« ForrigeFortsett »
affected the FY 1974 Construction Program forced the deferral of this project in order to fully fund the other projects in that program.
The requirement for computers and special operational areas that support this Agency's mission, has required extensive consolidation and relocation of attendant activities. The computer and special area space in our Operations Building is now virtually depleted and the machine complex is now contiguous with shop facilities, creating a potentially hazardous condition. Shops which have toxic and explosive characteristics are surrounded by the machine compler. This project will relocate these shop activities from the Operations Building to another building which will be modified to provide the necessary safety features. It will remove the present hazard and will also provide needed space for computers and associated equipment.
In summary, Mr. Chairman, this is the NSA FY 1976 Construction Program for which we are requesting $3,012,000.00. I will be pleased to answer any questions which you may have concerning these projects.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. WARREN D. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, DEFENSE NUCLEAR
AGENCY Jr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am pleased to appear before you to present the Defense Nuclear Agency's fiscal year 1976 military construction request.
We are requesting authorization and funding for three projects in FY 1976 as shown in table I:
At Johnston Atoll, Mid-Pacific Ocean:
Waste heat exchange system.
577 14, 100
577 14, 100
Two of our projects in FY 1976 involve Johnston Atoll in the mid-Pacific; The third project relates to the cleanup of Enewetak, 1850 statute miles west of Johnston Atoll.
Johnston Atoll is maintained as a readiness to test base in the event the atinospheric nuclear test ban treaty is abrogated. It is used for storage of Army "Red Hat” munitions and the Air Force defoliant “Herbicide Orange". It is also used to support the Thor missile launches for certain Army programs, the Coast Guard Loran Station, and Aerospace Defense Command Detachments. In 1963, Congress approved a project which enlarged the atoll land area from about 200 acres to 680 acres. The shoreline of the larger configuration is vulnerable to erosion and has required protection to prevent loss of the fill and improvements placed on it. Protection projects have been accomplished from time to time over the past decade when erosion has threatened improved portions of the island. To date we have invested $9 million in shoreline protection.
The Government's investment in land and facilities on Johnston Atoll approximates $100 million. This project for which we are requesting funds includes protection of an additional 6,000 linear feet of shoreline. If this project is not approved, a storm could cause significant loss of real estate and facilities. Total cost of the req
sted roject is $3,456,000. The proposed waste heat exchange system will provide both fuel and monetary savings by utilizing waste heat from the power plant diesel engines in the distillation of fresh water. It is estimated that after completion of this system, 1,350 gallons of fuel will be saved on Johnston Atoll each day, permitting amortization of the $577,000 cost in three years.
Our project at Enewetak arises from a commitment made by the United States in April 1972 to return the Enewetak people to their home atoll. These people were resettled by the U.S. Government in 1947 on Ujelang Atoll, 140 miles to the south. This was done to permit the use of Enewetak for nuclear
weapon testing and development. From 1948 to 1958, forty-three nuclear devices were exploded there in a series of extremely important nuclear tests. After the signing of the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1958, the atoll had limited use in the ICBM development program.
As you may know, the Trust Territory of the Pacific is the only remaining trust territory, and the United States is subject to the scrutiny of the United Nations and indeed the world. Additionally the l'nited States has other important interests in this part of the Pacific; at Saipan and Tinian, and in the future status of all of Micronesia. Moreover, it seems clear we have a moral obligation to the people of Enewetak to do everything within reason to return them to their homes. They are most anxious to return to their homes.
Since we discontinued testing, facilities have deteriorated beyond repair, except for a few buildings and the airfield on Enewetak Island. Deteriorated structures as well as the extensive radiological debris remaining from our use of the atoll present a hazard which must be removed or neutralized to permit the safe return of the Enewetak people.
