Guam Realignment Annual Report 2010

January 25, 2010 v1Interagency coordInatIon group of Inspectors general

for guam realIgnment annual report

sectIon 2835 of the natIonal defense authorIzatIon act for fIscal year 2010

[february 1, 2010](Public Law 111-84)

On October 28, 2009, the President signed the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010, Public Law 111-84. Section 2835 established the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General for the Guam Realignment with the following duties.

PUBLIC LAW 111-84It shall be the duty of the Interagency Coordination Group to conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations of the treatment, handling, and expenditure of amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam

and of the programs, operations, and contracts carried out utilizingsuch funds, including—

(A) the oversight and accounting of the obligation and expenditure of such funds;

(B) the monitoring and review of construction activities funded by such funds;

(C) the monitoring and review of contracts funded by such funds;(D) the monitoring and review of the transfer of such funds and associated information between and among departments, agencies, and entities of

the United States and private and nongovernmental entities;(E) the maintenance of records on the use of such funds to facilitate

future audits and investigations of the use of such funds; and(F) the monitoring and review of the implementation of the Defense Posture Review Initiative relating to the realignment of military installations and

the relocation of military personnel on Guam.

Not later than February 1 of each year, the chairperson of the Interagency Coordination Group shall submit to the congressional defense committees, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of the Interior a report summarizing, for the preceding calendar year, the activities of the Interagency Coordination Group during such year and the activities under programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam. Each report shall include, for the year covered by the report, a detailed statement of all obligations, expenditures, and revenues

associated with such construction.

See Appendix A for the legislative mandates for Guam realignment in the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010.

Guam RealiGnment RepoRt

FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Message from the Chairman,Interagency Coordination Group

I am pleased to submit the first annual report of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General for Guam Realignment to the congressional defense committees, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of the Interior. The annual report, as required by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84), covers the reporting period January 1 to December 31, 2009.

The strategic deployment of United States and Japanese forces provides security and strengthens our deterrent capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region. The Defense Posture Review Initiative provides a framework for the future U.S. force structure in Japan and the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. I deployed teams to Guam, U.S. Pacific Command, and Japan to identify the key organizations involved in the Guam realignment effort, obtain an understanding of the magnitude of efforts required, and begin to identify areas of risk associated with the realignment.

In November 2009, I held the first meeting of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General for Guam Realignment to discuss the legislative requirements and request information on oversight initiatives planned or completed. The members of this group are the Inspector General of the Department of the Interior and other Inspectors General as appropriate. The Interagency Coordination Group recognizes that the realignment may present challenges in operational readiness, quality of life, contract management, contractor oversight, asset accountability, and financial management. A key factor impacting these challenges is the infrastructure development on Guam. The Interagency Coordination Group will consider the risks associated with these challenges when developing an oversight plan that effectively and efficiently utilizes our audit and investigative resources. In addition, I am participating as an observer on the Department of Defense’s Guam Oversight Council and I have designated a representative to participate as an observer on the Department of Defense’s Guam Executive Council.

The Interagency Coordination Group will provide transparency and accountability to the American people and to the U.S. military forces affected by this realignment. The group will also provide an accounting of funds received from the government of Japan. The Interagency Coordination Group is committed to providing independent, objective, and relevant information in achieving accountability, integrity, and efficiency in the Guam realignment.

I want to thank those participating as part of the Interagency Coordination Group and those Federal and Department of Defense agencies involved in supporting this effort. As the group moves forward, Congress and senior leadership throughout the U.S. Government will use these oversight efforts to improve the economy and efficiency of vital programs and operations, sustain the readiness of U.S. forces, and minimize the impact on the citizens of Guam.

Gordon S. Heddell Inspector General


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Section 2835 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 designates the Inspector General of the Department of Defense as the Chairman of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General for Guam Realignment (ICG). The Chairman is required to provide an annual report to the congressional defense committees, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of the Interior on the activities of the ICG and the programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam. This report contains data collected from multiple organizations. The Department of Defense Office of the Inspector General has not idependently verified the data provided.

The Defense Posture Review Initiative, initiated by the Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense with their Japanese counterparts, serves as the framework for the future of U.S. force structure in Japan and the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. The Guam realignment will be one of the largest movements of military assets in decades while helping to maintain a robust military presence in the Asia-Pacific region. In order to facilitate, manage, and execute requirements associated with the relocation of U.S. Marine Corps assets from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam, the Deputy Secretary of Defense established the Joint Guam Program Office. Expected construction costs for facility and infrastructure development requirements relating to the realignment are approximately $10.27 billion, of which the government of Japan (GOJ) has agreed to provide up to $6.09 billion.

This first report identifies the programs and operations funded with appropriated amounts or funds otherwise made available for military construction on Guam in calendar year 2009 to include:

DoD obligated approximately $60.3 million and expended approximately •$35.7 million. Other Federal agencies obligated approximately $7.8 million and expended approximately $3.4 million. (Section 1)GOJ provided revenues valued at $336 million with approximately $369,000 in •interest associated with those revenues. (Section 2)DoD identified 102 projects and programs with costs totaling approximately •$17.5 million with an estimated completion cost of approximately $36.1 million. Other Federal agencies identified 4 projects and programs with costs totaling approximately $7.7 million with an estimated completion cost of approximately $201.2 million. (Section 3)DoD identified operating expenses of approximately $19.8 million. Other Federal •agencies identified operating expenses of approximately $666,000. (Section 4)DoD and other Federal agencies identified 15 contracts and 6 grants with obligations •of approximately $53.1 million (Section 5).


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Proposed Actions on Guam

O ro P o i

F acpi P o int

Philippine Sea

Cocos

I S~ Ag a P oi nt

Army Earth Covered Magazine

USMC Main Cantonment and Housing

Oka

Agallll BlIJ'

Miles 4

6 Kilometers

I 12

R i t i d ian P o i n t

Munitions Storage Upgrades

North Gate and Access Road

Air Mobility Command lAir Embarkation

~-...;,."... ______ P ati

Pacific Ocean

Legend

o Route Number

Landing Zone

Surface Danger Zone C:::::: i 000 Lands

P oi nt

~ USMC Main Cantonment and Housing

- Ammunition Storage Area c::=:::J Army Weapons Emplacement Site

Roadway Projects Access Road Route 15 Realignment I New Construction

Waterfront Projects

s~w Aircraft Carrier Enroute Path

CJ Proposed Channel Improvements

CJ Existing Channel C-J Minimal Aircraft Carrier Turning Radius

Training Convoy Course Existing Road Convoy Course New Road Advanced Motor Vehicles

- Operations Course (AMVOC) Military Operations and Urban Train ing (MOUT)

Non-Firing Maneuver Training Area

Safety Buffer ISurface Danger Zone

Live Fire Range


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Table of Contents

Background 1 Efforts of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General for Guam 7 Realignment (Section 2835(e)(1))

Section 1. U.S. Government Obligation and Expenditure Data 11 (Section 2835(e)(1)(A))

Section 2. Government of Japan Revenue 15 (Section 2835(e)(1)(C))

Section 3. Project and Program Costs 19 (Section 2835(e)(1)(B))

Section 4. Operating Expenses 29 (Section 2835(e)(1)(D))

Section 5. Contracts, Grants, Agreements, or Other Funding Mechanisms Data 33 (Section 2835(e)(1)(E))

Appendices

A. Legislative Mandates for Guam Realignment in the National Defense 39 Authorization Act for FY 2010 B. Federal Spending in Guam Not Directly Related to the Realignment 47 C. Guam-Related Completed Audits and Government Accountability 49 OfficeTestimony D. Acronyms 51 E. Endnotes 53 F. Source Documentation 55


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) entering Apra Harbor, Guam

1 Guam RealiGnment RepoRt

FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Background u.S. militaRy RealiGnment

The Defense Posture Review Initiative (DPRI), initiated by the Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense with their Japanese counterparts, serves as the framework for the future of U.S. force structure in Japan and the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. The Guam realignment will be one of the largest movements of military assets in decades and will help to maintain a robust military presence in the Asia-Pacific region. Under the command of the Joint Region Marianas, the two largest military bases on Guam are Naval Base Guam and Andersen Air Force Base. Since 2000, the U.S. Pacific Command has built up air and naval forces on Guam to strengthen U.S. deterrence and power projection in Asia, specifically crisis

response, counter-terrorism, and contingencies in the Western Pacific. Guam is a U.S. territory considered strategically significant to U.S. forward deployments in the Western Pacific. The island, three times the size of Washington, D.C., is home to about 173,000 residents. Figure 1 shows the location of Guam and overseas distances to various locations in the Asia-Pacific region.

