STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. WILLIAM R. SHULER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR LOGISTICS, ON ARMY FAMILY HOUSING BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Maj. Gen. William R. Shuler was born in Temple, Tex., on January 16, 1911. He is a 1932 graduate of the California Institute of Technology in electrical engineering. He was appointed to the U.S. Military Academy from the State of California and graduated in 1936, receiving a commission in the Corps of Engineers. He captained the 1935 Army football team. He received a graduate degree in civil engineering from the University of California in 1940. He graduated from the Army War College in 1954. Prior to World War II, his assignments included duty with the 6th Engineers at Fort Lewis, Wash.; with the Engineer School at Fort Belvoir, Va.; and with the Training Center at Camp Claiborne, La. His World War II duty was with Amphibious Task Force No. 9 in the Aleutians campaign and as commander of the 1115th Engineer Combat Group in the European theater. General Shuler served with the Manhattan Engineer District from 1944 to 1945, and with the Seattle Engineer District from 1946 to 1948. He was Deputy Engineer, U.S. Army, Pacific, from 1948 to 1950. From 1950 to 1953, he was District Engineer, Los Angeles Engineer District. From 1954 through 1958, General Shuler served as Chief, Construction Division, DCSLOG, Department of the Army; and then as Division Engineer, Mediterranean Engineer Division from 1958 to 1960. From 1960 to 1962, he served as Division Engineer, Missouri River Engineer Division at Omaha, Nebr. He was assigned as Director of Installations, DCSLOG, Department of the Army, on April 23, 1962. General Shuler's decorations include the Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Bronze Star Medal, the Commendation Ribbon with two Oak Leaf Clusters and the Purple Heart. His foreign decorations include the French Legion of Honor, French Croix de Guerre, the Beligan Legion of Honor and Croix de Guerre. He is married to the former Marjorie Beeuwkes and has two children. He was promoted as follows: first lieutenant, June 12, 1939; captain, September 9, 1940; major, February 1, 1942; lieutenant colonel, October 20, 1942; colonel, August 21, 1943; brigadier general, March 21, 1957; and major general, May 1, 1962. OPENING STATEMENT Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate this opportunity to comment on the Army's military family housing management account. This package program consists of three segments: First, the construction program; second, the debt payment; and third, the operations and maintenance program. The amount of new obligational authority requested is $227,465,000. Taking each segment separately: (a) Construction, $44,069,000 This will provide 1,847 family housing units at $36,052,000; 383 trailer spaces at $657.000; acquisition and improvement of 356 Wherry units at $2 million; improvements to onpost quarters and minor construction, $5,060,000; advance planning, design, and liability for existing rental guarantee units, $300,000. In connection with this construction program, the committee is well aware of the Army's keen interest in the need to provide decent family housing for our military personnel. Our worldwide family housing requirement is 301,500 units. Our total assets including leases and community support amount to 227,000 units, leaving a gross deficit of 74,500 units. However, we only program to 90 percent of our family housing requirements in United States, Caribbean, and Okinawa, and to 80 percent of requirements in foreign countries. Computed on this basis, our net deficit for family housing is 34,700 units. The 1,847 units for which we are seeking funds, is thus less than 6 percent of the 34,700 unit deficit. Turning to the second segment of the package program: (b) Debt payments, $49,242,000 A total of $48,222,000 is required to reduce the debt incurred by acquisition, over the past several years, of 58,248 family housing units under the following programs: Capehart, 35,885 units; Wherry, 20,142 units; and surplus commodity, 2,221 units. The other item under this category is for $1,020,000 for servicemen's mortgage insurance. The third part of the package program is: (c) Operation and maintenance, $134,154,000 Funds requested under this item are primarily for the support of an average of 133,510 units of family housing. In addition to the operation, maintenance, and utility costs for these housing units, funds are also required for maintenance and repair of supporting appurtenances within the housing area, such as streets, grounds, and utilities distribution systems, items of minor construction, furniture, and for the various miscellaneous services. Funds are also included for leasing of 5,242 family housing units, worldwide. The budget book before you contains the line item justification for the three programs, family housing construction, debt payment and operation, and maintenance. Each proposal has been presented in a manner which I hope meets with your approval. Mr. Chairman, I have with me Col. James R. Rorabaugh, Chief of the Army's Family Housing Division. We stand ready to provide the committee with whatever information you desire. BREAKDOWN OF REQUESTED FUNDS Major General SHULER. The amount of the new obligational authority that the Army is requesting is $227,465,000. I would like to break this down into its three major components. Construction accounts for $44,069,000 and debt payments for $49,242,000 and operation and maintenance accounts for $134,154,000. Under construction, sir, this would provide 1,847 family housing units at $36,052,000, and 383 trailer spaces at $657,000. NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS PROVIDED Senator STENNIS. Pardon me, how many houses? Major General SHULER. 