of State or other local government. Wherever we have joint use of a facility with a municipality or the active Air Force, we have tried to obtain joint funding to the maximum from the authorities with whom we share facilities. We are occasionally successful in this, resulting in considerable savings to the Federal Government. I have mentioned in previous presentations to this committee and would like to state again our appreciation for our fiscal funding flexibility; i.e., lump-sum funding. Because of its flexibility we are able to be responsive to mission changes, differences in attitude of local governments and variations of geographical conditions which affect project costs. For example: It is possible that several of the items in this program may need to be rescheduled in order to meet the requirement for conversion to aircraft that may become available from the Air Force earlier than programed. The fiscal year 1966 MCP, in summary, requires construction in 25 different States, and includes: Seven operation and training buildings. Seven airfield pavement construction or repair projects. Nine aircraft maintenance facilities. Six alert hangars with multiple stalls. Four weapon or supply storage warehouses. Some airfield lighting and electrical distribution modification to fill isolated deficiencies. The urgently required facilities summarized above are either for training personnel, providing operational pavements, protecting and segregating weapons and supplies, sheltering alert aircraft, maintaining aircraft, or furnishing power and airfield lighting. They are programed within a scope that is often less than Air Force criteria would provide, but they are adequate in all respects for our missions. Each item has been reviewed thoroughly by the local commanders, State Reserve facilities boards, my staff, air staff and OSD, and I can assure you of my complete confidence in the integrity of this program. The authorization requested stands at $8,985,000 for the essential items listed. As I have stated in previous years, I am personally satisfied that the construction undertaken by the Air National Guard is sound. Before closing, gentlemen, I should like to briefly review the status of our two previous years' MCP's. Of the 44 projects in the fiscal year 1964 program, 27 are complete and 14 will be completed by July 1965. In the fiscal year 1965 program, due to the many uncertainties which have made it impossible for OSD to approve numerous projects, we have 34 on which design is complete; design will be completed on the remaining 31 by December 1965. This concludes my presentation to the committee in support of the Air National Guard military construction authorization program. My staff and I are ready to entertain any questions you may have regarding our construction program. Senator STENNIS. Colonel, you represent the Air Force? STATEMENT OF COL. JAMES B. McDONALD, HEADQUARTERS, U.S. AIR FORCE, DIVISION OF CIVIL ENGINEERING Colonel MCDONALD. Yes, sir. Senator STENNIS. The Air Force Reserve? Colonel McDONALD. Yes, sir. Senator STENNIS. Do you have a statement? Colonel MCDONALD. I have a statement of Major General Curtin that I would like to enter in the record at this time. Senator STENNIS. All right. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. ROBERT H. CURTIN, DIRECTOR OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, WASHINGTON, D.C. Our military construction authorization request for the Air Force Reserve this year totals $3.4 million and points up the acceleration of the C-124 aircraft conversion program. The Department of the Air Force has concluded a new evaluation of total airlift requirements which reflected on the airlift augmentation to be provided by the Air Force Reserve troop carrier groups. The phased aircraft replacement program for the Reserve flying units, from the C-119 Flying Boxcars to the larger and faster C-124 Globemaster aircraft, is well underway. In anticipation of changing airlift augmentation force requirements, the authorization of $4.6 million for the fiscal year 1965 Air Reserve construction has been held in abeyance until the most realistic facilities requirements for the newly developed force realinement could be developed. The lump-sum authorization for fiscal year 1965 combined with our request for fiscal year 1966 aggregates an $8 million military construction authorization program, which will provide the minimum essential operational requirements for the current force structure. 47-232-65-37 The development of our program under the lump-sum authorization method employed for the past 3 fiscal years, to replace the line item authorization procedure, enables us to effectively manage the construction program in the face of force structure alinements and revised scheduling of the assignment of C-124 aircraft to certain locations. All of the $3.4 million we are requesting for fiscal year 1966 as well as the authorization granted for the fiscal year 1965 is programed for priority facilities to support the C-124 aircraft conversion program. All of the projects in our proposed program are to provide minimum essential on-the-line facilities directly associated with flying training with the C-124 aircraft. This concludes my general statement in support of the Air Force Reserve military construction authorization program. We are prepared to answer any questions which you may have. Senator STENNIS. Anything you would like to say in addition? Colonel McDONALD. No. I think the program is tight but I believe it will satisfy the requirements. Senator STENNIS. I think it is mighty tight, too. I have tried to emphasize the Reserves and National Guard for several years. It seems to me you get a very small program of construction based on your needs and I would like to see it emphasized more. A few times we have been able to squeeze out a dollar or two extra for you that wasn't in the budget, and then when it was appropriated you couldn't get it spent. Senator THURMOND. Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with your remarks on this subject. Senator STENNIS. Thank you, Šenator. Now, of course, we will go over these things, gentlemen, and we are delighted to have you here and I think that your part of the bill will be rather readily approved. General WILSON. Thank you. Mr. DEININGER. Thank you. Colonel McDONALD. Thank you, sir. Senator STENNIS. I commend you for the work you are doing. Mr. DEININGER. I haven't anything further except to thank you for your very kind consideration. Senator STENNIS. Well, if we need anything special, we will call you back. Otherwise, we want to thank you for what you have already said and done. Mr. DEININGER. Thank you very much. Senator STENNIS. All right. The committee will now recess subject to the call of the Chair, but it is expected that we will convene again in the morning at 10 o'clock, and take up the Army title. (Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., a recess was taken until 10 a.m., Tuesday, May 11, 1965.) |