Figure 1. Guam and Overseas Distances

Defense Posture Review Initiative. The purpose of the DPRI was to develop a common security view; to review roles, missions, and capabilities; and to review force posture changes. Included in the various DPRI initiatives are the relocation of U.S. Marine Corps personnel to Guam; the return of selected bases and facilities to the goverment of Japan (GOJ); and the consolidation of some of the remaining U.S. bases and facilities in Japan. The DPRI includes plans to:

Relocate the functions of two U.S. air bases from urbanized to rural areas; •Relocate more than 8,000 III Marine Expeditionary Force personnel and their associated dependents •from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam; Co-locate U.S. and Japanese command and control capabilities; •Deploy U.S. missile defense capabilities in Japan, in conjunction with Japan’s own deployments; and •Improve operational coordination between U.S. and Japanese forces. •

2


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

As part of the military realignment, the Department of Defense (DoD) anticipates total or partial return of multiple facilities to the GOJ. The facilities may include Camp Foster (Camp Zukeran), Camp Lester (Camp Kuwae), Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, Camp Kinser (Makiminato Service Area), and Naha Military Port. The U.S. Marine Corps forces remaining on Okinawa, Japan will consist of Marine Air-Ground Task Force elements such as command, ground, aviation, and combat service support, as well as a base support capability. These activities will strengthen capabilities and maintain deterrence in the region while reducing impacts of U.S. presence on local communities in Japan.

SiGniFicant eventSSince the DPRI was initiated, several significant events have occurred in the Guam military realignment (Figure 2). The U.S. Government and GOJ have developed interrelated initiatives and plans to facilitate the realignment of U.S. forces from Okinawa, Japan to Guam by a targeted completion date of 2014.

Figure 2. Significant Events in the Guam Military Realignment Timeline

U.S.‑Japan Alliance. On October 29, 2005, the Security Consultative Committee approved the “U.S.-Japan Alliance: Transformation and Realignment for the Future,” in which the United States and GOJ agreed to realign U.S. and Japanese forces throughout the Pacific. The United States and Japan reviewed bilateral roles, missions, and capabilities, particularly those of the U.S. forces and the Japan Self-Defense Forces.

Roadmap for Realignment Implementation. On May 1, 2006, the “U.S.-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation” documented specific initiatives, plans, and implementation schedules for the realignment of these forces. The realignment includes the relocation of the Futenma airfield flight functions by a targeted completion date of 2014; realignment in Okinawa, Japan; identification of candidate facilities for total or partial return to the GOJ; and relocation of the Air Self Defense Force Air Defense Command units to Yokota Air Base.

2


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Joint Guam Program Office. On August 25, 2006, the Deputy Secretary of Defense established the Joint Guam Program Office (JGPO), reporting to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations and Environment, to facilitate, manage, and execute requirements associated with the relocation of U.S. Marine Corps assets from Okinawa, Japan to Guam.

JGPO will lead the coordinated planning efforts and synchronize the funding requirements between DoD Components and other stakeholders. The proposed planning efforts include:

Relocating U.S. Marine Corps command, air, ground, and logistics units from Okinawa, Japan to •Guam;Enhancing infrastructure and logistics capabilities for military training and operations;•Rehabilitating or constructing operational, support, and training facilities on Guam and at other •locations within the Northern Mariana Islands; and Constructing or upgrading infrastructure such as utility systems, roads, and waste facilities to support •the relocation of III Marine Expeditionary Forces.

JGPO also works closely with the governments of Japan and Guam, Federal agencies, and Congress to manage the comprehensive realignment effort. It has additional responsibilities to coordinate DoD’s conduct of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for moving U.S. Marine Corps forces to Guam. JGPO receives planning assistance from the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) in conducting analyses and developing an acquisition strategy for infrastructure needed to support DoD’s operational requirements.

Bilateral Governmental Agreement. On February 17, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed the bilateral “Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of the U.S. of America Concerning the Implementation of the Relocation of III Marine Expeditionary Force Personnel and Their Dependents from Okinawa to Guam.” To support the realignment effort, the GOJ agreed to provide up to $6.09 billion.1 The GOJ agreed to support the United States in its development of necessary facilities and infrastructure on Guam.

USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) approaching

carrier berthing at Apra Harbor

Secretary of State Clinton and Japan’s Minister for Foreign Affairs

Nakasone signing the bilateral Agreement (Ministry of Foreign Affairs

of Japan Photo)

4


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Implementation Guidance for Government of Japan Funded Projects. On June 30, 2009, the two governments approved implementation guidance for projects funded by GOJ cash contributions and further determined that:

Accrued interest on the GOJ cash contributions can fund relocation projects if they receive proper •approval; DoD will provide the Ministry of Defense of Japan a detailed description and cost estimate of each •specific project;NAVFAC will execute all contracts in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations; and•Projects funded by GOJ cash contributions will be awarded separately from U.S. Government funded •projects.

Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. As required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), DoD continues to prepare an EIS to document and analyze the environmental impacts associated with the Guam military realignment efforts. DoD completed the draft EIS in November 2009, and the final EIS is scheduled for completion in July 2010. Only after the Record of Decision for the EIS is signed will DoD finalize its Guam Joint Military Master Plan for facilities development. The construction contract awards may be delayed if the EIS is not completed as planned.

impact to RealiGnment oF u.S. FoRceSAccording to March 2008 testimony provided by the Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, the GOJ approved a comprehensive legislative package that authorized financing to build housing on Guam for U.S. Marine Corps forces relocating from Okinawa, Japan. Additionally, the GOJ initiated the environmental assessment needed to implement construction of the Futenma Replacement Facility on Okinawa, Japan.

The U.S. Government and GOJ agreed to relocate the flight functions of the Futenma airfield to a new facility in a less crowded area of Okinawa, Japan. According to the “United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation” the:

“...consolidation and land returns south of Kadena depend on completing the relocation of • III MEF [Marine Expeditionary Force] personnel and dependents from Okinawa to Guam.The III MEF relocation from Okinawa to Guam is dependent on: (1) tangible progress • toward completion of the FRF [Futenma Replacement Facility], and (2) Japan’s financial contributions to fund development of required facilities and infrastructure on Guam.”

F-22s on patrol over Pacific Ocean

Marine Corps personnel from the Okinawa-based Combat Logistics Battalion 31 and an Indonesian service member carry supplies for a humanitarian assistance

and disaster relief effort in Padang, Indonesia

Japan Air Self Defense Forces participate in exercise on Guam

4


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

FundinG aRRanGementSThe U.S. Government and GOJ estimated costs for facility and infrastructure development requirements relating to the realignment to be approximately $10.27 billion (in Fiscal Year [FY] 2008 U.S. dollars). The GOJ agreed to provide up to $6.09 billion of the $10.27 billion.1 The U.S. Government will fund approximately $4.18 billion.1 Figure 3 identifies the funding arrangement between the U.S. Government and the GOJ.

Figure 3. Funding Sources for Realignment (numbers below total $10.27 Billion)Dollars in Billions

Sources: Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of the United States of America Concerning the Implementation of the Relocation of III Marine Expeditionary Force Personnel and their Dependents from Okinawa to Guam, 2/17/2009 and JGPO, Guam Military Realignment Overview, 2/5/2008.

FedeRal FundinG FoR the GoveRnment oF GuamThe government of Guam receives Federal funding through programs such as the Federal Highways Administration Territorial Highway Program, Medicaid, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program - Food Stamps. In addition, Guam receives grants for school improvement, energy efficiency, and conservation. According to an Office of Management and Budget official, these funds would be spent regardless of the military relocation from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam. Based on an August 2009 budget data request from

$2.80

$3.29 $3.18

$1.00

GOJ Direct Cash Contributions

GOJ Equity and Loans to SpecialPurpose EntitiesU.S. Funds (Facilities andInfrastructure)U.S. Funds (Road)

F-22s on patrol over Pacific Ocean

Marine Corps personnel from the Okinawa-based Combat Logistics Battalion 31 and an Indonesian service member carry supplies for a humanitarian assistance

and disaster relief effort in Padang, Indonesia

Japan Air Self Defense Forces participate in exercise on Guam

6


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

the Office of Management and Budget, the government of Guam received Federal funding and grants of approximately $596 million in FY 2008. The budget data also included estimated increases in FY 2009 and FY 2010 to $611 million and $675.3 million, respectively.2 See Appendix B for an agency breakout of Federal spending in Guam that is not directly related to the realignment for FY 2008 through FY 2010.

