DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1983 WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1982 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room 1114, Everett McKinley Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Stevens (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Stevens, Schmitt, and Andrews. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. ROBERT C. KINGSTON, USA, COMMANDER, RAPID DEPLOYMENT JOINT TASK FORCE ACCOMPANIED BY: CHARLES W. GROOVER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PROGRAM INTEGRATION, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (MANPOWER, RESERVE AFFAIRS AND LOGISTICS) LT. GEN. JAMES R. BRICKEL, USAF, DEPUTY COMMANDER IN CHIEF, U.S. READINESS COMMAND COL. JOSEPH V. RAFFERTY, USAF, HEAD OF FORCE PLANNING AND PROGRAMING DIVISION, PLANS AND POLICY DIRECTORATE, J-5, ORGANIZATION OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF RAPID DEPLOYMENT JOINT TASK FORCE READINESS ARMED FORCES READINESS Senator STEVENS. Gentlemen, we apologize for the problem regarding the hearing this morning. We had originally set it for 9 a.m. and changed it to 10 a.m. It is apparent that I am involved in convening the Senate more days than not now. I regret the inconvenience. We will try to see that it doesn't happen again. I extend my apologies to Senator Stennis, also. The principal subject of our inquiry today is the Rapid Deployment Force. I have also requested that the Department witnesses be prepared to discuss the general readiness of our Armed Forces. Our current military force levels stand at over 2 million personnel, most of which would be dedicated to an overseas location in the event of conflict. RDF-QUICK RESPONSE UNIT One of the keys to our global military contingency planning is the quick response unit-the Rapid Deployment Force. The Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have determined that the RDF will be a joint service unit, thereby rejecting the notion of singular responsibility in the hands of the Marine Corps. Further, the RDF has been removed from the operational control of the U.S. Readiness Command and, by next January, will be a separate JCS unified command, specifically dedicated to Southwest Asia-the Persian Gulf region. Although the organization and regional assignments have been swiftly implemented, the mission scenarios and, most important to this committee, the funding requirements, remain uncertain. Despite all the public attention to rapid deployment, it remains virtually impossible for this committee to determine just how much of the fiscal year 1983 budget request is for the RDF. Even the RDF Commander's prepared statement today passes over the appropriations for the RDF. It is difficult for us to secure support for the RDF as a separate entity, particularly with the U.S. Readiness Command still in place, without adequate budget justification and program definition. The examination of funding requirements, assets, and mission scenarios to the RDF is the direction of this hearing today. With my apologies and, on the record, everyone knows my great love for the District of Columbia, so if you would like to join me in enjoying the swamp of the place and take off your jackets, I will be happy to have you do so. INTRODUCTION OF WITNESSES I am pleased to have General Kingston, Commander of the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force; General Brickel, Deputy Commander in Chief of the U.S. Readiness Command; and Mr. Groover, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Program Integration. Gentlemen, your statements will be printed in the record in full. General Kingston, there are others who will assist you today. I hope you will help us by identifying them as they participate, for the record. Thank you. I might say that we started at 8:45 this morning in the Senate. Under our rules we will not be able to sit beyond 10:45. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. ROBERT C. KINGSTON General KINGSTON. Senator Stevens, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee. My purpose today is to acquaint you and the other members of the committee with essential Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force programs and how they will be affected by the fiscal year 1983 defense budget. In March of 1980 the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force was established as a subordinate command of the U.S. Readiness Command with a mission to deploy joint forces worldwide. Today the RDJTF is a separate joint task force, reporting directly to the Na tional Command Authorities through the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Secretary of Defense has directed that the RDJTF transition to unified command status by January 1, 1983. My current mission is to conduct planning for possible Southwest Asia contingencies that would affect the vital interests of the United States, to conduct the training that is required to assure the operational readiness to respond to those plans and to be prepared to deploy my forces, no notice, to the Southwest Asia region on order. ACTIVITIES OF RDJTF The RDJTF is basically a deterrent force. If deterrence fails and it becomes necessary to come to the aid of our friends, we must be prepared to deploy forces to the region quickly when directed by the National Command Authorities and, if required, commit them to combat in defense of our vital national interests. FORCE STRUCTURE AND MISSION OF RDJTF The force structure and mission of the RDJTF was evolving during the first year and one-half of its existence. Therefore, service programing of funds for RDJTF-related activities was like shooting at a moving target. Now, as a separate joint task force with forces designated and assigned, we can begin to more clearly assess our own needs and the contribution of service budgets toward meeting my mission essential requirements. The fiscal years 1984-88 service program objective memoranda are the first formal opportunity my staff has had to work with the service staffs to identify RDJTF needs. COSTS OF SOUTHWEST ASIA-RELATED PROGRAMS In order to address the costs of Southwest Asia-related programs, certain considerations are in order. The costs of forces allocated to the Southwest Asia mission would not necessarily be reduced by eliminating the mission, since these forces also have roles in other theaters. In addition, mobility program costs should not be directly apportioned to Southwest Asia, as these programs-specifically