Lastly, the activity and attitude of the military would appear to be a moral incursion into the separate spheres which are the provinces of the military and private enterprise.

Thank you.

Senator STEVENS. Thank you very much.

I thank you particularly for reminding us all we are not going to get any income from Navy Petroleum Reserve No. 4 as the situation stands unless it is decreed by the commercial side of our economy. That is a very good point.

I appreciate your coming to present the testimony.

Mr. BRADNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

TEAMSTERS LOCAL 959, ANCHORAGE, ALASKA

STATEMENT OF ROBERT W. JOHNSON, REPRESENTING TEAMSTERS LOCAL 959, ANCHORAGE, ALASKA

Senator STEVENS. Mr. Johnson.

Mr. JOHNSON. I have a prepared statement, but I should like to say ahead of time that I intend to depart from that text immediately after the first paragraph, in view of the testimony given by the Department of Defense.

I am Robert W. Johnson of Anchorage, Alaska, and I appear before you today as the representative of more than 20,000 Alaskan members of Teamsters Local 959, the local union having jurisdiction over all teamsters in the State of Alaska.

INITIAL REACTIONS

When we first learned of this effort by the Air Force, by the Department of Defense, we made inquiry of our congressional delegation regarding it, attempting to learn why it was necessary, and attempting to decide from what source it arose and what it pretended for the future.

We ran into a dearth of information; and as soon as it became obvious that it was definitely going to be what we consider an intrusion in the civilian effort, we issued a statement that this was an economic blow and that we intended, if necessary, to take economic action, including pickets if determined necessary.

On reconsideration, particularly in view of our international union's expressed policy against striking the military or the defense effort in any way, shape, or form, we reconsidered our opinion.

We had a second reason, and that is in Alaska with its small population, its dependence on the military, such a move would be definitely divisive. It would tend to separate the civilian from the military and would serve to create what we believe to be unnecessary prejudice in what is often a tense situation anyway.

UNION PARTICIPATION

Now, the Air Force testified that this cargo was off-loaded by union members from the barge in Anchorage and I would like to state those were our members. We represent the longshoremen at the port of Anchorage.

They further testified the cargo was hauled from the port out to Elmendorf by union members. Those were our members. We represent the line drivers.

Just to round out the picture, I would like to say we also have a contract covering the swamper group at Barrow and their services, the civilian contractor there.

We would also have partaken in any haul down the slope taking it to a site because we have that area covered.

We also represent the surveyors working with the seismic crews and we also represent the roughnecks and drillers in the field of exploration, but we decided to forgo economic action.

UNION VIEW OF MILITARY TRANSPORT

There is no way to express fully the feelings of our members regarding the activities of the military forces in the transport of cargo to the North Slope area of our State. The feelings which are beyond expression range from indignation to outrage, and cover all points in between. The transportation of this cargo is a support function and by law, by regulation, and by tradition a part of the civilian function-save in time of war. Any effort to redesignate it a "training mission" must, under Shakespear's law, wind up being known by the smell it creates.

In addition, when carried out under the conditions of the Alaskan economy, it creates an impact which shall remain after the smell has drifted away.

ATTEMPTS AT JUSTIFICATION

Since this effort first came to light, we have been exposed to an unending chain of attempts to justify the departure from normal processes. To date none of the excuses have done more than prove beyond doubt the wisdom of the axiom, "Nothing which is wrong in principle can become right in practice." And with the proving has come the first losses to our members.

Had the civil forces been charged with the delivery of these goods, more than 300 teamsters would have been employed for some 6 weeks in their delivery

The wages which they should have drawn would have accrued to the economy of the State, at a time when that economy is entering a seasonal slump which will peak with some 20 percent of the State's working force unemploved.

Thus, the effect of this unwarranted and arbitrary action by the military will be felt by all those engaged in normal Alaskan commerce. Cooks and waitresses, landlords, bankers, et cetera, will have a little less in support of their labors. Thanks to this single action.

Nor can there be any refuge in the relative smallness of the amount of money involved.

IMPACT ON ALASKA ECONOMY

In this Nation, which creates an ocean of billions of dollars and calls it an economic base, the small pebble of a few millions as a result of this cargo haul would have little or no impact.

However, that same small pebble cast into the goldfish bowl of Alaksa's economy is bound to be felt-it will have a definite impact. We are aggrieved at this loss and have come to you for a redress of this grievance.