The Department of Defense cleanup portion of the program is estimated to cost a total of $39.9 million. The $14.1 million we are requesting for fiscal year 1976 is for the austere rehabilitation of essential base support facilities and initiation of the cleanup work. Based on current engineering estimates, future year increments are scheduled as follows: $24.7 million for fiscal year 1977 and $1.1 million for fiscal year 1978. Thus, we would expect to complete the project in about 30 months after approval of funding. In a final phase, the Department of Interior will build houses and relocate the people. Part of the Interior's work would be accomplished simultaneously with the cleanup.
DNA has been designated to accomplish this cleanup project and the Pacific Ocean Division of the Corps of Engineers has been selected as our construction agency. No work, other than planning will be initiated until the procedures prescribed in the National Environmental Policy Act have been completed. A draft Environmental Impact Statement was filed in September 1974. The com. ments have been received from all interested parties. A final Environmental Impact Statement will be filed on 15 April 1975. We do not expect the final Environmental Impact Statement to be challenged.
Mr. Chairman, this completes my prepared statement. I will be pleased to answer any questions or to discuss any of the above projects, if you desire.
STATEMENT OF JAMES B. SCHREPEL, STAFF SPECIALIST, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, INSTALLATIONS AND HOUSING Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it is indeed an honor and a privilege to appear before this distinguished Committee to present the Fiscal Year 1976 Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities Program of the Department of Defense.
This proposed Fiscal Year 1976 program represents the fifth and, to date, largest increment of a continuing facilities acquisition plan intended to support, in part, the rapid development of a combat-ready Guard and Reserve Force readily able to fulfill its Total Force mission of augmenting the active forces in all future contingencies.
Efforts in recent years to achieve the necessary combat readiness have included increased emphasis on improved training as well as the procurement of essential up-to-date equipment. For example, Army National Guard and Army Reserve units are affiliating with and sharing the missions of Active Army Divisions to bring about closer integration of the active and reserve elements, Similarly, the Navy has reorganized its Reserve force to emphasize hardwareoriented units and to plan expanded Reserve missions.
In addition, the Air Force is increasing the tactical airlift and reconnaissance roles of the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve and at the same time is assigning them a strategic offensive mission by transferring 128 of its KC-135 jet tankers to the Air Guard and Reserve over the next four years.
Understandably, the new training concepts and the great quantities of modern aircraft, vehicles, weapons, and other equipment now on hand or scheduled for early assignment to Guard and Reserve units have had a substantial impact on the scope, nature, and numbers of facilities required. During the past year, space criteria for all Guard and Reserve facilities have been reevaluated to accommodate the new operational, training, storage, and maintenance facilities require
ments. Consequently, the costs associated with these adjustments, compounded by construction cost escalation, have adversely affected our past efforts to liquidate the Guard and Reserve Forces backlog which is currently estimated to be $1.8 billion in terms of today's costs and present missions. However, with close management and constant screening to effect maximum joint utilization of all new and existing active and reserve facilities, we feel that the magnitude of the proposed Fiscal Year 1976 program is such that it will measurably reduce the current backlog. Incidentally, Mr. Chairman, with respect to the subject of maximum joint construction and utilization, it is appropriate to note that this program includes the second and final phase of the proposed construction of an Armed Forces Reserve Center complex at Bolling/Anacostia in the District of Columbia.
The first element of this tri-service facility was authorized in the Fiscal Year 1974 program and the balance is contained in this program. As a jointly-utilized Armed Forces Reserve Center, this facility will consolidate Army National Guard units now located at Camp Simms, Navy and Marine Corps units currently assigned to the Washington Navy Yard, and additional Naval Reserve units located at Jones Point in Alexandria, Virginia.
For Fiscal Year 1976, the Department of Defense is requesting a total of $205,604,000 in authorization to support the following facilities programs of the various Guard and Reserve components : Army National Guard -
$54, 745, 000 Army Reserve...
44, 459, 000 Naval and Marine Corps Reserve--
34, 800, 000 Air National Guard.-
55, 100,000 Air Force Reserve.-
205, 604, 000 This request represents an increase of 36 percent over the Fiscal year 1975 request and reflects the continuing Depa rtment of Defense conviction fully equipped, combat ready Guard and Reserve Force is indispensable if a strong National Defense posture is to be maintained.