The government of Guam is also receiving additional funds from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. According to the official U.S. Government Web site for American Reinvestment and Recovery Act spending, as of November 2009, the government of Guam received approximately $206 million in Federal stimulus funding in the form of contracts, grants, and loans.3 The government of Guam used a portion of these funds to support highway infrastructure projects, energy programs, and rehabilitation of the Guam International Airport runway.

USS Boxer (LHD 4) pulls pierside carrying U.S. Marines and Sailors from the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit as they prepare to disembark for a cultural liberty call at

U.S. Naval Base Marianas, Guam

6


FebRuaRy 1, 2010Guam RealiGnment RepoRt

FebRuaRy 1, 2010 7 7 Guam RealiGnment RepoRt

FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)

effortS of the interagency coordination group of inSpectorS general for guam realignment

8


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Efforts of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors Generals for Guam Realignment

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)

8


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Section 2835 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010 designates the Inspector General (IG) of the DoD as the Chairman of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General for Guam Realignment (ICG). The members of this group are the IG of the Department of the Interior (DOI) and any other IGs as appropriate. The ICG provides objective supervi sion of audits and investigations, to include inspections, evaluations, and reviews relating to the programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam. Specifically, the ICG oversight duties are to conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations of the treatment, handling, and expenditure of amounts appropriated for military construction on Guam. This oversight consists of the programs, operations, and contracts carried out using these funds, including:

Oversight and accounting of the obligations and expenditures;•Monitoring and review of construction activities;•Monitoring and review of contracts;•Monitoring and review of funds transferred among departments, agencies, and entities of the United •States and private and non-governmental entities;Maintenance of records to facilitate future audits and investigations; and•Monitoring and review of the implementation of the DPRI relating to the realignment of military •installations and the relocation of military personnel to Guam.

The ICG Chairman began coordinating with the IG of the DOI and the IGs of various other Federal departments and agencies to determine the required membership of the ICG. On November 20, 2009, the ICG Chairman met with personnel from several IG offices to introduce the legislative requirements for the ICG and request information on planned or completed oversight initiatives. The ICG Chairman will use the information collected to determine the appropriate ICG membership. In addition, the ICG Chairman continues to oversee the development of a strategy to conduct, supervise, and coordinate oversight activities to monitor the use of funding for the Guam realignment.

In order to assist with the development of this strategy, the ICG Chairman established the Guam Interagency Planning Group (IPG). This group will share information about the status of Guam construction and discuss planned and ongoing oversight efforts. The IPG is made up of representatives from the audit and investigative community, as well as representatives from DoD and other Federal departments and agencies. The information exchanged will provide the basis for determining the initial and future initiatives needed to effectively oversee activities related to the Guam realignment. The IPG will also make recommendations to the ICG for its Annual Oversight Plan for the Guam realignment and determine future information and assistance needs for fulfilling the ICG duties. The IPG held its first meeting on December 15, 2009.

The ICG Chairman is also participating as an observer of the Guam Oversight Council. The Guam Oversight Council, chaired by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, is a DoD council responsible for reviewing overall strategy and addressing issues associated with the Guam realignment. Additionally, the ICG Chairman has designated a representative to participate as an observer of the Guam Executive Council. The Under Secretary of the Navy and the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Asian and Pacific Security Affairs) are the deputy co-chairs of the Guam Executive Council, which is responsible for formal coordination and control of Guam policy and issue resolution.


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

annual oveRSiGht planThe National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010 requires the members of the ICG to develop a comprehensive plan for a series of audits and reviews respective to its oversight responsibilities for the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. Currently, the ICG is compiling the Annual Oversight Plan.

ICG members will have varying degrees of involvement, but all members will play a role in the oversight and success of the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. The group anticipates that significant challenges will arise throughout the course of the military realignment. The ICG must consider the following challenges to ensure that sufficient infrastructure is in place by 2014 to support the military and citizens of Guam. The Annual Oversight Plan will focus on the following challenges and designated statutory reporting requirements.

Operational Readiness. It is important that the realignment does not adversely impact the operational readiness of U.S. forces. The relocation of 8,000 U.S. Marine Corps personnel and their associated dependents will create operational challenges with mobility support, training facilities, and adequate infrastructure. DoD needs to ensure that there is adequate military sealift and airlift capability and that training ranges and facilities meet the requirements of the U.S. military.

Quality of Life. The U.S. Government must ensure that the realignment does not adversely affect the quality of life on Guam. The increase in military presence will have a significant impact on the government of Guam’s infrastructure, including medical facilities, schools, housing, roads, and standard of living. Research, planning, and coordination among Federal agencies and the government of Guam are essential to mitigating this challenge.

Contract Management. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) designated contract management as a high risk area for DoD and interagency contracting. NAVFAC is the contracting office responsible for executing all construction contracts related to the Guam realignment. Annually, NAVFAC delivers more than $11 billion of products and services.4 This amount could increase by approximately 15 percent with the contract execution to support the military construction on Guam. DoD will need to ensure that it has an adequate number of trained and experienced acquisition personnel to manage the increase in service, support, and construction contracts awarded for the Guam realignment.

Contractor Oversight. In the past, DoD has struggled to maintain adequate visibility over its contractors. DoD needs to ensure that it has an adequate number of qualified contractor oversight personnel for the Guam military construction contracts.

Asset Accountability. DoD has experienced challenges with asset accountability. These challenges include the monitoring and tracking of inventory and plant, property, and equipment procured and maintained by DoD.

Financial Management. Historically, DoD has identified and reported on several material control weaknesses that reflect some of the pervasive and long-standing financial management issues it faces. These weaknesses include:

Inadequate number of trained financial management personnel available to manage the influx of funds, •contract and vendor payments, and associated documents;Inaccurate cost accounting processes and systems that provide unreliable cost reports of obligations and •expenditures;Incomplete and inaccurate valuation of inventory accounts; and•Inadequate accounting for Government-furnished and contractor-acquired material. •

10


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)

10


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010 10Guam RealiGnment RepoRt

FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)Efforts of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors Generals for Guam

These weaknesses affect the safeguarding of assets and proper use of funds and impair the prevention and identification of fraud, waste, and abuse. Due to an estimated influx of approximately $10.27 billion in funds related to the Guam realignment, DoD can expect to experience financial management challenges related to the weaknesses discussed above.1

completed auditS and teStimonyGAO and the Naval Audit Service (NAVAUDSVC) have completed 15 audit projects and provided 1 testimony related to the Guam realignment. The audit reports and testimony address deficiencies and internal control weaknesses. See Appendix C for information related to each completed audit or testimony.

completed inveStiGationSFrom January 1 to December 31, 2009, the DoD and other Federal law enforcement agencies, including the Defense Criminal Investigative Service; the Naval Criminal Investigative Service; Air Force Office of Special Investigations; the Federal Bureau of Investigations; and the Internal Revenue Service, did not identify any investigations related to programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam.

B-52 and B-2 aircraft taxiing at Andersen Air Force Base




FebRuaRy 1, 2010 11

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)a)

1u.S. government obligation and expenditure data

Section 1: U.S. Government Obligation and Expenditure Data (Section 2835(e)(1)(A))

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(A)

12


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Public Law 111-84 states that not later than February 1 of each fiscal year, the ICG Chairman must report on the programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam. Each report shall include a detailed statement of all obligations and expenditures associated with such construction.

dod appRopRiation typeSDoD plans to fund the majority of its costs for the Guam realignment with Military Construction and Operation and Maintenance appropriations. Military Construction appropriations fund the planning and design; installation or assembly of a new facility; the addition, expansion, alteration, or replacement of an existing facility; the acquisition of an existing facility; or the relocation of a facility. Military construction also includes equipment installed and made part of the facility and related site preparation, demolition, excavation, landscaping, or other land improvements.

The Operation and Maintenance appropriations fund expenses which include DoD civilian salaries, supplies and materials, furniture, maintenance of equipment, maintenance of real property, rental of equipment and facilities, food, clothing, and fuel.

u.S. FundinG FoR RealiGnmentThe U.S. Government will be responsible for at least $4.18 billion to support the realignment of military personnel from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam. Of this amount, $3.18 billion supports facility and infrastructure development and $1 billion supports construction of a road to link military facilities.1 Although the goal is to relocate U.S. Marine Corps forces to Guam by 2014, funding for military construction will continue beyond FY 2014. For FYs 2008 through 2010, the DoD was appropriated $11 million, $28 million, and $324.7 million, respectively. Figure 4 identifies the increase in appropriated amounts for military construction for these years.

