Senator STENNIS. And you think there is a justification for it? General VIDAL. We actually felt our requirement originally was for seven of these, and we were willing to go ahead. We thought it was quite equitable to start out with the three.

Mr. DEININGER. Could I add a word to that, Senator?

We considered these projects very carefully and had decided in the Office of the Secretary of Defense that we would be willing to go along with one of these 50-man units at each of three locations pretty much as a trial.

They are very low cost. It is an open barracks type of affair with a communal latrine type facility.

Senator STENNIS. Even though they are not plush they help the morale.

General VIDAL. Yes, sir.

Senator STENNIS. To be able to provide these facilities. All right, anything further, Senator?

Senator CANNON. Nothing further.

Senator STENNIS. Proceed, gentlemen. Just hit the high spots. ELLINGTON AIR FORCE BASE, HOUSTON, TEX. ($823,000)

Colonel WILSON. Project provides 100,000 square yards portland cement concrete overlay to bring existing apron up to light duty capacity. Replacement of 30 percent defective slabs is included. Area involved extends from northern end of reserve apron to a point near ANG apron. Existing pavement designed for 48,000 pounds must be strengthened for C-119's 74,000 pounds.

At the Ellington Air Force Base, we have just one item which is a strengthening of the apron. Our apron at this location was constructed for 48,000 pound payload. The C-119 type aircraft requires an apron capable of a 74,000 pound payload. The existing apron has been deteriorating and this proposed strengthening is to prolong the life of that apron.

Senator STENNIS. Next item?

GENERAL MITCHELL FIELD, MILWAUKEE, WIS.

($43,000)

Colonel WILSON. Facility required to provide housing for 50 reservists who must travel for 2 hours or a distance in excess of 50 miles. The maximum one-way distance traveled by a reservist is 300 miles. The nearest hotels are in downtown Milwaukee approximately 30 minutes away. No dormitory facilities are available at this installation.

At General Mitchell Field we have one dormitory.

Senator STENNIS. The same reason.

Colonel WILSON. Yes sir, at General Mitchell Field, Milwaukee.

O'HARE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, CHICAGO, ILL.

($1,890,000)

This project will provide the required amount of apron to adequately park authorized and assigned C-119 aircraft in accordance

with criteria. The maintenance hangar formerly situated in the central apron was condemned as unsafe and uneconomical to repair. Provides fire and crash rescue protection for the base and training of reservists jointly with AFR and ANG missions. Facility houses 1-011A structural firetruck, an ambulance, and an R-2 rescue vehicle.

This facility is required to provide hangar and shop space for the operational and training requirements for the reserve mission. Eighteen C-119 and three C-47 aircraft are assigned. There are no adequate facilities at this installation. New facilities tailored to the requirements of a reserve base, which can be economically maintained, are required.

Project required to support new facilities which will house Air Force Reserve Detached Troop Carrier Squadron. Heat will be required for reserve hangar, contained elsewhere in this program, Steam will be required for maintenance shops and other purposes.

At O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, we have an apron rehabilitation project, a fire station combination, which will be used jointly by the Air National Guard and the Air Force Reserve, a hangar, and a heating plant for the hangar and other buildings. This is the largest item we have.

The building presently used as a hangar out there is being demolished as uneconomically repairable and is considered dangerous. Senator STENNIS. It takes your money mighty fast when you go to building hangars now and rehabilitate aprons and items of that kind. That drinks up your money.

Colonel WILSON. This hangar is necessary. The building we are in now is jointly used by the Air National Guard, the Air Defense Command, and the Air Reserve. The maintenance cost of that building was excessive, and was also unsatisfactory from a safety viewpoint.

The building being used as a hangar is being demolished because of this condition, and these proposed facilities will be the only facilities we will have to operate at this location.

Senator CANNON. You have answered my question. I was just going to ask what about the facilities you are presently using? General VIDAL. That's right, Senator. When the old hangar is demolished there is nothing there.

General WILSON. This one has been condemned, Senator. We have the same thing as far as the Air Guard is concerned.

Senator STENNIS. You have such tremendous manpower in an area like this, Chicago and Evanston, that it seems like they ought to have a waiting list there.

General VIDAL. The unit out there is well-manned.

General WILSON. I think it is at about 108 percent right now. Senator CANNON. With the additional civilian facility operations being transferred over there you are going to have a problem in the near future of vacating this base?