Projects supporting this total lump sum authorization request can be only tentatively identified at this time, but the present list indicates that $66,968,000 would be used to construct, expand, or modify 87 armories and training centers for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve while an additional $32,236,000 would be used to meet urgent requirements for vehicle maintenance, aviation support, field training, and other essential non-armory facilities. The Naval and Marine Corps Reserve propose to use $25,109,000 for seven training centers and $9,691,000 for vehicle and aircraft operations and maintenance, personnel support, and other energy conservation and water pollution abatement projects. Similarly, the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve propose to use $31,954,000 for operational facilities, $27,916,000 for aviation maintenance facilities, $7,720,000 for training facilities, and $4,010,000 for various other storage and energy conservation projects.
Mr. Chairman, representatives of the Guard and Reserve components are here with me to discuss their respective programs in greater detail and to answer any questions the Committee may have concerning this or other Reserve programs.
STATEMENT BY MAJ. GEN. LAVERN E. WEBER, CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU,
DEPARTMENTS OF THE ARMY AND THE AIR FORCE Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to appear before this distinguished committee. My purpose is to request authorization for military construction, Army National Guard, for Fiscal Year 1976. This authorization is for facilities which are urgently needed for the training and mobilization readiness of our units. I know this is a matter of concern to this committee, just as it has always been in the past. Today the readiness posture of the Guard has become even more critical. Certainly the facilities needed to assemble and administer our Guard units, to store and secure weapons and ammunition, to maintain vehicles and aircraft and to accomplish our annual and weekend training assume added importance.
Today we are requesting an authorization for $54.7 million for armory and non-armory facilities. Included are 58 armories and 60 non-armories projects. This makes a total of 118 major projects in 38 States, and Puerto Rico. The non-armory projects consists of 6 aviation facilities, 23 training facilities, 30 vehicle maintenance facilities, and 1 USPFO warehouse. The amount of $54.7 million for major projects plus $8.0 million for minor construction and planning make up our FY 1976 budget of $62.7 million.
As a result of the increased reliance placed on the National Guard for the defense of our nation, our units have, and are still receiving, additional and more modern equipment. In the last 5 years, the value of our equipment inventory doubled. Our requirements for maintenance and storage facilities for this equipment have increased proportionately. In addition, training requirements for the Guard have increased so that our units may attain and maintain a high state of combat readiness. This has created a need for more and better training facilities. Because of these increased facility requirements, our construction backlog has increased from $300 million in FY 71 to $500 million even though we have done $107 million of construction during that period. This backlog is based on FY 76 costs and does not include future escalation costs.
Our actual obligations for FY 1974 were $36.3 million which exceeded our original obligation target by $1.3 million. This represents an obligation of 95.0% of the funds available. This left us a carry-over of only $2.0 million into FY 1975. Our FY 75 budget plan of $59.0 million provides an obligation target of $55.5 million. We expect to reach this target; therefore, we should have a carry-orer of $5.5 million into FY 1976. We plan to obligate $62.0 million during FY 1976 which will give us $6.2 million to carry into FY 1977. Our obligation figures include minor construction and planning funds as well as major construction. This FY 76 Budget level of $62.7 million is an increase of $3.7 million over FY 1975.
I wish to express my appreciation for your understanding and continuing support of our efforts to provide adequate facilities for our 400,000 man Arms National Guard force.
This concludes my prepared statement. If there are any questions, I will be pleased to furnish any information that you may require.
STATEMENT BY MAJ. GEN. J. MILYOR ROBERTS, CHIEF ARMY RESERVE. DEPARTMENT
OF THE ARMY Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege to appear before this Committee to present the FY 1976 Military Construction, Army Reserve Authorization Request.
During FY 1976 we will be continuing work on the construction program approved in 1970 which will provide adequate and proper facilities for the Army Reserve. The past five years have seen major changes in the role of the Army Reserve in our national defense. The requirement of achieving and maintaining a higher state of combat readiness places an increased burden on our Reserve commanders, especially in the areas of equipment maintenance and unit training. To achieve their unit readiness requirements, they must have Reserve centers which will provide adequate locations for the conduct of inactive duty training and must also have improved annual training facilities.