Existing Naval housing on Guam

12


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(A)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Figure 4. Military Construction Appropriations FY 2008-FY 2010 (Dollars in millions)

Source: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/Chief Financial Officer) response provided on 1/14/2010 and JGPO response provided on 1/14/2010.

dod obliGationS and expendituReSThe majority of Military Construction and Operation and Maintenance appropriated funds are planned for obligation and expenditure in future fiscal years. The DoD OIG requested the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller); Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Budget); Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller); and the Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps Programs and Resources office provide obligation and expenditure data supporting the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. However, only the Department of the Navy (which includes the U.S. Marine Corps) and the Department of the Army obligated and expended funds for this purpose in calendar year 2009. A Department of the Navy official indicated that the obligation and expenditure data was derived from a NAVFAC management information system and does not reflect data from an official accounting system. The official also indicated that the data provided may not be complete since the Department of the Navy funding could have been transferred to other organizations for execution. DoD obligated approximately $60.3 million and expended approximately $35.7 million in calendar year 2009. For calendar year 2009, DoD primarily obligated and expended Operation and Maintenance appropriations. However, the obligations and expenditures of Military Construction appropriations will increase as construction contracts are awarded. Table 1 identifies the amounts obligated and expended for each appropriation from January 1 to December 31, 2009.

$11.0 $28.0

$324.7

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(A)

14


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Table 1. DoD Obligations and Expenditures Related to the Guam Realignment (January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2009)

otheR GoveRnment aGencieSFrom January 1 to December 31, 2009, the Department of Transportation identified obligations or expenditures related to programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam. The Department of Transportation identified total obligations of $7,753,348.5 Of this amount, it expended a total of $3,397,318.5

Appropriation* Obligations

Expenditures

Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps

$ 585,676 $ 520,724

Military Construction, Army $ 0 $ 0

Operation and Maintenance, Navy $ 6,115,735 $ 6,078,926

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps

$ 52,712,715 $ 28,957,909

Operation and Maintenance, Army $ 59,516 $ 59,516

Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps

$ 848,050 $ 73,161

Total $ 60,321,692 $ 35,690,236

* The Department of the Air Force reported no obligations or expenditures supporting the Guam realignment for calendar year 2009.

Sources: Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Budget), response to DoD OIG data call, 1/7/2010; Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller), response to DoD OIG data call, 1/8/2010 and 1/11/2010; NAVFAC Headquarters, response to DoD OIG data call, 1/15/2010; and JGPO, response to DoD OIG data call, 1/8/2010.

14




FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Se

cti

on 2

835

(e)(1

)(c)

2government of Japan revenue

Section 2: Government of Japan Revenue (Section 2835(e)(1)(C))

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(c)

16


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Section 2350k, title 10 of the United States Code grants the Secretary of Defense authority to accept cash contributions from any nation in support of a relocation of the armed forces. According to agreements between the U.S. Government and the GOJ, the GOJ is expected to provide up to $6.09 billion (FY 2008 U.S. dollars) for the U.S. Marine Corps relocation from Okinawa, Japan to Guam.6 Public Law 111-84 requires the ICG annual report to contain a detailed statement on the revenues contributed by the GOJ and any obligations or expenditures of these revenues.

tRuSt Fund accountThe “Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009” established a trust fund account, the “Support for U.S. Relocation to Guam Account.” The trust fund account has separate treasury accounts reserved for cash contributions, earnings on investments, and expenditures associated with the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/Chief Financial Officer) (OUSD[C]) plans to transfer the funds received from the GOJ and issue an Obligation Authority Letter to the Department of the Navy. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller) will then allocate the Japanese funds to NAVFAC using the assigned Trust Fund Receipt Account with a subhead specifically assigned to the GOJ funds to facilitate tracking. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) monitors disbursements and collections and allocates interest earned by the trust fund account. Figure 5 shows an overview of the cash flow process.

Figure 5. Government of Japan Cash Flow Process

Source: Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller), Financial Management Functions Related to the Government of Japan Funding Associated with the Movement of U.S. Forces to Guam, 12/29/2009.

The trust fund account can be used to fund work supporting the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel to Guam including:

Administrative buildings; •Instructional buildings; and•Quality of life facilities and other supporting buildings.•

DFAS tracks and reports the GOJ financialdata

NAVFAC executes all GOJ funded

construction contracts

DoD Component provides the funds

to NAVFAC for execution

GOJ provides direct cash funds to

OUSD(C)

OUSD(C) provides the funds to the DoD Component

Japanese frigates - Apra Harbor, Guam


U.S. Marine Corps personnel - Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, Okinawa, Japan

16


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Section 2: Government of Japan Revenue (Section 2835(e)(1)(C))

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(c)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

GoveRnment oF Japan FundinG FoR RealiGnmentThe GOJ has agreed to provide approximately $2.8 billion in direct cash contributions for facilities and infrastructure development and approximately $3.29 billion in equity and loans to Special Purpose Entities (public/private investments) to finance construction of housing and utilities.6 Each month, DoD must provide a report to the GOJ showing the activity in the trust fund account holding the direct cash contributions provided by GOJ. Table 2 shows the specific funding by category for GOJ funds.

RevenueS (contRibutionS) / inteReSt / obliGationS / expendituReSIn July 2009, the GOJ provided $336 million for design and on-base infrastructure projects.7 For the GOJ funds, DFAS identified the amount received, investments earned, obligations, and expenditures from January 1 to December 31, 2009 (Table 3).

Table 2. GOJ Funding Breakout(in Billions)

Direct FundsSpecial Purpose Entity Financing

Operating Facilities $ 1.29 $ 0Utility Infrastructure $ 0 $ .74Family Housing $ 0 $ 2.55Barracks / Quality of Life $ 1.51 $ 0 Total $ 2.80 $ 3.29

Source: Secretary of the Navy, Report on DoD Planning Efforts for Guam, 9/15/2008 and JGPO, SAME International Business Opportunity Workshop, 2/22/2007.

Table 3. Funds Received from the GOJRevenue

(Contribution)Earnings on Investment Obligations Expenditures

Activity for the GOJ Funds $336,000,000 $369,315 $0 $0

Source: DFAS, response to DoD OIG data call, 1/7/2010.



U.S. Marine Corps personnel - Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, Okinawa, Japan

18


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Vintage Photograph of U.S. Navy Seabees constructing Apra Harbor Wall

18




FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(b)

3proJect and program coStS

Section 3: Project and Program Costs (Section 2835(e)(1)(B))

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)

20


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Public Law 111-84 requires the ICG annual report to contain a detailed statement on the costs incurred to date and costs estimated to complete each DoD or DOI military construction project or program. The report must identify all projects and programs associated with the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel to Guam.

RecoRdinG and appRoval oF dod pRoJectS The DoD Financial Management Regulation requires a narrative justification and validation for each military construction project. For U.S. Government projects, DoD justifies each proposed military construction project with a DD Form 1391, “Military Construction Project Data.” DD Form 1391 provides information such as a description of proposed construction, projected design completion date, and project cost. The Japanese funded projects use a document similar to a DD Form 1391 for each military construction project.

Process for Projects Funded by U.S. Appropriations. DoD has a standard process and controls in place for planning, programming, budgeting, and executing military construction funds. The DoD Component provides a project justification, the DD Form 1391, to the OUSD(C) and requests funding in DoD’s annual budget submission. If approved, DoD includes the military construction project within its budget justification. The budget justification is part of the annual President’s budget to the congressional committees. In addition, any funds spent on military construction for the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam will have other reporting requirements. Public Law 110-417, “Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009,” requires the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress a report on military construction projects no later than February 15 of each year. This report must contain information on each military construction project included in the budget submission for the next fiscal year, as well as those included in the defense program related to the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel to Guam for future years.

Process for Projects Funded by Government of Japan. The Headquarters Marine Corps requested assistance from NAVFAC Pacific to aid in the preparation of FY 2010 and FY 2011 DD Forms 1391, in which funds will be requested from the GOJ. NAVFAC Pacific prepared a document similar to a DD Form 1391 for each military construction project, and the Headquarters Marine Corps verified the scope requirements of each project prior to submission to the GOJ for approval.