We have come to you with the definite knowledge that this is not a new problem. Rather, it is a problem which predates the Bicentennial which our Nation is entered on and celebrating.

In the bill of particulars listed as "Facts" within the Declaration of Independence, the 12th fact so listed says, "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power."

CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

The feelings which prompted this are noted again in the Constitution, under the "Powers of Congress", when Congress is given the power to regulate, as well as to create, the Armies, and maintain the Navy. Any State such as Alaska which is and has always been a frontier area, essential to the defense of the Nation, has its destiny interwoven in the fabric created by Congress as it exercises its power over these same Armed Forces.

There is no place under the American flag so quick to reflect the results of congressional success or failure in this basic duty. Gentlemen, we are dependent on you for our well-being.

Those of us who passed through the territorial phase of Alaska's history know only too well the instant and lasting effects of any congressional failure to keep watch on military activities. We watched roads, buildings and other items constructed as training missions, when they were clearly and demonstrably part of the civilian support function.

And we did not always disagree, for there were times when this was the only way the military could get those things done.

However, there was nothing in our silent assent during those days now gone which could possibly be read as approval of this present action. Further, with the present level of defense spending, there is no possible way for us to conceive a shortage of funds in this present instance.

We realize, beyond any question, the necessity of the Armed Forces having the capability to replace instantly the civilian entities of our State. Their service of supply can and must be able to replace our warehousing and distribution facilities. Their bakers and cooks are and must be able to replace those working in the bakeries and restaurants of our cities. Their department of finance could probably replace our bankers, should the need ever arise, and certainly their planes can replace our planes even without the proof they are displaying in this alleged training mission.

EXTENT OF MILITARY JURISDICTION

However, we maintain and we submit to you for decision they may have this capability only so long as they do not attempt to replace these same civilian counterparts under normal peacetime conditions.

In short, we hold that this present training operation and any similar training operation is not only in violation of all doctrine and tradition, but also definitely contrary to the public interest, welfare, and well-being.

We ask you to take all possible steps toward correcting the existing erroneous effort and to take whatever steps are necessary to make certain it is not repeated in any form.

And we would ask one more thing: That there be established in the simplest terms a rule of culpability and a similar rule of responsibility, at every level of these Armed Forces.

The past relationship and the present instance are replete with a fogbank of anonymity which totally. hides from views the person or persons responsible for creation of such transgressions on the civilian force. I say to you in all seriousness, it is easier to grab a handful of smoke than it is to get from any of these people the name of the individual who started the ball rolling. So long as this condition is allowed to exist, there shall never be a full check on such wrongdoing.

In closing I should like to express the thanks and appreciation of all our members of Teamsters Local 959 for this opportunity to appear before you and seek redress of this grievance. Should any Alaskan have need, it is living testimonial to the viability of our Nation in its 200th year.

Thank you very much.

Senator STEVENS. Thank you very much, Mr. Johnson.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

I think we should close the record with a statement of thanks to the chairman and my colleagues who have taken their time on a busy Monday morning to attend these hearings, and to all those of you who have taken your time to come from Alaska trying to get this straightened out.

I too am heartened slightly by the statement made that there will not be a repeat of this matter, but I think we have to make certain it will not occur again, and also to see if there is any way we could stop the present ongoing movement by the military of at least a portion of this freight that is destined for oil and gas operations within the naval petroleum reserve, contrary to the understanding we had when that operation started.

I have been informed that the chairman intends to keep the record of this hearing open until the 30th. It will be printed, according to his advice, as a separate hearing, and any of those of you who have additional facts or rebuttal to the statements you have heard here today are invited to convey to the staff any statements or facts or figures you may wish to submit.

Other than that, is there anyone else who wishes to testify this morning?

[CLERK'S NOTE: The following statement by the National Air Carrier Association of the United States was received by the Committee for insertion in the record.]

1

STATEMENT OF NATIONAL AIR CARRIER ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES NACA submits this statement of position in connection with the Committee's hearings on October 20, 1975, in connection with the transport of supplies in Alaska by military aircraft. The CRAF carriers, all of whom are certificated by the Civil Aeronautics Board, have been advocating for years that the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) program was jeopardized by the failure of military services to assure that a greater portion of its airlift requirements was moved on commercial carriers. The recent involvement of the Navy and the Air Force in providing airlift with military aircraft to supply the oil exploration activity

1 Scheduled and supplemental carriers who leave aircraft allocated to the Civil Reserve Air Fleet program in support of military operations.