DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM THURSDAY, APRIL 30, 1992 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL, COMMITTEE On Armed SerVICES, Washington, DC. RESERVE AND NATIONAL GUARD PROGRAMS The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:05 a.m., in room SD-562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator John Glenn (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Committee members present: Senators Glenn, Exon, Shelby, and McCain. Committee staff members present: Arnold L. Punaro, staff director; and Lucia M. Chavez, research assistant. Professional staff member present: Frederick F.Y. Pang. Minority staff members present: Romie L. Brownlee, deputy staff director; George K. Johnson, Jr., and George W. Lauffer, professional staff members. Staff assistants present: Barbara L. Braucht and Debra A. Rice. Committee members' assistants present: Phillip P. Upschulte, assistant to Senator Glenn; Andrew W. Johnson, assistant to Senator Exon; Terence M. Lynch, assistant to Senator Shelby; Melvin G. Dubee, assistant to Senator Byrd; Anthony H. Cordesman and Christopher J. Paul, assistants to Senator McCain. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN GLENN, CHAIRMAN Senator GLENN. The hearing will be in order. The Subcommittee on Manpower and Personnel meets this morning to continue its hearing on National Guard and Reserve programs associated with the amended defense authorization request for fiscal year 1993. On April 8 we heard from administration witnesses: Mr. Steven Duncan, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs and Mr. Christopher Jehn, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Management and Personnel. We also received a briefing from Dr. Bernard Rosker, the director of the Active Reserve Mix Study, a study the Congress mandated last year in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993. We had intended to receive testimony from two other panels of witnesses, our uniformed National Guard and Reserve chiefs and a group of representatives from the National Guard and Reserve As sociations, but were unable to do so because we ran out of time. I am sorry that happened last time, but we appreciate your bearing with us on that. So we are reconvening this morning to ear from these two panels and I appreciate their patience in waiting their turn. Senator McCain, the ranking minority member of this subcommittee, has requested that we hear from three other defense witnesses this morning, and I am certainly happy to accommodate him. I understand Senator McCain will be along very shortly. I want to read Senator McCain's letter requesting these witnesses, and also include this letter in the record at this point. [The information follows:] Senator JOHN GLENN, U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE On Armed SERVICES, Chairman, Subcommittee on Manpower and Personnel, DEAR JOHN: I am concerned that Secretary Cheney and General Powell's rationale for reducing the Reserve Components was poorly justified during our recent Manpower hearing. It seems that there is a misperception that the Department of Defense is attempting through the Base Force Plan to create a military force that is capable of conducting large scale military operations without any reliance on the Reserve Components. In an effort to better inform our committee members, I am requesting that we add three witnesses to the first panel for our hearing on April 30, 1992. The witnesses are the J-3 of U.S. Forces Command, a representative of the Joint Staff, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations, U.S. Army. I feel strongly that we should hear from the planners who can address the "Lessons Learned" from Desert Shield/Storm and future requirements based on those lessons. Additionally, they should be prepared to address the findings of the Mobility Requirements Study and its related impact on deployment schedules for active and reserve forces and the necessary closure times in theater. Thank you for your assistance, and I look forward to joining you on the 30th. Sincerely, JOHN MCCAIN, I understand Senator McCain will be along in just a few minutes. Because discussions of the mobility requirement study and its related impact on deployment schedules and closure times in theater could involve classified information, we may have to go into closed session. I hope we do not have to do that, but we might have to. Therefore, we will have these witnesses as our third panel this morning, instead of including them on the first two panels, so that we can go into closed session, if necessary, without disrupting the flow of the hearing. I want to ask our uniformed National Guard and Reserve chiefs to remain for the testimony of our third panel so that they will be available for any questions we may wish to address to them. So at this time I want to welcome our witnesses on our first panel. They are Lt. Gen. John B. Conaway, USAF, Chief, National Guard Bureau; Maj. Gen. Raymond Rees, U.S. Army, Director, Army National Guard; Maj. Gen. Phil Killey, USAF. Director, Air National Guard; Maj. Gen. Roger