Mrs. HECKLER. Is there a point of inefficiency by reason of having this depot overloaded so that perhaps you should consider another location? Colonel NELSON. When you see we have to take up half the street and this is the only hardstand we have, you start to get inefficient. If you are running 90 to 91 percent occupancy you are inefficient because you have to handle materiel two or three times to store it or ship it out. So the answer is "Yes," we have a certain amount of inefficiency right now because of materiel stored in an inefficient configuration. General CLAY. Another problem is the concentration. Colonel NELSON. And your risks are quite high both from enemy loss and other losses which result from concentration. Mrs. HECKLER. Is there any alternative to it? General CLAY. The alternative is more construction and dispersion. We are making a study on that. Mr. MONAGAN. Have you made any separation of the cost of FRELOC with reference to Kaiserslautern? Colonel NELSON. Yes, sir. The FRELOC portion we have accounted for. Mr. MANNING. I think the FRELOC portion was around $3 million, what we considered as FRELOC. Mr. MONAGAN. What did you consider as FRELOC? Mr. MANNING. What we used generally is the tonnage we received from France and then we used our cost per ton. Mr. MONAGAN. Cost of what per ton? Mr. MANNING. Cost of handling. Mr. MONAGAN. You mean your overall cost of handling on other items as well? Mr. MANNING. Yes, sir. Mr. MONAGAN. And you applied a proportionate share to this on a tonnage basis? Mr. MANNING. Yes, sir; what came out of France. Mrs. HECKLER. That had no relation to the acquisition value? Mr. MANNING. NO. Mr. MONAGAN. I didn't ask him the value. I asked the cost of moving it. Does that include salaries? Mr. MANNING. Yes. The reporting, though, to higher headquarters was not done in this fashion. In other words, if you had a body on board whether it was handling FRELOC or not FRELOC we did not report that body. We only reported FRELOC when they were handling FRELOC only. Mr. MONAGAN. So you may have left out a lot of bodies? Colonel PFEIFFER. This $15 per ton includes all the things. The additive cost is what Mr. Manning is talking about. Mr. MONAGAN. Is the reason you did this because of the detail involved in estimating it in another manner? Mr. MANNING. Yes. It would be practically impossible to do it any other way because you can't say one box was FRELOC and the other box was not FRELOC. General CLAY. I think I saw a recent chart of the total cost of FRELOC to the Army and I think it was $40 million which was far less than was anticipated.1 Mr. MONAGAN. The total cost by some authorities is estimated at $100 million. General CLAY. That probably includes other services. Mr. LEVINSON. And construction of new facilities. Mr. MONAGAN. I think it is supposed to include everything. Colonel NELSON. This concludes our presentation today unless there are questions. Mr. ROMNEY. Colonel, you said COMZ would not know the location of a given item. Colonel NELSON. They only know by depot. For example, they know cups and saucers are stored at C-22. I have 235,000 actual storage locations. But they don't know which pigeonhole I have cups and saucers in; and that is why I must match my records to find the exact location. These things are continually changing. For example, you have a stock location and as soon as the location is emptied I may have new stock coming in. As soon as that one location is empty we kill that location so far as the storage location for that. The next day I might have another shipment that goes in that same location. We may have a single item in as many as four or five storage locations because we get more and more and could not put them all together. We try to keep down the number of multiple storage locations and we try to consolidate our storage locations into one or two principal storage locations. Mr. ROMNEY. One other question: When you ship the materiel back to the United States for repair there, how do you determine whether it is economical to repair it back in the United States? Colonel NELSON. Each major item of equipment that comes in, we prepare form 523 which outlines the estimated man-hours required. and the dollar value of this labor along with the repair parts to repair that item. That is shown on the form based on published criteria. This goes to the commodity manager at SMA. In the case of ordnance we prepare form 471-7 which again outlines the cost to restore the item to serviceable condition. So it is based on an actual physical inspection of the item. It is not a decision made at the top of your head or the seat of your pants. Mr. ROMNEY. Does there have to be a decision made for this back in the States before you send it back? Colonel NELSON. Definitely. Mr. ROMNEY. In the case of FRELOC was the same criteria held to? Colonel NELSON. Of course, one of the things that has caused additional equipment going back to the States has been the activity in Southeast Asia and the requirements of CONUS are more than they were prior to the intensive staffing and manning of Southeast Asia. Some of these items may go through CONUS on the way to Southeast Asia. Mrs. HECKLER. I suppose there is no way you can estimate the value. You estimate the tonnage and that is about it? 1 The Department of the Army subsequently advised that as of Apr. 30, 1967, total Army costs of approximately $55 million have been reported to the Department of the Army in accordance with special instructions for the accumulation of costs for the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces from France. Colonel NELSON. We ran an old one of about $400 million across the board, between $400 and $500 million. Mr. LEVINSON. This is your increase? Colonel NELSON. No; this is our total inventory. General CLAY. The original estimate of the tonnage to be shipped out of France was based on value and it came out very close. Mr. LEVINSON. This was not applied to any one depot. Mrs. HECKLER. So the figure of $400 to $500 million includes FRELOC? Colonel NELSON. Yes, plus receipts from CONUS. Mrs. HECKLER. Would it be possible to separate CONUS? Colonel NELSON. We could. We have never approached it that way. This is a figure we normally wouldn't deal with here internally and we never tried to keep track of it. Mrs. HECKLER. Was it physically possible for you to accept a good deal of materiel from CONUS at the same time you were accepting materiel from FRELOC? Colonel NELSON. We had no choice. However, shipments destined for France were diverted to Kaiserslautern. General CLAY. I heard that same story as to Nahbollenbach. Colonel PFEIFFER. I think it is fair to point out we did have a moratorium until we were in some position to handle them. We were not doing ordinary business plus FRELOC. Colonel NELSON. This concludes our briefing. General CLAY. Is there an unanswered question? Mr. MONAGAN. I don't think so. If we do have one, we will be glad to let you know. Thank you. (The following charts were used by Col. Robert K. Nelson during his presentation at Kaiserslautern General Depot:) 1. PRINCIPAL MISSIONS Receive, store, maintain in-storage, and ship general supplies and repair parts as directed. Receive and store reserve and special project stocks. Receive and deliver supplies destined for military units of nations participating in the cooperative logistics program. Receive, store, and ship radiological waste and toxic chemicals. Perform depot maintenance of equipment as directed. Provide direct and general support maintenance to USAREUR Augmentation Readiness Group and ET-A sites. Maintain U.S.-owned rail equipment. |