« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
Fiscal year 1960, actual 1961, estimate 1962, estimate (2)
431 Depot maintenance..
Total program requirements..
Project 431: Depot maintenance
Fiscal year 1962.-
$27, 485, 000
PART K-PURPOSE AND BCOPE This project provides funds by which the Air National Guard will reimburse the Air Force for depot level maintenance including corrective maintenance of aircraft equipment and acceşsories, electronic and communications equipment, vehicles and other equipment. Depot -level maintenance includes repair, overhaul, modification, reclamation, manufacture, assembly, and disassembly, inspection and testing, including contractor-furnished supplies and equipment incident
to maintenance, and modification, and modification service performed under contract. Excludes Government-furnished parts and equipment and maintenance or modification performed under Air Force budget program 180 and corrective maintenance kits furnished under Air National Guard budget project 411.
PART II-JUSTIFICATION OF FUNDS REQUESTED The following tabulation shows a summary of requirements by subproject:
Summary of computations This computation was made by the prime and/or specialized AMC depots and subsequently reviewed by Headquarters, Air Materiel Command; Headquarters U.S. Air Force; and the Air National Guard.
The administrative overhead requirements have been developed by the AMC installations. These requirements include such costs as travel; costs of manhours required to fabricate materiel and equipment not provided under aircraft procurement and other procurement appropriations and not available by local purchase; and costs associated with Federal employees life insurance, civil service retirement, and social security contributions.
The amounts contained in these schedules for the subprojects indicated, reflects the ANG portion of the requirements and related costs. These costs are developed on the same base period of actual experience as is used for the regular Air Force and then applied to the programed flying hours, weighted to consider the power rating of each aircraft.
Program 440: Training support --Summary of requirements
The following tabulation shows a comparison of the costs for functions included under this project for fiscal years 1960, 1961, and 1962:
Program 470: Medical support-Summary of requirements
Program 480: Servicewide support-Summary of requirements
Mr. Mahon. Now, General, we on this committeee have a great deal of confidence in you and the people who work with you in the Air National Guard. You have long been aware of the necessity for what the President calls vigor in the operation of your agency, and I think you have done a good job. Of course, your operation is a large and important operation, but it is relatively small compared to some of the overall more massive undertakings in the Department of Defense.
I just believe you are doing a good job and yet you have continued to press for a better job. You want the Air National Guard to measure up to its missions and responsibilities, and you want to improve it year by year, and without a doubt it is improving. I want to wish you continued success in your operations.
General Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are going to do our best to come up to our final goal of full combat readiness to like standards of those units of the active Air Force.
Mr. Mahon. Thank you.
FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEMS
Can you or can someone with you here tell us more about the program for the contributions to State retirement funds? How does this retirement fund program work and how much is included in these estimates and what are the limitations and so forth? Have the person best able to answer those questions comment on them for the record. I have been receiving some communications in regard to the retirement fund.
General Wilson. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, as you know, the air technicians are employees of the States. They are paid by Federal funds allotted to the States. As such, they really have only social security as retirement to look forward to. Last year Mr. Becker wrote a letter-Congressman Becker from New York-to the Department of Defense pertaining to the possibility of the Federal Government paying the State share for these State employees who are working with the guard, as a means of giving them some hope of getting additional retirement. They are not Federal employees, although they are paid by Federal funds. So they do not come under the Federal civil service retirement programs.
This was studied in both the Army and the Air Force and the Department of Defense, and it was found that it could be done by administrative authority of the Department of Defense, and in answer to Mr. Becker's letter, the Department of Defense told him that funds for the payment of the State share to air technicians would be included in the 1962 budget program.
As you know, sir, the State retirement systems vary in each State; whereas in the Federal Government it is all the same kind. It depends on the local level as to how much money would be placed, and we have made surveys throughout the country and have come up with information to the effect that it varies, I would say, from about 2.5 to 9.6 percent, depending on the State laws.
Mr. MAHON. Do you have a statement which you could put in the record at this point giving the percentages for the various States?
General Wilson. No, sir; but I can furnish it for the record,
Mr. Mahon. All right, put that in the record. I would be interested in that information and I think others would.
(The information requested follows:) The following listings show the employer rate contributions under each State law: States now permitting particiption in a State retirement system Percent
Percent Connecticut 2. 75 Missouri_
4 Florida. 6 New Jersey
7 Hawaii. 7. 29 New Mexico_
5 Iowa--13.5 Ohio...
7.41 Massachusetts. 5 Washington.-
* 4.5 1 On 1st $4,000. 2 Not in excess of $4,800.
States whose laws will permit participation when Federal funds are made
Percent Arizona 3.5 Nevada.
5 Arkansas_ 13 New York..
9. 619 California. 9. 16 North Carolina.
*3 Delaware.. 5 Tennessee
4. 12 Kentucky
4. 75 Mississippi.
6,08 Montana--3. 3 Virginia.
4 13 percent on 1st $4,500, 4 percent on next $1,500. 2 3 percent on 1st $4,800'; 5 percent in excess of $4,800.
States that have retirement systems, but whose laws do not now permit
Percent Alabama. 3.5 New Hampshire_
2. 82 Colorado 6 Oregon--
5. 55 Illinois 7 Pennsylvania -
7 Indiana. (") Puerto Rico
5. 09 Louisiana.
6 Rhode Island Maine. 4. 34 South Carolina.
3.98 Maryland 9. 15 Wisconsin
6. 33 Michigan---6. 16 Wyoming
2. 75 i Not over 6 percent.
Funds were included in the budget estimates submitted to OSD and BOB by both the Army and Air National Guard, based on the above percentages by State. However, in the review of the estimates by the Bureau of the Budget when they limited the rate to 6.5 percent including social security, old age and survivors insurance contribution, they only considered the first two categories of States listed above. The budget estimates submitted to the Congress did not include any funds for the States that have retirement systems, but whose present laws do not now permit participation by Army and Air technicians in the State retirement systems.
All of the rates indicated above were used by both the Army and Air National Guard in computing the requirements for contributions to State retirement funds.
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET LIMITATION
General Wilson. Mr. Chairman, the Department of Defense asked the Bureau of the Budget for authority to do that. The Bureau of the Budget included in the President's budget—the past administration's budget-up to 612 percent. In this budget we have $1.9 million. The 612 percent limitation is what I presume you are getting letters