Construction of Kilo Wharf to accomodate the future supply class vessel

(Apra Harbor, Guam)

20


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

dod pRoJect and pRoGRam liStNAVFAC Headquarters (which includes the U.S. Marine Corps data) and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller) identified 102 projects that received funds and were directly associated with the realignment of military installations and military personnel to Guam. These projects incurred costs of approximately $17.5 million with an estimated completion cost of approximately $36.1 million. A Department of the Navy official indicated that the expenditure data was derived from a NAVFAC management information system and does not reflect data from an official accounting system. The official also indicated that the data provided may not be complete since the Department of the Navy funding could have been transferred to other organizations for execution. Table 4 identifies the DoD project and its associated costs for calendar year 2009.

Table 4. 2009 Costs for DoD Projects and Programs

Project Description / Scope Start Date

Total Budgeted

Cost

Cost Incurred to

Date (US Funds)

Estimated Cost to

Complete

Headquarters Marine Corps Contractor Support Program Support ToBe

Determined $ 49,480 $ 0 $ 49,480


Determined $ 528,240 $ 0 $ 528,240


Determined $ 55,000 $ 0 $ 55,000

S-10 Headquarters Contract Support – Environmental

Program Support * $ 31,100 $ 151,991 $ (120,891)

S-10-Program Support Contract Program Support ToBe

Determined $ 1,328,488 $ 0 $ 1,328,488


Determined $ 1,775,850 $ 0 $ 1,775,850

S-10-Program Support Contract Program Support * $ 0 $ 81,840 $ 0

S-10 Program Support Contract Program Support * $ 0 $ 5,057,408 $ 0


Determined $ 3,000,000 $ 0 $ 3,000,000

N-13-Carrier Vessel Nuclear Spring Survey

Carrier Vessel Nuclear Spring Survey April 8, 2009 $ 414,283 $ 413,639 $ 644

N-7-Carrier Vessel NuclearTurbidityMonitoring

Carrier Vessel Nuclear TurbidityMonitoring

September 25, 2009 $ 146,511 $ 13,088 $ 133,423

N-9-Habitat Equivalency Analysis

Coral Habitat Equivalency Analysis

September 25, 2009 $ 12,589 $ 25,570 $ (12,981)

P-1-Master Plan Phase II Master Plan, Phase II * $ 676,212 $ 13,000 $ 663,212

P-17, 18, 19-Water, Waste Water, and Electrical Plan, On-base

On-base water, wastewater, and electrical system layout and cost estimates to support 1391 submittals

Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 397,383 $ 0


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)

22


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Total Budgeted

Cost

Cost Incurred to

Date (US Funds)

Estimated Cost to

Complete

P-20-On-baseTrafficAnalysis

TrafficstudyforMarineCorpsmain base which provides technical level of details on road width, alignments, controls

September 30, 2009 $ 275,262 $ 1,200 $ 274,062

P-28-DPRI Master Integrated Schedule

CPM schedule for JGPO and NAVFAC project activities


P-29-Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) Joint Military TrainingMaster

Master plan for Marine Corps and DoD joint training on TinianandotherCNMIstudy


P-2X-Federal Highways Federal Highway Study ToBeDetermined $ 1,595,940 $ 0 $ 1,595,940

P-30-TinianMasterPlanPhase II

MasterPlanforTinian,PhaseII Guam Joint Military Master Plan (AM)

July 23, 2009 $ 651,456 $ 120,300 $ 531,156

P-4-Project Documentation

Prepare DD1391 for FY 2010 and Japanese FY 2009 for Guam Joint Military Master Plan. Funding was accelerated to FY 2008

September 30,2009 $ 922,000 $ 945,126 $ (23,126)

P-50-Historical Ordinance Assessment

Historical Ordinance Assessment July 8, 2009 $ 108,447 $ 0 $ 108,447

P-55-Alternatives 1, 3, & 8

Detailed NEPA Alternatives Development Plans for Alternatives 1, 2, 3, & 8 for U.S. Marine Corps Agreed Implementation Plans for Guam Joint Military Master Plan

June 24, 2009 $ 99,817 $ 82,346 $ 17,471

P-57-TrafficStudy Off-BaseTrafficStudy September 10, 2009 $ 215,392 $ 0 $ 215,392

P-58-Construction and Demolition Recycling Study

Solid Waste Management plan for construction and demolition debris for Finegayan to include green waste

September 22, 2009 $ 249,609 $ 0 $ 249,609

P-58-Solid Waste Study Solid Waste Study Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 3,500 $ 0

Basic Facilities Requirements Revalidation

Basic Facilities Requirements Revalidation


Guam Naval Master Plan Guam Naval Master Plan Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 156,481 $ 0

Master Planning for Ballistic Missile Defense

Planning for Deployment of BallisticMissileDefenseTaskForce


Revise Sprinkle System Revise Sprinkle System Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 24 $ 0

Waste Water Study Waste Water Study Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 2,022 $ 0

22


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Total Budgeted

Cost

Cost Incurred to

Date (US Funds)

Estimated Cost to

Complete

Waste Water Study Waste Water Study Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 12,022 $ 0

Water System Plan (on base) Water System Plan (on base) Prior Year

Award $ 0 $ 3,727 $ 0

Water Utility Study Water Utility Study Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 13,921 $ 0

E-11-Electrical Study Electrical Study-Power Generation July 29, 2009 $ 104,601 $ 6,768 $ 97,833

E-16-Natural Resources Study

Natural Resources Biologist Support for Consultations Records

September 25, 2009 $ 179,690 $ 35,000 $ 144,690

E-16-Natural Resource Biologist

Natural Resource Surveys-Utilities Corridor Study (Harmon)

September 23, 2009 $ 107,736 $ 0 $ 107,736

E-17-Cultural Resources Study

Cultural/Historical Resource Study

September 18, 2009 $ 148,271 $ 0 $ 148,271

E-17-Cultural Resources Study

Additional Cultural Resources Surveys for Utilities Alternatives and Harmon Main Cantonment


E-17-Cultural/Historical Resource Study

Cultural/Historical Resource Study * $ 125,312 $ 75,187 $ 50,125

E-25-CNMI Natural Resource Survey

Natural Resources Surveys in CNMI to Support Proposed Trainingon,ataminimum,Tinian,Saipan,andAguiguan

ToBeDetermined $ 7,011,986 $ 0 $ 7,011,986

E-29-Social Impacts Assessment Social Impacts Assessment Prior Year

Award $ 0 $ 1,240,827 $ 0

E-31-Administrative Record Review

Legal Record of Actions and Decisions in the Preparation of the EIS

September 24, 2009 $ 1,000,000 $ 29,852 $ 970,148

E-31-Administrative Record Review

Legal Record of Actions and Decisions in the Preparation of the EIS

September 24, 2009 $ 76,629 $ 5,269 $ 71,360

E-33-Sierra Wharf Dredge Material

Sierra Wharf Dredged Material Characterization for Ocean Disposal

September 25, 2009 $ 387,282 $ 0 $ 387,282

E-33-Sierra Wharf Dredge Material

Sierra Wharf Dredged Material Characterization for Ocean Disposal

September 25, 2009 $ 330,715 $ 0 $ 330,715

E-37-Cultural Resources Study Cultural Resources Study Prior Year

Award $ 0 $ 120,000 $ 0

E-38- Conduct Natural Resource Survey

Conduct Natural Resource Survey


E-4-Draft EISModificationforAdditionalAction Alternatives and Actions to Further Expedite EIS

June 22, 2009 $ 2,570,296 $ 974,123 $ 1,596,173


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)

24


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Total Budgeted

Cost

Cost Incurred to

Date (US Funds)

Estimated Cost to

Complete

E-40-Socioeconomic Study

ModificationtoExpandtheSocioeconomic Study in Support of the Joint Guam Build-up EIS

May 14, 2009 $ 262,523 $ 30,000 $ 232,523

E-41-Cultural Resources Survey/Alternate Power

Cultural Resources Survey/Alternate Power

Prior Year Award $ 0 $ 1,269,852 $ 0

E-42/E-44-Natural Resources Survey Natural Resources Survey Prior Year

Award $ 0 $ 453,252 $ 0

E-43-Waste Water TreatmentPlantOutfall

WasteWaterTreatmentPlantOutfall


E-45-Biosecurity Biosecurity ToBeDetermined $ 205,901 $ 0 $ 205,901

E-45-Biosecurity Biosecurity ToBeDetermined $ 885,992 $ 0 $ 885,992

E-45-Biosecurity Biosecurity ToBeDetermined $ 1,350,486 $ 0 $ 1,350,486

E-46-Utility Study-New Wells

WaterWellTestingStudyto Support EIS U.S. Marine Corps Relocation

June 1, 2009 $ 1,354,611 $ 15,000 $ 1,339,611

E-46-Utility Study-New Wells

UtilityStudyModificationtoadd two additional wells and geotechnical research

September 21, 2009 $ 78,913 $ 0 $ 78,913

E-47-Air Impact Study Air Impact Study June 23, 2009 $ 167,110 $ 62,432 $ 104,678