General WILSON. No, sir. The Air Force has removed one of their fighter interceptor squadrons from it and they have reduced the military activity, and about the only two that will remain there will be the Guard and the Reserves, sir. We have had no objections so far. Senator CANNON. You don't foresee any saturation point in the immediate or foreseeable future?

General WILSON. No, sir.

Senator STENNIS. All right, the rest of your line items, have we taken up something that is largely typical of all of them?

General VIDAL. Yes, sir. We have covered that when we covered the apron and the hangar and the dormitories. The remaining line items provide for an apron at Portland, Oreg.; an additional increment for warehouse at Richards-Gebaur, Mo.; and a washrack, dormitory, and an additional increment for a warehouse at Willow Grove NAS, Philadelphia, as follows:

PORTLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, OREGON

($588,000)

Project is required to provide operational parking apron for eight troop carrier aircraft. Adequate parking apron meeting Air Force criteria does not exist in sufficient quantity to support the Reserve mission at this installation. Balance of Reserve aircraft (eight C-119, four SA-16 and one TC-47) will be parked upon existing apron by slight relaxation of Air Force criteria. Failure to approve and construct this project will preclude assignment of programed Reserve aircraft with resultant deleterious effect on buildup, training and combat capability of Reserve flying units assigned to this base.

RICHARDS-GEBAUR AIR FORCE BASE, KANSAS CITY, MO. ($105,000)

Project represents essential increment in overcoming existing Reserve warehouse deficiency at this base. Host (ADC) unit fully utilizes existing storage space. Requirement is based upon 20,000 square feet for the 303d TC Squadron (16 C-119 and 171 personnel) plus 8,135 square feet for the 304th TC Squadron (16 C-119 and 169 personnel), 9,150 square feet for the 442d Troop Carrier Wing (610) personnel) and 845 square feet for the 8504th Navigator Training Squadron (one TC-37 and 33 personnel). The preceding aircraft and personnel strengths represent currently assigned totals within the unit authorizations.

WILLOW GROVE NAVAL AIR STATION, PHILADELPHIA,

PA. ($188,000)

Aircraft presently are washed on apron with waste discharging through apron storm drains into a stream flowing through private estates. Resultant stream pollution violates riparian rights of local estate owners as well as established executive order regarding pollution control. Drainage from Reserve apron has already seriously eroded the Strowbridge Memorial Park property and effluent from apron washing will further contaminate natural ponds and water areas in the park area. If this project is not provided, Air Forcepublic relations will be adversely affected and legal action against the Air Force may be expected. This facility will be constructed on 2,740 square yards of existing operational parking apron and includes utility building (240 square feet)

This facility is required to provide the first increment of weekend housing needed by 200 Air Force Reservists who must travel for 2 hours or a distance in excess of 50 miles. The maximum one way distance traveled by a Reservist is 280 miles. No housing can be made available by the Navy to satisfy Air Force housing requirements.

Project is required to provide second increment of three of Reserve warehousing. A total of 38,130 square feet is required for Reserve Troop Carrier Wing with two squadrons plus Reserve Navigator Training Squadron. No facilities exist at the Naval Air Station to complement the existing 20,748 square feet.

Senator STENNIS. Unless there are some further questions suppose we switch over now to the Air National Guard.

General Wilson?

AIR NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES

General WILSON. Mr. Chairman, with your permission I would like to submit my statement for the record to conserve time.

(The document referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. WINSTON P. WILSON, CHIEF, AIR FORCE DIVISION, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I appreciate this opportunity to appear before you to discuss what the Air National Guard has accomplished under past construction authorities and to explain something about our future programs and future requirements for construction. In this presentation, I have included the status of our present facilities on both flying bases and nonflying bases.

The Air National Guard construction program has been phased over a period of years on programs established by Headquarters, U.S. Air Force. The ground rules under which it has been prepared are based on the needs of the units on the premise that construction should be phased with the delivery of aircraft and the growth of units. That is, the facilities should be available when the aircraft are delivered, but it isn't necessary to spend the money until it is known that the equipment is available. The same is true as to growth in personnel strength. That is, additional training facilities are not provided until the growth of the unit in strength justifies it.

Basically, the needs of the Air National Guard are met by using either or a combination of the following:

First, available Air Force or other military facilities.

Second, available federally owned facilities other than military.

Third, State and municipal facilities.

