Indicates units being augmented/increased in some manner due to this action.

1- Search and Rescue Detachment (SARDET)

Approximately 8 personnel assigned to

parent unit who man a ready boat out of another area in the summer season.

2- B-0 Ready crew and boat able to respond within 30 minutes.

3- Reserve Augment Replace a portion of regular complement with reserve billets during the summer season providing an extra ready boat.

****NOTE**** All dollar savings are initial estimates. Where we are creating SARDET's or augmenting other units the dollar savings are the net of the two transactions.

FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM

SENATOR ANDREWS: What is status of the family advocacy

program?

ANSWER: We are pursuing initiatives in several areas. Instructions are being drafted on incest casehandling procedures and child care policy. Four Community Support Centers are on line. Through a cooperative agreement, the grant authority of the Department of Health and Human Services' National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect is being utilized to assure that demonstration projects in Family Programs are continued. Close coordination with the Army, Navy, and Air Force Family Programs is continuing in the areas of legislation, policy, and reporting standards. We are represented on their Family Advocacy and Family Policy Coordinating Committees. Our casehandling procedures have been expanded from dealing with reported family violence to referring families at risk to appropriate help in the early stages of trouble, and offering assistance to non-violent families with special physical, medical, and educational needs.

Our future plans call for continuing our basic Family Advocacy training efforts and expanding our specialized training efforts for investigators, medical, and dental personnel. Two more Community Support Centers are planned. Preventive efforts aimed at assisting the majority of our Coast Guard families will continue to be emphasized and expanded.

We have had extensive training programs involving Coast Guard wives (officer and enlisted), Command Enlisted Advisors, and our Chaplains. The wives of the Commandant, Vice Commandant, Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard and other service

leaders are actively involved and the program has the full personal support of the Commandant.

SENATOR ANDREWS: How much is being spent in FY 1985 and 1986 for the Family Advocacy Program?

ANSWER:

Approximately $600,000 for each year.

SENATOR ANDREWS: Has the Coast Guard complied with the senate report directive to assign family counselors at the remaining six major centers?

ANSWER: Counselors have been assigned at the six remaining

centers.

SENATOR ANDREWS: How do the Coast Guard statistics for both wife and child abuse, and alcohol abuse compare to the other services? What is the trend for these problems: On the decline or rise?

ANSWER: Coast Guard statistics for family violence are equivalent to the other Services. The present trend shows an increase due to an increased awareness of family violence issues and reporting procedures as a result of our continuing education and training courses.

The incidence of alcohol abuse is also equivalent to that of the other services. The trend in inpatient admissions is slowly increasing. The reason appears to be attributable more to command awareness of the indicators of alcoholism rather than an increase in the number of alcoholics in the Coast Guard.

AQUATIC RESOURCES TRUST FUND

SENATOR ANDREWS: The balance in the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund is expected to grow to $225.25 million in FY 1986. Has the Coast Guard considered submitting legislation to offset more than $15 million in Operating Expenses from this fund?

ANSWER: The legislation authorizing the transfer of $15 million to our Operating Expenses appropriation was only enacted within the past year. Our FY 1986 budget requests the full amount authorized to be transferred. We have no plans to submit legislation to increase it.

SENATOR ANDREWS: On what was the Coast Guard's $45 million request to the Office of the Secretary based: A higher program level for recreational boating safety, or a higher operating expense transfer?

ANSWER: The request was based on full use of the authorized funds from the Boat Safety Account, i.e., $30 million for State recreational boating safety programs and $15 million for Coast Guard operating expenses for recreational boating safety services.

SENATOR ANDREWS: What Sportfishing Program goals has the Fish and Wildlife Service established for its $44 million program? Will any of these activities duplicate those of the Coast Guard?

ANSWER: Discussions with program administrators at the Fish and Wildlife Service indicate that their goals address the management of sportfish resources. Based on consultation with the Department of Interior, none of these activities duplicate Coast Guard efforts.

SENATOR ANDREWS:

Provide for the record the FY 1983-1986
State boating grants. Would most States be able to match
Federal funds at the $15, $20, and $30 million level.
why?

If not,

ANSWER: The FY 1986 allocation will depend on the amount provided in the FY 1986 Appropriation Act. However, based on the level requested, State amounts for FY 85 are representative of the FY 1986 allocations.

In FY 1983, two States and one Territory failed to meet the match requirement. They were Nebraska, Vermont and the Virgin Islands. American Samoa and the Northern Marianas are exempt from the matching share requirement. Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Vermont did not meet the full match in FY 1984, with shortfalls ranging from $1,800 to $28,000. The Coast Guard will not have data for FY 1985 until after year end. However, it is doubtful that there will be others unable to match funds. It is anticipated that ample State matching funds will be made available to meet the requirement at the $20 million level with less than five States having a problem at the $30 million level.

USER FEES

SENATOR ANDREWS: Last year's budget also assumed collections from user fees. And the committee was told that the necessary rulemaking would be promulgated. Was it? Will the Coast Guard realize $10.5 million in FY 1985 user fees? If not, please explain.

ANSWER: Although a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to collect additional user fees using existing regulatory authority was developed, it was not promulgated, and an additional $10.5 million in FY 1985 user fees was not realized. Title 46 presently prohibits charging certain users for many of the services which would normally be eligible for cost recovery under Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-125. Proposed legislation has been submitted which would expand the authority to collect user fees and recover $476 annually in costs incurred by the Coast Guard.

TRANSFER AUTHORITY

SENATOR ANDREWS: To what extent has the Coast Guard utilized the transfer authority provided by Section 5 of P.L. 98-557? Are there plans to transfer funds in FY 1985?

ANSWER: The Coast Guard has not yet used the authority of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-557) to transfer funds between appropriations. There are no plans to make any such transfers in FY 1985.

FY 1984 AC&I DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS

SENATOR ANDREWS: Provide for the record the procurement and delivery estimates for items included in the Acquisition,

Construction, & Improvement Appropriation of $300 million in FY 1984. Indicate expected date of obligation of funds.