aircraft coming into the inventory. The FY 1983 Air Force budget fully funds the depot repair of aircraft components, engines, and airframes. Repair backlogs in these areas have held down aircraft mission capable rates in the past. (U) The Air Force mission capable rate projections compared to the actual rates achieved in FY 1980-81 are as follows: (U) of 26 aircraft types, 19, including all first-line tacair aircraft, are expected to increase their MC rates between FY 198185. Despite these positive trends, however, only three Air Force aircraft the C-9, E-4, and OV-10 --are expected to attain their MC rate goals by FY 1985. MARINE CORPS (U) Mission capable rates for the LVT7 landing vehicle family are expected to decrease slightly until the new LVT7Als are fielded in FY 1985. The rebuild program for the LVT7 family has been terminated in anticipation of fielding the LVT7A1. The conversion from the M109A1 self-propelled 155mm Howitzer to the M109A3 (begun in FY 1981) is scheduled to continue through FY 1986, and improve the materiel condition for this equipment type. The Improved HAWK systems are on a five year rebuild cycle. The materiel condition of these systems should stabilize with the reduction in the number of fielded Army Improved HAWK units because of decreased competition for spares in the supply system. SUMMARY (U) The readiness-related funding increases in the President's original FY 83 budget submission demonstrate the resolve of this administration to improve the readiness of our forces. This budget would virtually eliminate the component repair depot maintenance backlogs in all Services, increase substantially our aircraft and weapons system spares inventories, and avoid any ship overhaul backlog due to financial constraints. These FY 83 initiatives will result in significant improvements in materiel readiness not only in FY 83 but also in FY 84-85 when the FY 83 funded spares are delivered to the field. It is essential that our ground combat equipment, strategic and tactical aircraft, and ships be maintained at a high state of readiness in peacetime so that they could transition to a fully combat ready status within the short period of warning we could reasonably expect to receive. RECESS Senator STEVENS. Gentlemen, there is a vote on. We will stand in recess. [Recess.] Senator STEVENS. I misspoke myself. We don't need permission to continue with our hearing, so we will continue. General Brickel, do you have a statement at all to make? DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. JAMES R. BRICKEL, USAF, DEPUTY COMMANDER IN CHIEF, U.S. READINESS COMMAND MISSION STATEMENTS General BRICKEL. No, sir. If I may, however, I would like to introduce for the record the mission statements for both the Readiness Command and the Joint Deployment Agency. I believe they would be of interest to the committee. Senator STEVENS. We will include those in the record. [The information follows:] UNITED STATES READINESS COMMAND MISSION STATEMENT The missions of the United States Readiness Command are to provide contingency forces designated by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to other unified and specified commands, and Commander, RDJTF for conventional operations; to conduct planning for assigned or programmed forces to reinforce other unified or specified commands; to conduct joint training for assigned forces to supplement that conducted by other commands, and develop recommendations to the JCS regarding joint tactics, techniques, and procedures for the joint employment of these forces; to manage Tactical Air Control Systems/Air Defense Systems joint operational interface training for CONUS-based forces; and to provide joint planning for the defense of Alaska, other than Aerospace Defense. United States Commander in Chief Readiness Command is responsible for planning and for coordinating the execution of the land defense of Continental United States (CONUS) and military support of civil defense in CONUS; and, as directed by the JCS: Provide a general reserve of combat-ready forces to reinforce other commands. Provide forces and activate a separate Joint Task Force or Joint Unconventional Warfare Task Force to conduct contingency planning and operations, disaster relief, and noncombatant evacuation operations in unassigned areas. Provide Joint Communications Support Element support. Provide Joint Special Operations Support Element support as requested by other unified commands or Commander, RDJTF. THE JOINT DEPLOYMENT AGENCY TERMS OF REFERENCE MISSION The Joint Deployment Agency (JDA) supports the Joint Chiefs of Staff and supported commanders in planning for and executing deployments. As directed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the JDA is responsible for coordination of deployment planning and execution in accordance with these guidelines and will act as the focal point for deployment associated decisionmaking information. Deployment planning and execution entail use of authorized systems and measures for planning, coordinating, and monitoring deployments/redeployments and movements of mobilized forces and materiel necessary to meet military objectives. a. During peacetime deliberate planning, the JDA will interact with the Joint Deployment Community (JDC) and coordinate deployment activities relating to the development, refinement, and maintenance of operation plans, deployment exercises, and establishment of necessary interfaces and procedures for wartime. JDA will assist the Joint Chiefs of Staff in developing deployment-related information_requirements for use in wartime decisionmaking and formulation of alternatives. The coordinating function of JDA further extends to reviewing supporting transportation plans involving common-user lift for the deployment of forces and movement of materiel as required by the supported commander. b. During time-sensitive execution planning, the JDA will interact with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, supported and supporting commanders, transportation operating agencies (TOAS), and the Services and provide a single point of contact for other supporting agencies. The JDA will coordinate deployment-associated data in execution planning in no-plan, multi-plan, or revised-plan situations in accordance with JCS guidance. Additionally, and in coordination with the TOAS and supporting commanders, the JDA will provide closure estimates and other data as required to the supported commander(s) for developing alternative courses of action and optimal flow of forces into theater, and will provide data for use by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in evaluating alternative courses of action for National Command Authorities (NCA) decision and in formulating lift and other allocation decisions. c. During deployment execution and sustainment of forces, JDA will act as the agent of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and supported commanders and within their guidance will adjust movement plans, schedules, and modes of transport and will direct implementation of deployment decisions. The JDA will continue to interact with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the supported and supporting commanders, the TOAS, and the Services and will continue to provide a single point of contact for other supporting agencies. Additionally, the JDA will monitor the