E-47-Utility Study, Air Utility Study * $ 18,568 $ 18,568 $ 0

E-48-ApraLandfill Groundwater Assessment Study,ApraHarborLandfill June 8, 2009 $ 80,172 $ 32,959 $ 47,213

E-49-Sustainable Yield Study Sustainable Yield April 15, 2009 $ 22,948 $ 22,000 $ 948

E-50-Recycling Study Recycling Study March 16, 2009 $ 224,827 $ 164,591 $ 60,236

E-51-Arch&Bio Curation (Dugong Biologist)

Biologist Support for Consultation Records

September 23, 2009 $ 11,635 $ 0 $ 11,635



September 23, 2009 $ 47,990 $ 28,794 $ 19,196



September 23, 2009 $ 5,495 $ 0 $ 5,495

E-51-Archaeological Curation


September 23, 2009 $ 134,323 $ 0 $ 134,323

E-51-DugongTranslator Biologist Support for Consultation Records

September 23, 2009 $ 98,526 $ 0 $ 98,526

E-52-Haul Roads Haul Roads ToBeDetermined $ 505,281 $ 0 $ 505,281

E-52-Haul Roads Haul Roads ToBeDetermined $ 3,191,329 $ 0 $ 3,191,329

E-53-Airspace Airspace Study September 23, 2009 $ 455,229 $ 12,734 $ 442,495

24


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Total Budgeted

Cost

Cost Incurred to

Date (US Funds)

Estimated Cost to

Complete

E-54-Bats & Snails Natural Resources Bat, Snails, and Marine Resources Study

September 25, 2009 $ 77,781 $ 15,000 $ 62,781

E-55-Northern District WastewaterTreatmentPlant

Evaluation of Northern District WastewaterTreatmentPlantCapacity

September 15, 2009 $ 46,009 $ 0 $ 46,009

E-56-Expand Main Cantonment Area

Expand Main Cantonment Area

August 28, 2009 $ 219,970 $ 0 $ 219,970

E-57-Adaptive Management Adaptive Management Study * $ 223,338 $ 223,338 $ 0

E-60-TinianTrainingRange Alternatives

TinianTrainingRangeAlternatives

September 11, 2009 $ 100,237 $ 89,227 $ 11,010

E-61-LEED Sustainability Program Sustainability Study September 30,

2009 $ 677,129 $ 14,100 $ 663,029

E-63-Drainage Low Impact Development

Drainage/Low Impact Development/Stormwater Management Plan

September 28, 2009 $ 499,429 $ 1,200 $ 498,229

E-66-On Base Utility Concept

Relocation and Standby Generator Plan

September 24, 2009 $ 69,797 $ 0 $ 69,797

E-68-Army Missile Defense Additional Alternative in Support of EIS

Army Missile Defense Alternatives

September 24, 2009 $ 59,516 $ 16,407 $ 43,109

E-76-Wetlands Delineation Study

Wetlands Delineation/Investigations

ToBeDetermined $ 165,601 $ 0 $ 165,601

E-77-Public Comment Assistance-Part 1

Public Comment Period Scope Increase

November 9, 2009 $ 451,350 $ 0 $ 451,350

E-80-Draft EIS Translation

Executive Summary TranslationandHardcopies

ToBeDetermined $ 4,000 $ 0 $ 4,000

E-9-Water Study (Lost River) Water Study * $ 7,249 $ 6,000 $ 1,249

E-xx-Air Study for Guam Power Generation

Air Study for Guam Power Generation


E-xx-Early Release/Draft EIS

Early Release Draft Impact Statement

August 28, 2009 $ 393,191 $ 251,486 $ 141,705

E-xx-Natural Resources Survey Spring Survey Prior Year

Award $ 0 $ 93,169 $ 0

Environmental Planning & Engineering Services for NEPA

BaselineTurbidityMonitoring September 25, 2009 $ 193,178 $ 192,528 $ 650

R-1-Appraisal Guam (minus Harmon)

Determine value of real property interests for acquisition and factors affecting value

ToBeDetermined $ 196,400 $ 0 $ 196,400

R-3-Boundary Survey (Federal Aviation Agency Parcel)

Identify and document land boundaries and any encroachment or other related issues

September 25, 2009 $ 652,514 $ 6,092 $ 646,422


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)

26


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Total Budgeted

Cost

Cost Incurred to

Date (US Funds)

Estimated Cost to

Complete

R-3-Boundary Survey (Route 15)

Identify and document land boundaries and any encroachment or other related issues

September 30, 2009 $ 210,199 $ 0 $ 210,199

R-7-Environmental Baseline Study

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to support proposed Route 15 Ranges in Guam

July 23, 2009 $ 253,372 $ 119,094 $ 134,278

R-9-Relocation Assistance

Provide relocation assistance planning and execution services

September 30, 2009 $ 116,448 $ 0 $ 116,448

P-21-Utility Breakpoint Study

Study will determine the estimated point in time at which existing utilities (electrical, water, wastewater, and solid waste) will be impacted with the increased military build-up. Study takes into consideration the projected construction worker build-up


P-46-SPE Development (2 of 3) Utility SPE development July 8, 2009 $ 1,911,605 $ 865,381 $ 1,046,224

P-54-Barrigada Utility Study

Barrigada Utility Study-Power, Potable Water, and Wastewater Utility Supplemental Study to Support EIS for Marine Corps

May 12, 2009 $ 388,367 $ 356,800 $ 31,567

P-59-CombustionTurbineStudy CombustionTurbineStudy June 24, 2009 $ 528,523 $ 0 $ 528,523

Basile, Bauman, Prestion Cole SPE Business Model

SPE Utilities Business Case Analysis incorporating technical studies, statutes, and determinefinaloutput

September 10, 2009 $ 985,520 $ 865,879 $ 119,640

Utilities AlternativesA study to identify the preferred alternative solutions to providing utilities

September 22, 2009 $ 68,283 $ 0 $ 68,283

Utilities Studies for Ballistic Missile Defense

Utilities Studies for Ballistic Missile Defense


P-44 Utility Solution Utility Solution * $ 97,315 $ 271,785 $ (174,470)

H-1 Family Housing SPE Family Housing SPE Development * $ 848,050 $ 73,161 $ 774,889

Guam EIS Draft EIS and Biological Assessment

September 17, 2009 $ 59,516 $ 59,516 $ 0

Total $ 42,783,940 $ 17,515,387 $ 36,077,408

* The Department of the Navy incurred costs for these projects; however, the start date was not provided.

Sources: NAVFAC Headquarters, response to DoD OIG data call, 1/15/2010 and Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller), response to DoD OIG data call, 1/8/2010 and 1/11/2010.

26


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(B)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

otheR FedeRal aGency pRoJect and pRoGRam liStThe Department of Transportation identified funds directly associated with the realignment of military installations and military personnel to Guam. Specifically, the Department of Transportation Maritime Administration and Federal Highway Administration identified four projects that received funds and were directly associated with the realignment. These projects incurred costs of approximately $7.7 million with an estimated completion cost of approximately $201.2 million. Table 5 identifies Department of Transportation projects and associated costs for calendar year 2009.

Table 5. Costs for Department of Transportation Projects and Programs


Total Budgeted

CostCost Incurred

to Date

Estimated Cost to

Complete

DTMA1R09007 Port of Guam Improvement Enterprise Program

December 4, 2008 $ 200,000,000 $ 0 $ 200,000,000

Government of Guam Contract GU-NH-IPMS(002) Islandwide Program Management Services

Prepare NEPA document and coordination among government of Guam Department of Public Works, Federal Highway Administration, and DoD

November 1, 2008 $ 5,372,550 $ 5,372,550 $ 0

Government of Guam ContractGU-NH-IPMS (002) Islandwide Program Management Services

Prepare Design Build RequestforQualifications/Request for proposals for FY 2010 Defense access road approved projects and develop Design Build concept for future projects

September 2009 $ 3,430,000 $ 2,283,920 $ 1,146,080

Funding for Federal Highway Administration Administrative Expenses

Administrative cost to Federal Highway Administration for travel and personnel cost

August 2009 $ 70,000 $ 20,000 $ 50,000

Total $ 208,872,550 $ 7,676,470 $ 201,196,080

Source: Department of Transportation, response to DoD OIG data call, 12/28/2009.