1,847 houses at $36,052,000 and 383 trailer spaces at $657,000; and acquisition and improvement of 356 Wherry units at $2 million; improvements to onpost quarters and minor construction, $5,060,000; and advance planning, design, and liability for existing rental guarantee units $300,000. Those figures all add up to $44,069,000 that I cited for construction. Our worldwide family housing requirements, sir, is for 301,500 units. Our total assets including leases and community support amount to 227,000 units, leaving a gross deficit of 74,500 units. However, we only program to 90 percent of our family housing requirements in the United States, Caribbean, and Okinawa and only to 80 percent of our requirements in foreign countries. Computed on this basis our net deficit for family housing is 34,700 units. SUPPLY OF HOUSING Senator STENNIS. Let me ask you a question. You talked about a deficit and talked about a total supply of housing units up to 90 percent of those that you would let everyone have a house? Major General SHULER. Every eligible person would have a house. These are safety factors so we don't overbuild. We take a 10-percent reduction in the continental United States, Caribbean, and Okinawa, and overseas we make it safer by going only up to 80 percent. Senator STENNIS. You are shooting for a goal and that 90 percent will live in Government-owned houses, Government-financed houses? Major General SHULER. No, sir. This also will include the community support. We take into account the houses we build on the post and the housing that is suitable community support. Senator STENNIS. Everyone has to be someplace. Major General SHULER. Yes. All of these are in our assets. Major General SHULER. This 90 percent has to do with strictly what we build on the post. What I was saying, sir, was that the net deficit I gave you is the result of taking into account all of the assets including the community support. As far as building houses on military installations, we only go up to 90 percent of our requirement for construction in the United States and 80 percent overseas after we have counted all community support first. As I say, these are safety factors so that if we built up to 100 percent and we had a drop in strength, then we would have vacant housing. This means, sir, that the 1,847 units for which we are seeking funds is less than 6 percent of the net deficit cited of 34,700 units. DEBT PAYMENT, HOUSING On the second package, the debt payment, the $49,242,000 is required to reduce the debt incurred by acquisition over the past several years of 58,248 family housing units under the following programs: Capehart-35,885 units, Wherry-20,142 units and surplus commodity-2,221 units. SERVICEMEN'S MORTGAGE INSURANCE The other item under this category is $1,020,000 for servicemen's mortgage insurance. HOUSING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE The third part of the package program is: Operation and maintenance, $134,154,000. Funds requested under this item are primarily for the support of an average of 133,510 units of family housing. In addition to the operation, maintenance, and utility costs for these housing units, funds are also required for maintenance and repair of supporting appurtenances within the housing area, such as streets, grounds, and utilities distribution systems, items of minor construction, furniture, and for the various miscellaneous services. Funds are also included for leasing of 5,242 family housing units, worldwide. This year, sir, you have the complete package in our request for family housing. This takes into account all the facets of running this program. I have with me Colonel Rorabaugh, Chief of the Family Housing Division in the Army who handles this. Senator STENNIS. Gentlemen, I do not see much reason in going over in detail Army and then Navy and then Air Force. It is up to the services to apportion these matters among themselves. We do not undertake to do that now as between the services. If we could get the whole picture from all of you, then we could pass on that. It would be up to the services or someone else to apportion it. Do you object to that? Major General SHULER. My understanding is Mr. Reed, who is the Family Housing Chief of the Department of Defense, will be in with Mr. McNamara to present the total program so you will get the