deployment and provide movement status for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other members of the JDC, and will provide necessary deployment-associated data to the Joint Chiefs of Staff for formulating recommendations to the NCA, for revising lift allocations, and for adjudicating conflicting requirements. JDA also will monitor those intratheater movements associated with intertheater deployments, as directed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. STATUS OF RDF Senator STEVENS. I think there were several people who told me on the floor they would like to be over here, but the defense authorization bill is on the floor and it makes it a little difficult to be involved in both this hearing and action on the floor. General Kingston, as I stated at the beginning of this hearing, it is difficult for us to interpret what is going on. Do you think we really have an RDF now? General KINGSTON. Yes, sir, I do. Senator STEVENS. It is in place? General KINGSTON. Part of it is in place and part of it is forces under my planning responsibility. Senator STEVENS. Is it ready to deploy now? General KINGSTON. Yes, sir. Senator STEVENS. Why is it keyed solely to Southwest Asia? General KINGSTON. In the concept of the original Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force it was worldwide, other than Korea and NATO, South Korea, where we have permanently stationed U.S. forces. That was a concept. The Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force did not come into being until March 1980, after the fall of the Shah of Iran and after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. It became apparent to my superiors that the United States had vital interests in the Persian Gulf region that were not adequately protected or could not be adequately protected by existing arrangements. A headquarters was formed on March 1, 1980, and later given the specific mission of concentrating on Southwest Asia. When we become a unified command next January, that will be the assigned area. Senator STEVENS. Are you concentrating on Southwest Asia to the point that you would not be able to use the RDF to the Arctic, for instance? General KINGSTON. Sir, I have that capability, because I have now in existence a four-service headquarters-Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, with Army and Air Force components assigned. The Marines and the Navy operate in support when we go into the existing unified command's area. The capability to deploy my four-service headquarters and employ my components in the Navy and Marine forces is there. For planning purposes, my headquarters is concentrating on the Southwest Asia region. Senator STEVENS. Will the RDF be capable of handling problems such as developed in the Falklands for the British? General KINGSTON. I don't understand "handling the problem," sir. I don't believe the U.S. Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force would have 2 weeks' notice during which strategic negotiations would be going on. We would get 30 days strategic warning for the worst-case contingency, I believe, once opposing forces had begun to mobilize. RESPONSE TIMEFRAME Senator STEVENS. What is the timeframe for your response? General KINGSTON. I can respond with forces in being, naval forces that are now on station in the Indian Ocean with naval air. From Okinawa I can respond with Air Force air, land-based air, within hours. I can project a brigade from the 82d Airborne from the east coast of the United States to the Southwest Asia area within 48 to 72 hours. I can project the lead elements, the combat elements, of one of my light divisions from the east coast of the United States to the Persian Gulf area within about 10 days. Senator STEVENS. In your opening statement you mentioned that the internal programing of funds for the RDF is like shooting at a moving target. What do you mean by that? General KINGSTON. Because up until this year, sir, my staff has been working with the service people who prepare the service budget, telling them my requirements; and the services provide me most of the things with which I perform my mission-the people and resources. The funding for my headquarters is the responsibility of the U.S. Air Force. This year is the first time we have gone to the services and formally presented my requirements, what I wanted the Army to do for the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force, for example, and what I need from the other services. What they have put in their POM's we don't know at this time. That information, I understand, is being released this afternoon. Senator STEVENS. To whom is it being released? The committee has not received it yet. General KINGSTON. It is coming out of the JCS today. When I say "released," I mean released to the services and the Joint Chiefs. Senator STEVENS. We have been having a considerable amount of difficulty this year identifying the amount of the military budget that is dedicated to certain objectives. For instance, we still do not have a firm figure on what it costs to meet our NATO commitment. Now, I gather from whay you say it is not going to be possible for us to find out what is committed to RDF funding; is that right? General KINGSTON. I cannot give you that information. I do not have it. Senator STEVENS. But it is committed to one area of the world, Southwest Asia? General KINGSTON. The Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force and the components are committed there; however, as to the enhancement program by all of the services, some funds are directly related to the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force. That would be the exercise programs that we conduct in the area. The airlift, the strategic sealift, the amphibious lift, some of the communications enhancements, can be used by any service or other services and in any worldwide commitment. So, even if there were not a Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force, I believe those strategic lift requirements would be necessary if we are going to project sufficient force or reinforce our existing overseas commanders rapidly. Senator STEVENS. Can you give us a detailed summary of the indirect and direct funding that is available in the current year and 1983 for RDF, if possible? General KINGSTON. Sir, I would like to defer on that one, if I may, to Col. Joseph Rafferty, who is from the JCS J-5. JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF STATEMENT OF 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 Colonel RAFFERTY. Sir, we can provide that information to you. Identifying precisely which ones are unique to Southwest Asia, as opposed to which ones are related to Southwest Asia, is being studied by the OSD staff and has been for several months now. We have been trying to come up with precise, definitive identification of which ones are and which ones are not. We can provide to you the information to the best of our ability and to the extent that that study is underway to this point. Senator STEVENS. Give it to us for the record, if you will. General KINGSTON. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I believe that is classified. Colonel RAFFERTY. It is. It will be classified. The 1983 information is unclassified. 1982 and 1983 are unclassified. Projecting further will be classified. [The information follows:] |