Our program request for FY 1976 is $14,459,000. This amount is for the following major construction projects: 15 new Reserve centers, 14 expansions of existing centers, 1 alteration of an existing center, 4 organizational maintenance shops, 1 Equipment Concentration Site/Area Maintenance Support Activity, 1 DS-GS maintenance shop, 5 annual training facilities.
Three of the new centers are to be SOLAR projects, which will use solar energy to accomplish heating and cooling, with limited supplementation from conventional sources,
We will be giving special attention to upgrading facilities at our annual training sites, both as to troop housing and for unit training. Most of our annual training is at World War II facilities, which present substantial maintenance and repair problems. The Corps of Engineers is currently working on designs for permanent, austere structures to replace the antiquated facilities at these training sites, and we will begin construction during FY 1976.
Maintenance of the greatly increased equipment inventory now on hand is a priority item for all our units. Six of the projects are for additional maintenance shops to give the Army Reserve increased capability to handle this vital job.
The Army Reserve construction backlog now stands at $401 million. Following is a list of authorizations and contract wards over the past five years:
Using current dollar amounts, the total FY 1976 budget request would allow program completion in about eight years.
Detailed justification data on all planned projects for FY 1976 is contained in the books you have been furnished. All these projects constitute the current highest priority requirements for the Army Reserve. All are needed now to support the maintenance and training requirements necessary for unit readiness.
STATEMENT OF VICE ADM. PIERRE N. CHARBONNET, JR., USN, DIRECTOR OF NAVAL
Our request for fiscal year 1976 totals 36.4 million dollars, of which 34.8 million is for specific projects and 1.6 million is for continuing authority. This is a substantial increase over our requests of recent years. The predominant part of this increase is the 13.9 million dollars for the Armed Forces Reserve Center at the Bolling-Anacostia site in Washington, D.C. For simplicity of management, total funding for this project has been programmed in the appropriation for the Naval Reserve which will be the host service. Over half of the actual construction, however, will be for the Army National Guard. The amount remaining for application against our construction backlog, while consistent with budget limitations and the overall priorities of the Navy, remains quite modest.
The backlog of Naval Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve construction deficiencies now totals 420 million dollars. The continued growth of this backlog reflects both the accelerating deterioration of our overage facilities, and the effects of the severe inflation of recent years in construction costs. The largest segment of construction deficiencies relates to support of the Naval Air Reserve and the Fourth Marine Air Wing. The Naval Air Reserve operates seven Naval Air Stations and one Naval Air Facility in support of these forces. Four of the Air Stations were constructed during the Second World War, and require replacement or updating of outmoded, semipermanent facilities to meet the operational and training requirements of today. Similar problems exist with many of the facilities assigned to our Naval Air Reserve Units (NARU's) who are tenants aboard regular forces air stations. Three projects totaling just over $7.0 million are included in the request in support of Naval and Marine Air Reserve requirements.
There are 337 Naval Surface Reserve Centers and Facilities of which 114 a re jointly utilized with the Marine Ground Reserve, which operates an additional 48 Marine Corps Reserve facilities. Over half of these surface and ground reserve facilities are semi-permanent structures constructed in the late 1940's, which have reached the end of their useful lives. In addition to the Bolling-Anacostia center, eleven projects totaling some $11.4 million are included in this request to support Surface and Marine Corps Ground requirements. Additionally, we are requesting $1.8 million for four energy conservation projects and $0.7 million for five pollution abatement projects.
We are continuing to support the policy of joint utilization at every opportunity. Of the 414 sites at which the Naval Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve now operate, 233, or 56% are jointly utilized with one or more services. All of the Reserve Centers and Air support facilities proposed in this request are for sites jointly utilized with other Reserve forces, or with the regular Navy.
51-344 0.75 - 6