28


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Near several parked US Air Force B-52 Stratofortress bombers, a B-1B Lancer Bomber, deployed from Dyess Air Force Base, Texas, takes off from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, in support of

the 7th Air Expeditionary Wing’s mission

28




FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(d)

4operating expenSeS

Section 4: Operating Expenses (Section 2835(e)(1)(D))

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(D)

30


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Public Law 111-84 requires the ICG annual report to contain a detailed statement on the operating expenses of agencies or entities receiving amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam. The DoD Financial Management Regulation states that operating expenses include costs for personnel, travel, communications, contractual services, and other program expenses.

depaRtment oF the navy opeRatinG expenSeSNAVFAC is the contracting office and agent responsible for executing acquisition for the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam. The dollars needed to support this acquisition effort are either mission funded or reimbursed by the customer. NAVFAC charges a Supervision, Inspection, and Overhead rate of 6.2 percent to each customer for construction management services on projects outside the continental United States. The Supervision, Inspection, and Overhead rate is applied to the cost of a construction contract to recover direct and indirect expenses for a project’s construction management services, including such items as contract/project administration, cost estimation, and cost management. This rate is calculated against each individual contract. However, the Department of the Navy indicated that it did not execute any U.S. Government or GOJ funded construction contracts in calendar year 2009 and did not apply any overhead rates.

The Department of the Navy (which includes the U.S. Marine Corps) identified operating expenses of $19.8 million during calendar year 2009, including salaries, travel, and other program expenses. Table 6 lists the operating expenses for support organizations associated with the military realignment on Guam.

Table 6. Department of the Navy Operating Expenses Related to the Guam Realignment (January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2009)

OrganizationDescription of Expenses

IncurredOperating Expenses

JGPO Salaries $ 1,879,254

JGPO Travel $ 486,125

JGPO Permanent Change of Station $ 31,170

JGPO Supplies $ 44,772

JGPO In-House JGPO Contract Support $ 2,488,155

NAVFAC Headquarters Salaries/Travel $ 507,740*

NAVFACPacific Salaries/Travel $ 7,210,568*

NAVFAC Marianas Salaries/Travel $ 619,000*

MarineForcesPacific/U.S.Marine Corps

Salaries/Travel $ 6,366,462*

Public-Private Venture Salaries/Travel $ 150,148*

Total $ 19,783,394

* A Department of the Navy official indicated that the expense data was derived from a NAVFAC management information system and does not reflect data from an official accounting system.

Sources: NAVFAC Headquarters, response to DoD OIG data call, 1/12/2010 and JGPO, response to DoD OIG data call, 1/7/2010.

30


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Section 4: Operating Expenses (Section 2835(e)(1)(D))

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(D)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

opeRatinG expenSeS FoR otheR FedeRal aGencyThe Environmental Protection Agency identified operating expenses associated with the realignment of military installations and military personnel to Guam. Specifically, the Environmental Protection Agency identified salary costs of $644,460 and travel costs of $22,150.

32


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

USNS Mercy (T-AH 19) navigates through Apra Harbor, Guam, on a deployment to areas of Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands to join with health and civic organizations to provide

humanitarian assistance and conduct community improvement projects

32


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(e)

5contractS, grantS, agreementS, or other funding mechaniSmS data

Section 5: Contracts, Grants, Agreements, or Other Funding Mechanisms Data (Section 2835(e)(1)(E))

Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(e)

34


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Public Law 111-84 requires the ICG annual report to contain a detailed statement on the awarded contracts, grants, agreements, or other funding mechanisms that use amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam.

contRactinG oFFiceNAVFAC is the contracting office responsible for executing all construction contracts related to the Guam realignment. NAVFAC provides facilities lifecycle support and facilities engineering and acquisition for the Department of the Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, and DoD agencies. It is one of two DoD Construction Agents consisting of 13,500 military, civilian, and contractor personnel, and annually delivers more than $11 billion of products and services.4

NAVFAC Pacific, located in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, has Navy contracting authority and specialized expertise in design and construction acquisition, facilities support contracts, and environmental restoration and planning. NAVFAC Pacific includes three commands: NAVFAC Hawaii, NAVFAC Marianas in Guam, and NAVFAC Far East in Japan. NAVFAC Marianas is responsible for Navy facilities and environmental program management, execution, and contracting on Guam. Responsibilities include construction, utilities, engineering, facilities management, base development and planning, and facilities maintenance and repair. NAVFAC began awarding architect and engineering contracts for the preparation of the construction on Guam in FY 2009 and plans to begin awarding construction contracts in FY 2010.

contRactinG pRoceSSThe “Implementation Guidance for the DoD and the Ministry of Defense of Japan on Projects Funded by Japanese Cash Contributions” states that Japanese cash contributions provided to the U.S. Treasury account are considered appropriated funds. Any contract associated with the use of such funds is subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulations.

Both Congress and the Federal Acquisition Regulations promote maximum participation by competition among business enterprises for the award of Government contracts. In the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009, Congress urged the Secretary of Defense to ensure maximum participation by business enterprises of the United States and its territories for the construction projects on Guam. The Federal Acquisition Regulations require that contracts be publicized to increase competition.

Several unique risks exist for the completion of the Guam construction projects. Because construction will exceed local capacity and the availability of the labor force, it is essential that NAVFAC solicit all potential entities able to perform the work. The construction capacity on Guam has averaged approximately $550 million8 per year and requirements to complete the U.S. Marine Corps realignment to Guam on time call for the execution of $3 billion9 in construction capacity a year. Due to the estimated increase in construction capacity, it is anticipated that the labor force on Guam will expand from approximately 2,800 in FY 2010 to approximately 17,000 in 2014.10

liSt oF contRactS / GRantS / aGReementS / otheR FundinG mechaniSmSNAVFAC Headquarters identified 14 contracts, the DoD Office of Economic Adjustment identified 6 grants, and the Environmental Protection Agency identified 1 contract that were used to support the military realignment to Guam. For these contracts and grants, NAVFAC, DoD Office of Economic Adjustment, and the Environmental Protection Agency obligated approximately $53.1 million. A NAVFAC official indicated that its obligation data was derived from a NAVFAC management information system and does not reflect data from an official accounting system. Table 7 identifies the DoD and Environmental Protection Agency contracts, grants, agreements, or other funding mechanisms. If a task order, delivery order, or modification increased the value of the contract, those costs were included in the following reported amounts.

34


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(e)


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Age

ncy

Con

trac

t, G

rant

, A

gree

men

t, or

Fun

ding

M

echa

nism

Titl

eC

eilin

g A

mou

nt

Am

ount

O

blig

ated

to

Dat

e(U

.S. F

unds

)Sc

ope

/ Des

crip

tion

Met

hod

Use

d to

Sol

icit

Offe

rsO

ffers

So

licite

dO

ffers

R

ecei

ved

Oth

er th

an

Full

and

Ope

n C

ompe

titio

n

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

4700

5D62

01*

$

193

,178

Env

ironm

enta

l pla

nnin

g an

d E

ngin

eerin

g S

ervi

ces

for t

he N

EPA

**

**

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

4700

9D00

03*

$ 1

,531

,849

Adm

inis

trativ

e R

ecor

ds R

evie

w

and

Fede

ral A

viat

ion

Adm

inis

tratio

n A

irspa

ce S

tudy

**

**

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

5C35

01*

$

210

,199

TitleBoundarySurvey,Route15

--

-C

ontra

ct

Modification

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

6D18

69$

5,0

00,0

00$

1

08,4

47Indefinite-Delivery/

Indefinite-QuantityEnvironm

ental

Stu

dies

and

Per

mits

Fede

ral

Bus

ines

s O

ppor

tuni

ties

-6

Sm

all B

usin

ess

Set

-Asi

de

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

6D18

70$

65,0

00,0

00$

12,0

75,8

82S

trate

gic

Bas

e P

lann

ing

Fede

ral

Bus

ines

s O

ppor

tuni

ties

-4

N/A

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

6D18

81$

5,0

00,0

00$

2

49,8

07Indefinite-Delivery/

Indefinite-QuantityW

aterStudies

Fede

ral

Bus

ines

s O

ppor

tuni

ties

-*

Sm

all B

usin

ess

Set

-Asi

de

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

7D11

19*

$

185

,570

Dun

hill

Con

tract

Dun

hill

Con

tract

--

TaskOrder

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

8D00

09$1

00,0

00,0

00$

19,4

40,1

28P

rogr

am M

anag

emen

t Sup

port

and

Des

ign

Ser

vice

s

Fede

ral

Bus

ines

s O

ppor

tuni

ties

-6

N/A

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

9D00

02$1

00,0

00,0

00$

7,1

47,6

97D

esig

n S

uppo

rt fo

r Var

ious

W

ater

front

/Mar

ine

Rel

ated

Pro

ject

s

Fede

ral

Bus

ines

s O

ppor

tuni

ties

-4

N/A

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

9D19

57$

3,5

00,0

00$

8

07,0

77Environm

entalTechnicalServices

-1

N/A

Sec

tion

8(a)