W. Sandler, U.S. Army, Chief, Army Reserve; Rear Adm. James E. Taylor, Director, Naval Reserve; Maj. Gen. Mitchell Waters, U.S. Marine Corps, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower and Reserve Affairs for Re serve Affairs; Maj. Gen. John J. Closner III, USAF, Chief, Air Force Reserve; Rear Adm. John W. Lockwood, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Readiness and Reserve, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters. We will have any statement that Senator McCain wishes to make after he arrives. Each of our witnesses has submitted a written statement which we will, without objection, include in the record. And we would ask each witness, of course, to summarize his statement. General Conaway, we have been watching the news this morning. Maybe you could make a few comments on the Guard activation in California, what do you see the situation as being out there right now. That is not the purpose of our hearing this morning, but it is certainly is indicative of some of the uses that the Guard gets involved with when something like this happens. Could you give us any information this morning about what is going on out there and what the status of the Guard is and what they are doing right now? STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. JOHN B. CONAWAY, USAF CHIEF, General CONAWAY. Yes, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the opportunity for us to appear before you. I might add first, the last hearing, obviously, was not a waste of our time. We learned of some of the high priorities that the committee has in areas that we need to work on. I have been back in the Pentagon working on these areas with some of the civilian leaderships and the departments of Army and Air Force. So it was helpful to us being here as well. Although we would like to have testified then, we appreciate you rescheduling this. On California, I was up several times during the night. I was called by our operations center and by California's Adjutant General. Where last night, at about 10 p.m. California time, 1 a.m. Washington time, Governor Wilson made the decision to declare a state of emergency in Los Angeles, and ordered the Adjutant General to call up 2,000 members of the Army National Guard at that time. Most of them were from the 40th Infantry Division headquartered in the Los Angeles area, but with units all over the State. They since have called up the Air National Guard C-130 unit that is at Channel Islands. They have seven of the C-130s that are on State active duty to help transport law enforcement personnel from other parts of the State, and any other National Guard units that they may have to transport down into that area. They are mobilized. The location, you know, we are not at liberty to divulge where they are mobilizing and standing by for further assignments. At this time it is not planned that they will be involved in direct law enforcement, but only in a support role in supporting the law enforcement in that area. We do not know when they will be called out onto the streets. The Governor is in charge of them and responsible for them, and so this is up to Governor Wilson. But I think the rules they are under will be helpful, as the law enforcement people and Mayor Bradley and others need their help and assistance in securing certain areas, and relieving the police authorities that have probably been on duty for a considerable number of hours by now. Later today and this evening, I think we will see more of them helping. Senator GLENN. They are mobilized but not deployed yet. General CONAWAY. They are mobilized but not deployed, and awaiting their further assignments. So that is the latest I have on that, sir. General Thrasher, the Adjutant General of California, was just on the morning news and said basically the same thing. The response is going well. But it is a mobilization of over 2,000 Army and Air National Guard. Senator GLENN. Do you know what the normal police deployment is in that area? How many police are normally in that particular area? What do they have in there now? In other words, what I was wondering is what size Guard force you have there compared to what the police force size is? General CONAWAY. Well we have 4,000 or 5,000 in the area, and I am sure there is more law enforcement than that in the area when you count the L.A. Sheriff's Department as well as the L.A.P.D. They are both two of the largest sheriff and police departments in the United States. I do not know their exact numbers. Senator GLENN. Please lead off with your regular statement, if you would. General CONAWAY. We have all agreed to keep this very short so we can get to your questions. I will speak initially on behalf of both of our directors here, to give you three in one. On behalf of our more than 560,000 members of the Army and Air National Guard, I welcome this opportunity to be here and represent them. We are very much aware of the overall efforts to reduce the deficit and the necessity of staying within the President's budget. The Congress, and particularly this subcommittee under your leadership, has helped provide us the resources we