total picture and they will break it down. Senator STENNIS. Excuse me. I know that, but what I want to know is, do you object to that or do you want to present yours separate from that? Major General SHULER. These are the amounts, sir, that we have been allotted by the Department of Defense, and we are defending these. If we get these, there is no need of making a defense. Senator STENNIS. I do not want to cut you off. HOUSE REPORT COMMENT ON HOUSING Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, General Shuler, I do not cotton to your figures, in the House report, the budget estimates were $57.4 million for construction and $188.2 million for operation and maintenance, and the House recommends $41 and $183 million. They cut your construction by $16 million and your operation and maintenance by $4.8 million. Now you show a construction figure of $44 million and then you show the debt payments and you show your operation and mainte nance. Now, am I wrong in saying that your statement does not seem to jibe with the figures in the military construction appropriations? EXPLANATION OF APPARENT DISCREPANCY Major General SHULER. I think we can explain it. Colonel Rorabangh has the breakout on this. Colonel RORABAUGH. For authorization, where you have $41,364,000, sir, the actual authorization in the law is $44,069,000. We were reduced $2.705,000 by the House appropriations, which is the $41,364,000 figure you mentioned. Senator SALTONSTALL. By the authorization? Colonel RORABAUGH. Yes, by the authorization. million difference there which represents the oversea Army had authorized; 2 projects totaling 144 units. tion 04 and one is at location 23. There is $2.705 projects that the One is at loca Major General SHULER. Senator, this is the only area where the House Appropriations Committee cut our housing request. These are new units and are all abroad and all are in the interests of the gold flow according to the committee. ITEMS IN RECLAMA Senator SALTONSTALL. You are asking for a full reclama up to the authorization that the Congress gave you? Major General SHULER. Yes, sir. Colonel RORABAUGH. The only items in reclama are the new units and involves 60 units for location 04 and involves 84 units at location 23. We have two statements to submit for the record on these. The Department of the Army has a firm requirement to construct 60 units of family housing at location 04. The project is required to provide efficient uninterrupted operation of the mission. Key personnel must live on post and be immediately available at all times. The long-range housing deficit is 268 units. Families must either be separated or live in inadequate private rentals in the community where lack of proper sanitary facilities, nonpotable water, and a lack of necessary structural built-ins including screens create an unfavorable housing condition and resultant morale problems. The problem of reducing gold flow is recognized and the use of prefabricated housing (USAHOME) procured in the United States will reduce foreign exchange to a minimum. The 60 units authorized in the fiscal year 1963 program for this location were awarded as a USAHOME package with erection scheduled for award early in 1964. USAHOME methods resulted in a foreign exchange cost of only 23 percent of that required for conventional onsite construction at location 04. Procurement of the 60 units of prefabricated housing requested in fiscal year 1964 would be deferred until the erection of the fiscal year 1963 project in order to take full advantage of all minor improvements in design and techniques of erection gained from the previous project. Deletion of the fiscal year 1964 project will extend indefinitely the requirement for payment of quarters and housing allowances of $1,400 average per year per set of quarters, or a total of $84,000 annually, which is largely a gold flow cost. The Department of the Army has a firm requirement to construct 84 units of family housing at location 23. The project is required to provide efficient uninterrupted operation of the mission. Key personnel must live onpost and be immediately available at all times. The long-range housing deficit is 254 units. Available off-post housing is inadequate due to lack of proper sanitary facilities, nonpotable water, and the absence of necessary structural built-ins and screens to insure comfort and privacy. Heating fuel is expensive and commuting is required over hazardous graveled mountain roads. The problem of reducing gold flow is recognized and the use of prefabricated housing (USAHOME) procured in the United States will reduce foreign exchange to a minimum. The 216 units authorized in the fiscal year 1963 program at 2 other ASA locations were awarded as a USAHOME package with erection scheduled for award early in 1964. USAHOME methods resulted in a foreign exchange cost of only 16 percent of that required for conventional onsite construction at the two locations. Procurement of the 84 units of prefabricated housing requested in fiscal year 1964 would be deferred until the erection of the fiscal year 1963 projects in |