strategic and tactical airlift, strategic sealift, and amphibious shipping-are badly needed to support any significant contingency. I believe that certain specific Southwest Asia-related programs are essential. One of the best examples is our exercise and environmental training program. Some of you may be aware of Exercise Bright Star 1982, conducted in Egypt, Somalia, Sudan, and Oman during November and December of last year. It involved deploying over 6,500 American personnel into the region. While exercises such as this are expensive, they are a visible demonstration of U.S. capability and resolve to our friends and send the right kind of signal to our adversaries as well. In the end, being unprepared would be far more costly. On the other hand, there are programs such as hospital support and communications enhancements designed to correct existing shortfalls and to support the Southwest Asia strategy but which could support missions in other theaters of operation. As a result of current programs, the RDJTF now has a credible force projection and combat capability but it is still not enough. We need more airlift and sealift to improve our capability to project combat power in greater quantities and more rapidly in support of U.S. interests. COMMAND AND CONTROL COMMUNICATIONS We also need better command and control communications. We must improve our capability to sustain and resupply our forces once they are committed. The services are working diligently to solve these problems and I am confident that our capabilities will improve with time. The fiscal year 1983 defense budget and the fiscal years 1984-88 service program objective memoranda are steps in the right direction. We are in the process of transitioning from joint task force status to that of a unified command. As we continue the transition, the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force will take on added responsibilities and my staff will continue to increase accordingly. FACILITIES AT MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE Facilities are currently under construction at MacDill Air Force Base but are not sufficient to house more than one-half of my headquarters. Funds to complete this construction are contained in the fiscal year 1982 supplemental budget request. Early appropriation of these funds would save contractor demobilization and subsequent remobilization costs; it would also avoid the great disadvantage of having my headquarters split and separated by 5 miles for up to 12 years. OVERALL ADEQUACY OF FISCAL YEAR 1983 BUDGET Addressing the overall adequacy of the fiscal year 1983 defense budget, I believe it provides a strong signal to our adversaries of the commitment to enhance our national security and demonstrates our resolve to our friends as well. This, in itself, is an important contribution to deterrence. The budget also represents a cooperative effort among the services to assure a balanced force posture so as to be better prepared to cope with a wide range of contingency missions. RDF READINESS ENHANCEMENTS Finally, relative to RDJTF programs, the services have been very forthcoming in funding RDF readiness enhancements, in some cases even at the expense of their own programs. My task now is to take what you approve and develop the best combat capability possible. This notwithstanding, I want to emphasize the importance of strategic mobility, communications, and sustainment programs, specifically airlift, sealift, prepositioning of equipment, military construction programs for Southwest Asia and en route basing, and command, control, and communications. These are the lifeblood of successful operations in Southwest Asia; therefore, the programs outlined in the fiscal year 1983 defense budget are necessary to enhance the capability for protecting vital U.S. interests in that region. Mr. Chairman and members of this committee, I solicit your continued support. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, we have already identified General Brickel and Mr. Groover. Senator STEVENS. Mr. Groover, do you have a statement? ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (MANPOWER, RESERVE AFFAIRS AND LOGISTICS) STATEMENT OF CHARLES W. GROOVER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PROGRAM INTEGRATION, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (MANPOWER, RESERVE AFFAIRS AND LOGISTICS) DEFENSE READINESS OVERVIEW Mr. GROOVER. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have provided a formal statement for insertion in the record. With your permission though, I will summarize it briefly now. I appreciate this opportunity to appear before your committee to give you an overview of defense readiness, with emphasis on materiel and readiness. Beginning immediately upon taking office and continuing today, the Reagan administration has accorded a top priority toward enhancing the readiness of existing forces. The major resource categories that drive the materiel readiness of our weapon systems are maintenance funding, both in our central depots and for the units in the field, and spares procurement. The length of the strategic warning that we can safely anticipate is much shorter than the time required to buy more spare parts, to repair or overhaul systems or components in our depots or to acquire additional maintenance capacity in the field. Therefore, it is clearly not only smart management to buy the spare parts and fund the necessary maintenance in peacetime to keep our weapon systems that we have already bought in commission, but it is also imperative if we are to keep our forces in a posture that allows them to respond to future crises within the warning time they are likely to get. Thus, our fiscal year 1983 budget request includes substantial increases in spare parts procurement and depot maintenance, including ship overhauls. The increase is about 11 percent higher in real terms than those budget items in fiscal year 1983 and about 23 percent higher than those same categories in fiscal 1981. We are also taking specific action to reduce maintenance downtime on our weapon systems that are already in the field, and we have several initiatives underway as part of Deputy Secretary Carlucci's acquisition improvement program that are designed to improve the readiness and operational support capability of new weapon systems that are now in development. Let me wrap this up by saying that in general all categories of our weapon systems are projected to increase their materiel readi |