need to contribute to our Nation's security. We have proved ourselves worthy of that support throughout the years and will continue to do so whenever called upon. The National Guard is truly a part of grassroots America, as was evidenced during the support provided during Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Our National Guard leadership and members of the Army and the Air National Guard recognize the fiscal constraints that our country is facing. We are continually exploring options in which we, as part of the total force, can retain and improve our versatility, deployability, and decisive combat capabilities to meet the present and future defense needs of our Nation. We continue, also, to recognize our State mission, as we just discussed, and strive to meet our responsibilities in many areas in which there is a need for our services. This call up, although larger than most State and community call ups, is only one of approximately 400 call ups a year that we average in the National Guard within the United States. Although we have had five major call ups in the last 50 years by the President, 1940, 1950, 1961, 1968 and 1990, this is nothing new to the National Guard. We average more than one a day throughout the country and the States. Today we have also over 3,300 out there supporting local, State, and Federal law enforcement agencies in the counterdrug oper ation. So you add to that the normal numbers of over 1,000 in other types of emergencies and the 2,000 a day, we may be in the neighborhood of 7,000 to 8,000 just today only, as a snapshot. With me today is Maj. Gen. Phil Killey, the Director of the Air National Guard, and Maj. Gen. Fred Rees, the Director of the Army National Guard. Fred Rees is the former adjutant general of the great State of Oregon, and has been with us in the Pentagon for just under a year. This is his first time before this committee. Phil Killey is the former adjutant general of South Dakota. This is the first time in our history that the Directors of both the Army and the Air National Guard have been adjutant generals from States. So we appreciate your tremendous support. I got back from Jamaica less than 2 months ago, where I was able to visit the Ohio Army National Guard engineers that are doing a tremendous job with nation building projects. Most of them are from the Toledo/ Port Clinton/Camp Perry area in Northern Ohio. They are doing 13 miles of road project, farm to market road project, and rebuilding two schools to help our good friends in Jamaica. So we appreciate them doing this, and they are doing a superb job. The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell, was down there in late January and also got to visit them and see the superb job that they are doing. I, as well as our directors, look forward to responding to your questions and thank you for the great support you and your staff have given us. [The prepared statement of General Conaway follows:] PREPARED STATEMENT BY LT. GEN. JOHN B. CONAWAY, USAF, CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I welcome the opportunity to again appear before you on behalf of the more than one-half million men and women of the Army and Air National Guard. It has been a privilege to represent these individuals in my capacity as Chief of the National Guard Bureau since February 1990. We are witnessing a historic turning point for the National Guard. Our performance in the desert, the changes taking place around the world coupled with a reduced Federal budget and the changing of America, will have a momentous impact on the National Guard. When military historians study this century, they will conclude that the National Guard and the Total Force Policy were successfully tested in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Our accomplishments in Desert Shield and Desert Storm were significant and many lessons were learned. However, as the political posture and threats to our free world change, the National Guard cannot rest on the praises of the Southwest Asian war and other past experiences. The Guard must be prepared to adjust to the changes and challenges of the present and the future. A reduction in the defense budget will reconfigure the structure and the capabilities of our Nation's defense, both Active and Reserve forces. The National Guard will restructure to a reduced size, while sustaining levels of excellence and maintain efficiency. We must continue to achieve more with fewer resources. The National Guard is unique in distinguishing itself from all other services in serving Federal, State, and community governments. As the National Guard accomplishes these missions and moves toward "Adding Value to America," we have incorporated in our planning the changing of America economically, socially, technologically and environmentally. For the 1990s, and beyond, we are dedicated to preserving and improving the quality of our organization to maintain the Guard as a viable reserve force and a more efficient and effective organization. In this decade, we will experience the "Changing of the Guard." With your continued support, the National Guard will |