Fourth, by lease or rental of privately owned spaces.

Now, requirements which cannot be satisfied through these means are provided for through new construction as authorized by congressional action.

Chart 1. Real estate acquisition

All construction or expansion of existing facilities are accomplished only when land is furnished by Federal license, Federal lease, or by States and other municipalities on a long-term lease for nominal considerations.

Chart 2. Operational facility requirements

The facilities listed on this chart are the minimum essential operational facilities requirements at each of our flying bases. In addition to the flying bases, we require nonflying facilities for certain type of units where specialized buildings are required to accomplish unit training.

Chart 3. Present facilities

Flying bases. Our requirement under the present Air Force program is for 94 bases with minimum facilities. As you can see from this chart, these 94 bases are located on municipal fields, State fields, Air Force bases, 2 private flying fields, and Navy bases; 38 of the 94 bases are in joint use with Navy, Air Force, Air Force Reserve units, and other Federal agencies. Our construction plans for

38060-59 45

fiscal year 1960 under present programs, mission, and aircraft assignment do not contemplate construction of any new bases.

Nonflying bases.-Under the present program, we have a requirement for 41 nonflying bases to house our aircraft control and warning radio relay units, and other nonflying support units.

Chart 4. Air National Guard progress

In this chart, we have combined the construction funds apportioned during fiscal year 1947 through fiscal year 1951, which was construction accomplished prior to the enactment of Public Law 783. Since enactment of Public Law 783, each year's apportionment and obligation are shown, indicating a very satisfactory construction program, which has met the Air Guard's long-range construction program. During the period fiscal year 1947 through fiscal year 1959, a total of $215.1 million have been funded by the Air Force to the Air National Guard for construction against which a total of $209.6 million has been obligated. The difference between the amount funded and obligated is a result of savings due to the actual obligations being less than the estimated cost of construction. Mr. Chairman, referring again to the $209.6 million of construction already accomplished or underway, we feel that the taxpayer has gotten full value of his money. We have well-planned, adequate, and efficient facilities which fit the equipment and mission assigned to us. This construction has been phased to conform to radical and necessary changes, to both mission and equipment. You are acquainted, I am sure, with the necessary conversions to new aircraft and to the Executive changes in our program structure within the last year. All of these things result in changing construction requirements and I have no reason to suppose that similar changes in requirements will not continue in the future.

Chart 5. Future requirements

Based on the present program for the period fiscal year 1960 through fiscal year 1963, we will have a requirement for construction amounting to approximately $66.9 million to meet the deficiencies. These deficiencies are for runway extensions and aprons for later model high-performance aircraft, installation of aircraft arresting barriers, replacement of facilities for World War II temporary construction, and maintenance facilities such as hangars and jet engine maintenance shops which only became a requirement when we received advanced model jet aircraft. For example, in fiscal year 1958 and fiscal year 1959, there were 72 conversions to new aircraft. For example, F-84, F-85D/L and F-100 aircraft required longer runways and taxiways; F-86D/L, and F-89 aircraft require larger parking areas; and the latter also require hangars and expanded maintenance facilities. We are 100 percent jet in our tactical combat aircraft including the F-100's of supersonic capability.

Chart 6. Summary

This chart gives a summary of construction for the Air Guard. Our estimated total cost through fiscal year 1963 will be approximately $276 million to convert a World War II temporary base structure to a modernized plant of operating century series jets. Our program, with new requirements previously mentioned, is approximately 75 percent complete. The balance of construction contemplated between now and fiscal year 1963 is $66.9 million, as shown on the chart. For fiscal year 1960, the Air National Guard is requesting a military construction authorization program in the amount of $15.536 million to meet this year's portion of the long-range construction program. In addition, the Air National Guard is seeking two amendments to Public Law 85-685 to cover increased estimated costs to two items authorized for fiscal year 1959 but which are now to be accomplished during fiscal year 1960. These items include au increase of $290,000 to the original estimate of the hangar at Barnes Field. Mass., and a total of $180,000 increase in cost to six jet arrestor barriers. These new costs are attributed to the development of more detailed estimates by our construction agencies.

Mr. Chairman, I believe detailed information has been submitted to your staff as to existing facilities at our bases, the types of aircraft with which our units will be equipped, and other factors affecting our fiscal year 1960 program. If, gentlemen, you have questions on this or any other matter, I am at your service. Thank you.