Thank you. Senator SYMINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Harrington. Mr. Chairman, I have some questions here the staff has prepared. Would you prefer I ask these or do you have questions? Senator ELLENDER. Go right ahead. Senator SYMINGTON. Senator Jackson? Senator SYMINGTON. Mr. Harrington, will you submit for the record a list of projects by States that you propose to construct out of the lump sum authorizations for the Reserve forces for fiscal year 1973? Mr. HARRINGTON. Yes, I will. I have copies with me. (The information follows:) Senator SYMINGTON. We are informed that you follow the practice of notifying the Congress whenever a Reserve project exceeds the original estimate by 15 percent. The regular forces are required to report only those projects exceeding the original estimate by 25 percent. Why is this? Shouldn't the same rule apply to both? Mr. HARRINGTON. We believe so, Mr. Chairman. Actually, the apparent inconsistency between Reserves and Active Force stems from a prior informal commitment made by the defense witness about 10 years ago in connection with the fiscal year 1963 Reserve facilities program. At that time in an appearance before the House Armed Services Committee and later before the Senate, the defense witness testified that in the future in order to assure that the committee would be properly appraised of any departure from the original estimates submitted, the committees would be notified in all cases where a project estimate exceeded the original estimate by 15 percent. Now, this we have faithfully done over these last 10 years, but, as you may recall, in Public Law 91-142, I believe, the fiscal year 1970 act, a revision was made under the general provisions of that act which related to project cost variation limitations for the Active Forces, and that change revised the limit so that only in those cases where an individual project of the Active Forces program exceeded the budget estimate by 25 percent would the Armed Services Committees require a notification of the situation prior to contract award. We believe that this same rule should be applied to the Reserve Forces facilities program. Senator SYMINGTON. Thank you. Another inconsistency called to my attention is the limitation on minor construction, which is limited to $50,000 for the Reserves. As I recall, about 2 years ago we raised the limitation for the regular forces from $200,000 to $300,000. Yet the $50,000 limitation still applies to the Reserves. What is your thought on this-should this limitation for the Reserves be increased? Mr. HARRINGTON. On that subject, Mr. Chairman, I think there is a minor pitfall involved in consideration of an increase. Let me say first, that the subject of minor construction is not specifically addressed in 10 U.S.C. 2233 (a) which is the present authorizing law for the Reserve facilities. That authorization legislation does, however, provide, as I mentioned in my previous statement, that in all instances any project being authorized under that law in excess of $50,000 would have to be submitted to the Armed Services Committees. |