CONCLUDING REMARKS Senator SASSER. We may have some questions which we would like to submit to both of you later, but I think we have pretty well covered it and I am under some time constraints today. I want to thank all of our witnesses for appearing here this morning, both from the Defense Department and our outside witnesses, and for your excellent presentations and for expressing your concerns about the construction request before this subcommittee for the Guard and Reserve Forces. As I said earlier, I think funds that we expend for the Guard and for our Reserve Forces are some of the best defense dollars that we spend. We have got to be very careful I think of talking about putting burdens on the Reserve and on the Guard and not giving them the financial resources to carry out the missions which are assigned to them. I want to assure both of you gentlemen that I strongly support the activities of our Reserves and of our National Guard and think that they have a very vital and continuing and I think expanded role to play in our national defense in the coming years. Thank you for appearing here this morning. SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS At this time the subcommittee is going to stand in recess, subject to the call of the Chair. [Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., Monday, May 18, the subcommittee was recessed to reconvene at the call of the Chair.] MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1982 TUESDAY, JULY 14, 1981 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 2:30 p.m. in room 1223, Everett McKinley Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. James Sasser presiding. Present: Senator Sasser. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INSTALLATIONS AND HOUSING STATEMENT OF PERRY J. FLIAKAS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (INSTALLATIONS AND HOUSING) ACCOMPANIED BY: LT. GEN. RICHARD H. GROVES, U.S. ARMY, DEPUTY ADVISOR ON NATO AFFAIRS COL. LEON K. PFEIFFER, U.S. AIR FORCE, DIRECTOR, NATO DEFENSE POLICY BRIG. GEN. EDWARD HONOR, U.S. ARMY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR J-4 BRIG. GEN. DONALD M. O'SHEI, U.S. ARMY, DIRECTOR, CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT BRIG. GEN. NORMAN G. DELBRIDGE, JR., U.S. ARMY, CHIEF, REQUIREMENTS BRANCH, PROGRAMING DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS COMDR. WILLIAM HARPER, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (INSTALLATIONS AND HOUSING) COMDR. JEFFREY L. BROWN, U.S. NAVY, EUROPEAN DIVISION, JCS-5 BUDGET REQUEST Senator SASSER. The subcommittee will come to order. Gentlemen, I apologize for delaying you this afternoon. We had a floor vote and some business that had to be disposed of on the floor of the Senate. That is the reason for the delay. Today we will receive testimony on fiscal year 1982 requests for military construction in Europe. Our subcommittee will consider a request of approximately $1.1 billion which incudes the U.S. share of the NATO infrastructure program in the amount of $385 million. Now this request amounts to about 20 percent of the overall military construction requests for fiscal year 1982. The subcommittee continues to be interested in the growth of the military con struction program and is especially interested in programs which provide the United States with assistance in the construction. INTRODUCTION OF WITNESSES Our primary witness today is Mr. Perry J. Fliakas, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Installations and Housing. He is accompanied as I understand it by Lt. Gen. Richard H. Groves, the Deputy Adviser on NATO Affairs and Maj. Gen. Richard D. Bowman, Director of European and NATO Affairs in the Office of International Security Policy. On behalf of our chairman I would like to welcome each of you gentlemen as well the various representatives from the services and the Office of the Secretary of Defense. COMMITMENT TO NATO Just let me say that our most important security obligation remains our commitment to the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance. I am very concerned with the systematic buildup of Soviet and Warsaw Pact military capabilities in Europe. It is clear that the threat to security in Europe is growing with each passing day. We have a great challenge before us. We must maintain the military balance and improve our own capability. Should we fail to recognize the growing potential threat not only of the military buildup but the political strains on the Alliance itself, we will find this deteriorating condition will only lead to economic and political unrest during peacetime and could lead to disaster should a conflict arise. This subcommittee is committed to the improvement of our NATO capabilities. We are committed to maintaining the proper and necessary military balance in Europe. Mr. Fliakas, I believe we will begin with your statement followed by a briefing on the NATO infrastructure program and how it works. We will also discuss the so-called master restationing plan which involves shifting U.S. forces closer to the border with Eastern Europe. It may be necessary as I understand it to go into executive session at the end of the hearing. At that point I will make the appropriate motion and have the room cleared except for authorized personnel. So Mr. Fliakas, if you are ready, please begin. Mr. FLIAKAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is one correction. sir, with respect to our witness list. General Bowman was unable to come this afternoon. His deputy, Colonel Pfeiffer, is here in his stead. Also, on my right is Gen. Ed Honor representing the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In addition, seated at the far right is General O'Shei, the Director of Construction in my office. PREPARED STATEMENT Senator SASSER. Welcome gentleman. Before we begin, the prepared statement of Mr. Fliakas will be inserted in the record at this point. [The statement follows:] PREPARED STATEMENT OF PERRY J. FLIAKAS DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (INSTALLATIONS AND HOUSING) Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am pleased to be here today to present the FY 1982 Department of Defense request for construction in Europe. The request totals $1.095 billion, of which $385 million is for the United States' share of the NATO Infrastructure Program. By major construction categories, the FY 1982 Program As I did last year, I have elected to address the Department of Defense military construction needs in Europe as a separate statement for three important reasons. First, this Committee as well as the other Congressional Committees dealing with construction have indicated a great deal of interest in our European program and methods of financing. Excluding Family Housing, the amount requested for construction authorization in Europe is 24 percent of the total FY 1982 authorization request. Second, the relationship of U.S. funded military construction to the NATO Common Infrastructure program is complex and sometimes difficult to understand without a full explanation of their interaction. Finally, we must have an adequate construction program in Europe if the United States and NATO are to realize the full benefits of the defense and deterrence which programmed levels of forces and equipment and our readiness initiatives should provide. The Secretary of Defense has directed a comprehensive analysis of our construction effort in Europe to ensure that it solidly supports national military objectives. Thus, we believe the European slice of our construction program needs, and deserves, special attention. I have spoken to the linkage between the U.S. military construction programs and those of NATO within the NATO Infrastructure program. As this Committee well understands, Mr. Chairman, the requirement for facilities derives from operational decisions affecting troops, weapon systems, and equipment. For example, the decision to preposition division equipment in Europe in support of rapid reinforcement has triggered a considerable increase in the requirement for storage and maintenance facilities and will result in a significant outlay of funds through the NATO common Infrastructure Program. The decision to deploy the ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM) and PERSHING II as part of theatre nuclear force modernization in Europe gives rise to a broad range of facilities requirements, some of which we plan to fund through NATO Infrastructure and others, like logistic and community facilities which we accept as a national responsibility, through the Military Construction Program. Failure to recognize this close linkage between forces and facilities in our planning and budgeting process can mean costly delays and program adjustments. More important, it degrades military readiness. We are now implementing a comprehensive program for improving the planning, programming and execution of construction in Europe. We have set up a systematic review of U.S. and NATO procedures in order to streamline the programming and execution process and thus improve our ability to meet the facility needs of the Major NATO Commanders (MNC). Consolidated programming and budgeting procedures have been applied in two review cycles and our U.S. European Commanders have been brought more directly into project development and priority-setting. As we seek ways to improve the management of our European programs, we also have very much in mind our obligation to keep the Congress informed and involved. For example, some organizational changes that I have recently been able to make will allow us to better keep the Committees currently and fully briefed on the NATO Infrastructure system and developments in the NATO pro grams. We also remain sensitive to the view of Congress that we should try to fund more of our wartime operational facilities' needs through NATO Infrastructure. This is part of the broader Congressional concern over what is viewed as a need for equitable burdensharing. A feature of the current five-year Infrastructure Program is the recent |