A total of $155.8 million is requested in this bill for facilities for the three major ICBM systems-ATLAS, TITAN, and MINUTEMAN.

Most of the major construction problems associated with the earlier phases of this huge and tremendously complex, first-of-a-kind, missilespace program have been resolved. The improved management of the program has resulted from the experience gained in both facility design and construction techniques.

Our major efforts now are devoted primarily to sites for the MINUTEMAN. Construction for the MINUTEMAN, although still complex and unique, is significantly simpler than that required for the ATLAS and TITAN. This is due to the smaller size of the MINUTEMAN, its type of guidance system, and its use of solid rather than liquid fuel.

Construction of operational facilities to support the 13 squadron ATLAS weapon system and the 12 squadron TITAN weapon system is essentially complete. This authorization request includes $10 million for both the ATLAS and TITAN systems to further the facilities updating program. This program will provide for incorporating facilities changes necessitated by improvements to the overall weapon systems.

Construction was authorized and financed in prior years for 5 wings. (a total of 16 squadrons) of the MINUTEMAN weapon system. Authorization is requested in this bill for MINUTEMAN facilities in the amount of $145.8 million.

Of this total, $140.7 million is for the sixth MINUTEMAN wing of three squadrons to be located at Grand Forks Air Force Base, N. Dak. The additional $5.1 million is for test and training facilities to support MINUTEMAN.

A major item included in the bill as printed would have provided $28 million for the first increment of construction of a deep underground support center to provide SAC with a survivable ground element of the postattack command control system (PACCS). This projects subsequently has been withdrawn by the Department of Defense and the Air Force for further study to more clearly define the requirement and plans.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, has that been omitted from the House bill?

General CURTIN. Yes, it was, sir.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Thank you.

General CURTIN. Continental air and missile defense.

Facilities requested to reduce the vulnerability of our continental defense systems and provide them with increased capabilities total $82 million. The principal item in this amount provides $45 million for construction of a minimum complement of operational facilities at a number of bases to increase survivability of the Air Defense Command fighters by dispersing them in small unit increments.

Increased emphasis is being placed on capabilities for conduct of conventional war operations under possible conditions of several simultaneous contingencies. This emphasis is reflected in the Air Force construction request of $100 million for support of the general purpose and airlift forces of TAC, MATS, and the overseas commands.

A major increment of this amount is $30 million for construction of protective aircraft shelters at oversea bases. These shelters will increase the survivability and capability of tactical aircraft by providing protection for them against nonnuclear weapon attack.

The rapidly advancing technology in military systems requires concurrent emphasis and timely provision of supporting facilities. The unique nature and technical requirements of many approved research and development programs necessitate new construction or major alteration of existing facilities. This is particularly true of missile and space applications which today receive a major share of the R. & D. effort.

Facilities requested in this bill to support the R. & D. programs of the Air Force total $53 million. This amount includes $25 million for projects supporting specific major missile and space development programs, including missile test ranges.

Projects totaling $128 million are requested for general force support activities and missions not included in the primary systems and programs previously discussed.

Authorization of $21 million is requested for facilities supporting major Air Force training activities. These include the technical and flying training programs of the Air Training Command and the professional education programs of the Air University.

For various logistic support activities of the Air Force Logistics Command, $13 million is requested. The improvements requested are essential for efficient supply and maintenance management of the weapon systems assigned to those bases for logistical support.

Communications facilities, including major system nets, base communications and telephone facilities, and related electric power projects, total $21 million.

Construction supporting six major communications systems amount to $15 million of the $21 million total. These will provide additional capabilities and increased reliability of communications systems in North America and in the Far East, European, and Mediterranean

areas.

Medical facilities in this program total $26 million and include hospitals, dispensaries, and dental clinics. The new hospitals and dispensaries requested will replace existing facilities which are grossly substandard, from both structural and medical aspects.

Also in the general support category are projects totaling $6.9 million for Bolling Air Force Base. The facilities requested represent the initial increment of construction to establish one of the two cantonment complexes needed for support of Department of Defense personnel and activities in the Washington, D.C., area.

Another major request in this grouping would provide $2.1 million for alteration and addition to an existing facility at Randolph Air Force Base, Tex., to accommodate Air Force military personnel operating and records management functions. These activities are being consolidated with functions assigned to Headquarters, Air Training Command, for more efficient control and management and to effect operational economies. At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to further explain this is consolidation of the personnel operating functions of Headquarters of the Air Force.

This is certainly a top priority project in our opinion and we would like to address ourselves further to it at the appropriate time.

The grouping also includes facilities supporting classified activities, primarily in oversea areas, amounting to $18.5 million and the $17.5 million emergency construction authority in section 303 of the bill. The authorization bill approved by the House of Representatives, H.R. 6500, includes $494 million in title III for Air Force construction. This amount represents a reduction of $87.7 million from the original authorization request, or about a $60 million reduction in addition to the postattack command control system project previously mentioned. The changes made by the House included the deletion of 47 items and cost reductions on 4 items.

As Mr. Morris, the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installations and Logistics), indicated earlier, all of the projects contained in the authorization request received an unusually careful examination as to their military necessity.

The projects deleted by the House are valid requirements to accommodate essential Air Force functions and to increase the effectiveness and economy of operations.

Supplemental information on the deleted items has been furnished to the committee. We are prepared to discuss each of the items in detail during your review of the program.

There are, however, several significant House-deleted items which cause us special concern. These projects amount to $40 million of the $60 million reduction made by the House, and include the following:

Bolling Air Force Base, District of Columbia: All items for DOD cantonment plan__

Million

$6.9

Randolph Air Force Base, Tex.: Consolidation of military personnel functions___

2.1

Cameron Station, Va.: Administrative and operational facility for the
Armed Services Technical Information Agency.

