Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
estimatedâleased on an annual two bill ion dollar program-- that only 2 percent more of the total dollar value of the facilities program would be approved using the packaged procedure that would have been sppzoved had a l l items been examined separately I t is f^lt that the potential economies to be gained from implementation of the packaging concept wil l more than offset the possible occasional appropriation of 2 percent additional funds, which otherwise mig tÌ not have been qtproved Accordingly, i t has been recommended that the Office of the Secretary of Defense request Congressional authoriza- tion and appropriation for a l l packaged items in the annual military facil it ies procurement program costing less than $500,000 each, as a single line item for eadi military Department 2 4 3 Authorization, Appropriation, and Apportionment The time interval from inclusion of a project in the annual military facilities procurement program until funds are apportioned and construction of a facility can commence, is in excess of two years The Committee believes that this interval is too long but recognizes that a considerable portion of the activity that takes place during this period is beyond the control of the Department of Defense The process of authorization, appropriation, and apportionment is broadly termed the funding ^cle and these fimctions are addressed m the discussion which follows 2 4 3 1 Congressional Authorizations and i^ropraations - The funding cycle usually begins during late October (nine months prior to the beginning of the new fiscal year) when each military. Department is called vpon to siQ>port its annual military facilities program to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installations and Logistics) and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) A series of conferences are held to review, add, delete, trade-off, reallocate or reenphasize specific elements withm the integrated facilities procurement program, in terns of , final f iscal budget guidance Withm several months, usually in February, the integrated program, as approved by the Department of Defense, is transmitted to Congress Congressional consideration of the military facil it ies procure- ment program involves four Congressional Committees the Senate Committee on Armed Services, the Senate Committee on Appropriations, the House Committee on Armed Services, and the House Committee on Appropriations Beginning usually in February or shortly thereafter, these Committees ( or sub- committees thereoQ initiate hearings on the facil it ies procurement program which is to take effect m the f iscal year 54
beginning on the following 1 July * These Committees take testimony and receive documentary justifications from repre- sentatives of the respective Facilities Procurement Agents as well as from other witnesses Justifications and testimony are provided for each item contained in the annual facil it ies procurement program Congressional involvement usually terminates in autumn (but often later) with passage of a - Military Construction Appropriations Act for the f iscal year, which by that time is already several months old Ihat Congress scrutinizes the facil it ies procurement program in detail I S si9ported by the fact that 44 pages of specific line I t e m authorizations appear m the FY 1970 joint Senate Committee hearings regarding military faci l i t ies , with 20 additional pages detailing constraints and amendments to re- gulations for acquisition of facil it ies Hie summary printing of these joint hearings required 636 pages of testimony A total of 53 witnesses gave statements and testimony A considerable period of time and amount of effort thus is involved in the authorization and appropriation processes Further, nearly half of the f iscal year often is past before funds are actually appropriated This situation is amelio- rated to an extent by the fact that the authorization of funds I S for a period of two years (15 months for family housing) However, i f the fimds are not committed by the time the request is made for the next fiscal year's program, the Congress understandably is reluctant, because of a l l the other demands being made for funds, to appropriate additional funds which also mig tÌ not be committed in the time period involved The Committee recognizes the necessary and important role the Congress has m the authorization and appropriation of funds for the military, but feelsâespecially m view of the expressed desires on the part of Congress to see economies realized in the planning and design processes associated with facilities programâthat certain considerations on its part could result in significant savings in the overall military facilities procurement program'' For example, the resources spent by the military Departments m preparing for Authorization hearings of the House Armed Services Committee were held on 5 to 11 May 1970 for the Fiscal Year 1971 facil it ies procurement program, and heanngs of the House Committee on Appropriations were completed on 25 May 1970 The Conference Report on Appropriation for the Fiscal Year 1971 mili- tary facilities procurement program was agreed upon on 16 November House and Senate enactment of legislation was completed on 24 and 25 November respectively, and Public Law 91-544 was signed by the President on 11 December 1970 55
and appearing before the Congressional Conmattees coidd be re- duced, and the mi l i ta ry f a c i l i t i e s procurement program could be pursued with greater continuity With regard to the f i r s t example, i n terms of manpower and paper work, a s ignif icant e f f o r t is made by Department of Defense representatives m preparation fo r tes t i ty ing before the Congress on behalf of the annual mi l i ta ry f a c i l i t i e s pro- gram I f , for example. Congress were to accept the Committee's recommended method for handling small, routine projects, a considerable reduction of such e f f o r t would be realized The Senate Armed Services and Appropriation Committees have for the past three years held j o in t hearings and this has proved to be both effective and e f f i c i e n t * I f both houses of the Congress were to adopt this practice, additional and considerable economies could be realized annually The second example concerns maintaining the continuity of the construction portion o f the f a c i l i t i e s procurement program Present appropriation o f planning and design funds are continu- ous That I S , when the f i s ca l year begins on 1 July, the m i l i - tary Departments, because of this continuous appropriation aspect, can continue the required planning and design functions despite the fact that the f i sca l year's appropriation b i l l has not yet been passed This procedure has the ef fec t o f provid- ing a significant degree o f continuity to the planning and design functions Construction projects contained i n the pro- gram before Congress, however, cannot commence before the b i l l IS signed into law and the funds are apportioned to the m i l i - tary Departments The Committee believes s ignif icant savings would be adiieved with a program the size of the annual m i l i - tary f a c i l i t i e s program by getting the fastest possible start on construction For exaniple, considering that i n f l a t i o n i n the building and construction industry recently has ranged be- tween 6 and 12 percent annually, a six-months delay m the mil i tary f a c i l i t i e s procurement program, whidi is on the order of two b i l l i o n dollars annually, could reduce i t s purdiasing power by between $60,000,000 and $120,000,000 Thus, i f some portion of construction funds could be made available at the outset o f eadi f i sca l year as is now done with planning and design funds, both continuity i n the construction program and real cost savings could be realized To help ensure that such funds are not eiqpended on projects whidi Congress may not sup- port a f te r i t s detailed review of the program, expenditure o f construction funds made available throu^^ such a continuing appropriations technique would need to be sid>ject specif ical ly * Joint hearings of the Senate Committees fo r the Fiscal Year 1970 f a c i l i t i e s procurement program were held during 8 to IS October 1969, for the Fiscal Year 1971 program, the jo in t hearings were held during 28 July to 5 August 1970 56