We

readiness and sustainability of the Army in the European theater? ANSWER. The FY 89 budget and out year program recognizes the increased importance of conventional ground forces in Europe. First, we have protected existing NATO European Troop Strength (ETS). Preservation of existing force commitments is key to our negotiating posture for conventional force reduction talks. have also protected the readiness of those forces by funding OPTEMPO at a high level. Finally, we have preserved essential sustainability in major warfighting systems, secondary item war reserves, replenishment spares, ammunition, and POMCUS stocks. However, we need Congressional support. Modernization of AFAPS and fielding of a Follow-On To Lance missile system are long standing high priorities for NATO. Specifically addressed in the 1983 Montebello Decision, and reaffirmed by NATO's Nuclear Planning Group in November of 1987, these programs are a NATO goal. Modernization of NSNF is required to maintain the credibility of the NATO triad of forces called for by NATO strategy, especially in light of the INF agreement. We must assure that our conventional forces are strengthened to maintain the credibility of conventional defenses and deterrence. Key elements include our deep attack, counterfire and modernized chemical retaliatory systems. ATACMS, JSTARS and MLRS additions will assure our conventional capability to offset Warsaw Pact quantitative advantages. The Binary Chemical Warhead for MLRS, the 155 binary chemical projectile and the BIGEYE bomb are required to insure our chemical deterrence. We must also maintain our armor and anti-armor capabilities to defeat the fielded Warsaw Pact armored threat as an essential element of deterrence. We also need Congress to be sensitive to the impact on readiness and sustainability of unprogrammed bills in OMA such as foreign currency fluctuation and civilian pay increases.

Reserve Component Resources

Question. Do you plan to allocate additional resources to the Reserve Forces which play a vital role in sustainability? Answer. Our Reserve Components represent a large and important part of today's Army. Given the Army's share of the Defense TOA, we have created as balanced a program as possible. The resultant President's budget recognizes the importance of the RC and resources them accordingly. The RC Share of the Army budget has grown over time to the point where they now receive 10.8% of our total budget. When the value of procured and distributed equipment and direct support from the Active Army are considered, the RC accounts for about 14% of our budget.

SINCGARS

Question. Secretary Marsh, you speak at length in your statement about the SINCGARS radio and its importance to the future of the Army. I am concerned that although foreign bidders are precluded from bidding as a prime contractor, several bidders are teamed with foreign companies. We have seen foreign governments in the recent past subsidize their industry to penetrate the U.S. market.

What actions has the Army taken to ensure that U.S. industry is protected?

Answer. We share your concern and have taken appropriate steps that, in fact, protect U. s. industry. All SINCGARS for the Army will be produced in the United States, regardless of source. The Army's basis for this was to provide sufficient production capacity to support mobilization requirements for SINCGARS.

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator SASSER. The subcommittee is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:52 a.m., Wednesday, March 23, the subcommittee was recessed to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS

FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989

THURSDAY, MARCH 24, 1988

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met at 10:10 a.m., in Room SD-192, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. J. Bennett Johnston presiding.

Present: Senators Johnston, Stevens, D'Amato, Sasser, Proxmire and Leahy.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES

RESERVE AFFAIRS

STATEMENT OF HON. STEPHEN M. DUNCAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR RESERVE AFFAIRS

GUARD AND RESERVE READINESS

OPENING REMARKS OF SENATOR JOHNSTON

Senator JOHNSTON. Good morning.

The Defense Appropriations Subcommittee will come to order. Today we hear from the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs and the Chiefs of the National Guard and Reserve.

Each year this hearing provides this subcommittee with a special opportunity to review the backbone of our armed forces, the National Guard and Reserve. I know this hearing has been a favorite of Chairman Stennis, who unfortunately cannot be here today. He is recovering from a bout with the flu, and although he may show up later on, we are trying to encourage him to get rid of the last vestiges of that flu before he comes, but knowing Chairman Stennis, he may show up any moment.

In any event, he sends his regards.

SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS FOR GUARD AND RESERVE

The past few years have been a success story for the Guard and Reserve. There was a time when the Reserve forces got leftover and worn

out equipment. Now, new equipment such as the F-16 fighters, M-1 tanks, Perry class frigates and Apache helicopters are fielded in the Guard and Reserve at the same time these systems are being allocated to the active forces. Manning levels have improved significantly. Since 1980, Guard and Reserve, Selected Reserve strength has increased by 304,000, and full time support has increased from 13 to almost 15 percent of the Reserve force. The members of the Guard and Reserve have proven time and again their ability to successfully take on new missions and challenges.