Protective shelters for tactical aircraft at oversea bases__

1.0

30.0

In addition to the reductions on specific items of construction, the House reduced from $17.5 million to $12.5 million the authorization requested in section 303 of the bill for unforeseen emergency construction requirements.

Projects currently approved and in process will consume the full amount of the $15 million emergency construction authority provided for fiscal year 1963.

The emergency authorization requested in this bill is necessary to permit the Air Force to proceed with essential, but unforeseen, construction which cannot be delayed until the next normal authorization cycle. The present atmosphere of rapid change and technological advances, and the need to respond to worldwide military contingencies, makes the availability of this authority essential.

Your favorable consideration of these important items is respectfully requested.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my summary remarks on the Air Force military construction authorization request. We are prepared to answer questions of the committee and to discuss fully the projects contained in the program.

Thank you, sir.

Chairman RUSSELL. General, you have testified there are some items that you think should be assigned priority that were deleted in the House of Representatives.

I wish that you would give us a priority listing of all of the deletions made by the House in the order of their importance as they appeal to the Department of the Air Force.

General CURTIN. We will furnish the committee such a list.

Chairman RUSSELL. What was the amount that you have in this bill for manned bombers and their supporting tanker aircraft?

General CURTIN. Mr. Chairman, for direct support of the B-52's in Strategic Air Command, we have a total of $18.2 million. Of this, $2.2 million is directly related to the B-52.

$14.8 million would be indirect support. There is $1 million related to the B-58, and approximately $200,000 related to the KC-135 and the RC-135.

Chairman RUSSELL. Is that largely for alterations and additions? General CURTIN. Actually, these amounts are essentially for alterations to existing pavement systems, and to round out the operational facilities required in direct support of the system:

As you know, the B-52's, like any of our weapons systems, are constantly updated. As I recall in last year's program, there were $200 or $300 million in the procurement and maintenance areas for updating these aircraft. As the aircraft are updated this_brings about additional facility requirements. These are very minor, I would point out. in relation to the actual amounts of money spent on the hardware but are required.

Chairman RUSSELL. They are very small. I had inquired into it particularly because of the fact that the Commander in Chief and the Secretary of Defense were apparently taking a very adamant position that we can't have any more manned bombers.

Of course, the majority of the Congress think that is a very grave error but we have not been able to persuade the Commander in Chief and Secretary of Defense to spend any of the additional sums that we have appropriated for that purpose in an effort to discharge our constitutional obligations for defense of the country.

We don't have the power to force them to spend it, and if they are determined to dispense with the manned bombers, I don't see any necessity for spending a great deal of money on the bases. I think the basic decision was an error and it may ultimately develop to be a very tragic error, but since it has been made there is nothing that the Air Force or Congress apparently is able to do about it.

I am referring not to the Air Force military and to the civilian portion of the Air Force so I think you should carefully consider a request of that nature.

General CURTIN. We have, Mr. Chairman, and I might point out that these facilities are required, as we see it, to support these aircraft through the life of the aircraft. We see this life extending out several years into the future.

These projects are required for essential and safe operation of the aircraft. They have been reviewed very carefully, Mr. Chairman. Chairman RUSSELL. You have a request for $30 million for defense against conventional weapons on oversea tactical bases, I believe they are tactical.

General CURTIN. That is correct, sir.

Chairman RUSSELL. Would that provide any protection against a nuclear attack?

General CURTIN. No, sir, they are minimal protection. The basic purpose of these shelters is against conventional weapons, and if I may, sir, in our executive session, we are prepared to expand upon this in considerable detail.

Chairman RUSSELL. Very well. We will probably request you to because I want to find out just why that was done, whether it is based on any realistic suggestion that any all-out war would be conventional. General CURTIN. We will be prepared to go into the operational concept as well as the technical features of the construction at that time, sir.

Chairman RUSSELL. General, you have here a number of items applying to specific bases, and others are not included in any degree in this request.

I wish you would outline for the committee all of the steps that are taken in selecting the bases that will be approved for inclusion in request for authorization.

Start down at the point where the colonel or the brigadier general in command requests something he wants done and follow it through the various steps and commands until it is brought up here, and tell us how it is passed on at the various command levels.

General CURTIN. I will be glad to, sir.

Starting at the base level, projects can be generated by anyone of the major staff sections or individuals at the base, for example, the supply officer, the maintenance officers, civil engineer, or other staff elements and, of course, by the commander himself.

In the annual cycle these projects are submitted to what is known as the facilities utilization board which is a formally constituted board at base level under the direct command of the base commander and reports directly to him.

This is made up of the base commander's staff members, so that you get an experienced view of the relative urgency of each project. Chairman RUSSELL. They decide as to the relative urgency of the project within each individual base?

General CURTIN. That is right, yes, sir.
Chairman RUSSELL. All right.

General CURTIN. Each individual base then submits its priority, in a priorities list, of projects to its appropriate major command. For example, a Strategic Command base would send all of its proposed projects to Omaha.

Each major command in turn has a facility utilization board composed of senior officers in the headquarters.

These senior officers, in turn, have assistants that they appoint as a working level group. In the majority of cases this working level group, once they have received the request from the individual bases, then schedule field trips to the extent that time will permit and personally examine these projects on site with the base commander and his staff.

And then, in turn, the major command from this staff review as well as on-site review, prepares again in priority, a listing of projects which they submit to our headquarters.