Today we have Guard and Reserve units assuming active duty missions overseas such as the Air National Guard's airlift support in Panama and tanker duty in Iceland. We have Guard and Reserve brigades in roundout associations with active divisions, making up a third of an active division's combat power.

In my home State we are quite proud of the roundout association between the 256th Infantry Brigade of the Louisiana National Guard and the Fifth Infantry Division Mech. at Fort Polk.

This subcommittee recognizes that the Department of Defense needed to make tough budget decisions in amending the 1989 budget. However, given the cost effectiveness of the Guard and Reserve, the decision to cut Guard and Reserve force structure, manpower, operations and equipment modernization gives us great concern. This subcommittee does not want to see the improvements of the past few years being reversed. The amended 1989 budget eliminates growth of 40,648 Guard and Reserve end strength. Procurement is reduced by $209 million. For all appropriations, the Guard and Reserve budget is reduced from $20.3 billion in 1988 to $19.9 billion in 1989.

Gentlemen, we look forward to your testimony and a review of the 1989 budget, and Secretary Duncan, if you will please proceed as you wish.

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Sir, I have submitted a statement for the record, but with your indulgence, I will make a few brief opening remarks.

Let me first of all express my pleasure in being here. This is my first appearance before this committee as the Assistant Secretary for Reserve Affairs.

TOTAL FORCE POLICY

As you know, under our Total Force policy, we have increasingly based the national security interests of our Nation on our ability to mobilize, deploy and to employ combat ready Reserve component units and members anywhere in the world. Today, many of our military contingency plans cannot be executed effectively without committing National Guard and Reserve forces in essentially the same time frame as our active forces. This kind of reliance on our Reserve forces requires units of the Selected Reserve, especially the early deploying units, to be manned and equipped at levels which make them ready for combat. This has been one of my primary goals, and it will continue to be one of our most difficult challenges, especially during this time of budgetary constraints.

Several significant events involving the Reserve forces have occurred in recent months, and with your indulgence, I would like to note some of them.

NO-NOTICE EXERCISE

First, in October of last year we conducted the first "no-notice" exercise of the President's statutory authority under 10 U.S. Code Section 673(b) to call up to 200,000 members of the Selected Reserve to active duty. The exercise was conducted in conjunction with an ongoing JCS exercise, "Proud Scout 88." The results of the test confirmed what most of us expected intuitively. Members of the Selected Reserve units were selected by random sample and they were contacted very effectively. Over 92 percent of the Reservists who were contacted actually reported to their Reserve Center or Armory or were excused pursuant to standards set by their respective services.

IRR AVAILABILITY

In fiscal year 1987, we also established a policy requiring eligible personnel of the Individual Ready Reserve to perform at least one day of active duty during the year in order to permit an evaluation of their skill proficiency, a determination of refresher training needs, and a confirmation of their availability for mobilization.

I might add parenthetically that the IRR is, of course, our principal source of pretrained manpower who would be available for warfighting situations.

The screening proved to be very successful and it provided information that we need to manage this program. I personally believe that a regular screening of the IRR is vital in order to assure a flow of augmentation and replacement manpower during combat operations. Because of budgetary constraints, an annual screening of all eligible IRR personnel will probably not be possible, but I would recommend that a viable screening program be continued, and we will certainly be working toward that end.

RECRUITING AND RETENTION EFFORTS

I am also pleased to report that we have had continued success with recruiting and our retention efforts in the Reserve components. Between fiscal year 1980 and fiscal year 1987, annual Selected Reserve enlisted accessions, including both prior service and nonprior service, increased nearly 8 percent. As you pointed out, Mr. Chairman, we have had a net increase of about 300,000 in the Selected Reserve. During the same period, that is, 1980 to 1987, total enlisted strength increased by 33 percent. In addition, the quality of our Selected Reserve remains high with 89 percent of all fiscal year 1987 enlisted Reservists being high school graduates, and 91 percent scoring average or higher on the Armed Forces Qualification Test.