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

7420

9D19

60$

3,5

00,0

00$

1

34,3

23A

rche

olog

ical

Ser

vice

s-

1N

/AS

ectio

n 8(

a)

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

4700

8D20

06$

40,0

00,0

00$

1,0

62,2

17IndefiniteDelivery/Indefinite

Qua

ntity

Hou

sing

and

Util

ities

S

tudi

es

Nav

y E

lect

roni

c C

omm

erce

O

nlin

e

-6

N/A

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

5830

8C00

34$

3

50,5

72$

3

50,5

72UtilitiesConsultationandTechnical

Ass

ista

nce

Sup

port

of U

.S. M

arin

e C

orps

Rel

ocat

ion

to G

uam

Nav

y E

lect

roni

c C

omm

erce

O

nlin

e

-3

N/A

Table 7. Contracts, Grants, Agreements, or Other Funding Mechanisms Supporting the Guam Military Realignment


Se

cti

on 2

835(

e)(1

)(e)

36


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Age

ncy

Con

trac

t, G

rant

, A

gree

men

t, or

Fun

ding

M

echa

nism

Titl

eC

eilin

g A

mou

nt

Am

ount

O

blig

ated

to

Dat

e(U

.S. F

unds

)Sc

ope

/ Des

crip

tion

Met

hod

Use

d to

Sol

icit

Offe

rsO

ffers

So

licite

dO

ffers

R

ecei

ved

Oth

er th

an

Full

and

Ope

n C

ompe

titio

n

Dep

artm

ent

of th

e N

avy

N62

4700

9D40

05$

3,5

00,0

00$

17

5,17

7C

ontra

ctor

Ass

ista

nce

and

Adv

isor

y S

ervi

ces

in S

uppo

rt of

NAV

FAC

P

&S

-1

1S

ectio

n8(a

)

DoD

Office

of E

cono

mic

A

djus

tmen

tG

R07

06-0

8-03

$ 2

,531

,610

$ 2

,531

,610

CapacitybuildingwithintheOffice

of th

e G

over

nor (

Env

ironm

enta

l A

dvis

ory

Ser

vice

s, P

lann

ing

Adv

isor

y S

ervi

ces)

; Fin

anci

al-F

isca

l A

dvis

ory

Ser

vice

s; In

tegr

ated

W

aste

Man

agem

ent S

tudy

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

DoD

Office

of E

cono

mic

A

djus

tmen

tG

R07

06-0

9-04

$ 2

,000

,000

$ 2

,000

,000

Portm

odernizationfactfindingand

plan

ning

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

DoD

Office

of E

cono

mic

A

djus

tmen

tG

R07

06-0

9-05

$

996

,873

$

996

,873

Fisc

al a

naly

sis

of d

irect

and

indi

rect

im

pact

s as

soci

ated

with

pro

pose

d D

oD b

uild

up o

n G

uam

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

DoD

Office

of E

cono

mic

A

djus

tmen

tG

R07

06-0

9-06

$

536

,955

$

5

36,9

55O

rgan

izat

iona

l/ Lo

gist

ical

sup

port

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

DoD

Office

of E

cono

mic

A

djus

tmen

tG

R07

06-0

9-07

$ 2

,000

,000

$ 2

,000

,000

Cap

acity

enh

anci

ng; H

ealth

and

H

uman

Ser

vice

s C

are

stra

tegi

c pl

anni

ngN

/AN

/AN

/AN

/A

DoD

Office

of E

cono

mic

A

djus

tmen

tG

R07

06-0

9-08

$

97

5,00

0$

9

75,0

00PortTerminalPrelim

inaryDesign;

Por

t Mas

ter P

lann

ing

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Env

ironm

en-

tal P

rote

ctio

n A

genc

y

EP-R9-08-1TO#16

(R90

8010

0016

)$

685,

018

$

354

,415

Impa

cts

on w

ater

and

was

tew

ater

re

sour

ces

from

the

mili

tary

ex

pans

ion

in th

e te

rrito

ry o

f Gua

m

Indefinite-

Del

iver

y /

Indefinite-

Qua

ntity

11

N/A

Tot

al$3

35,5

76,0

28$

53,0

66,9

76

* In

form

atio

n no

t pro

vide

d.So

urce

s: N

AVFA

C H

eadq

uarte

rs, r

espo

nse

to D

oD O

IG d

ata

call,

1/1

2/20

10 a

nd 1

/14/

2010

; O

ffice

of E

cono

mic

Adj

ustm

ent,

resp

onse

to D

oD O

IG d

ata

call,

1/7

/201

0; a

nd E

nviro

nmen

tal P

rote

ctio

n A

genc

y,

resp

onse

to D

oD O

IG d

ata

call,

1/2

1/20

10.

36




FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Appendices and Endnotes

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

38


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

U.S. Air Force Personnel with the 144th Air National Guard Civil Engineer Squadron

constructing one of three 5,000 square foot K-Span facilities to house equipment at Northwest Field,

Andersen Air Force Base, Guam (May 2009)

38


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

Appendix A. Legislative Mandates for Guam Realignment in the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


SEC. 2831. ROLE OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE IN MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION OF DEFENSE ACTIVITIES RELATING TO GUAM REALIGNMENT.(a) DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.—Section 132 of title 10, U.S. Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:‘‘(d) Until September 30, 2015, the Deputy Secretary of Defense shall lead the Guam Executive Council and shall be the Department of Defense’s principal representative for coordinating the interagency efforts in matters relating to Guam, including the following executive orders:

‘‘(1) Executive Order No. 13299 of May 12, 2003 (68 Fed. Reg. 25477; 48 U.S.C. note prec. 1451; relating to the Interagency Group on Insular Affairs).‘‘(2) Executive Order No. 12788 of January 15, 1992, as amended (57 Fed. Reg. 2213; relating to the Defense Economic Adjustment Program).’’

(b) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report including the charter that establishes the Guam Executive Council.

SEC. 2832. CLARIFICATIONS REGARDING USE OF SPECIAL PURPOSE ENTITIES TO ASSIST WITH GUAM REALIGNMENT.(a) SPECIAL PURPOSE ENTITY DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘special purpose entity’’ means any private person, corporation, firm, partnership, company, State or local government, or authority or instrumentality of a State or local government that the Secretary of Defense determines is capable of producing military family housing or providing utilities to support the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam.

(b) REPORT ON INTENDED USE SPECIAL PURPOSE ENTITIES.—(1) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing the intended use of special purpose entities to provide military family housing or utilities to support the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam.(2) NOTICE AND WAIT.—The Secretary of Defense may not authorize the use of special use entities as described in paragraph (1) until the end of the 30-day period (15-day period if the report is submitted elec tronically) beginning on the date on which the report required by such paragraph is submitted.

(c) APPLICABILITY OF UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA.—(1) APPLICABILITY TO SECTION 2350K CONTRIBUTIONS.—Section 2824(c)(4) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (division B of Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

‘‘(D) APPLICABILITY OF UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA.—The unified facilities criteria promulgated by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and dated May 29, 2002, and any successor to such criteria shall be the minimum standard applicable to projects funded using contributions referred to in subsection (b)


A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

40


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

(1) for a transaction authorized by paragraph (1).’’.(2) APPLICABILITY TO SPECIAL PURPOSE ENTITY CONTRIBUTIONS.—

The unified facilities criteria promulgated by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and dated May 29, 2002, and any successor to such criteria shall be the minimum standard applicable to projects funded using contributions provided by a special purpose entity.

(3) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report containing an evaluation of various options, including a preferred option, that the Secretary could utilize to comply with the unified facilities criteria referred to in paragraph (2) in the acquisition of military housing on Guam in connection with the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam. In preparing the report, the Secretary shall consider the impact of—

(A) increasing the overseas housing allowance for members of the Armed Forces serving on Guam; and (B) providing a direct Federal subsidy to public-private ventures.

(d) SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SCOPE OF UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.—Section 2821 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (division B of Public Law 110–417; 122 Stat. 4729) is amended—

(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b); and(2) in such subsection, by striking ‘‘should incorporate the civilian and military infra structure into a single grid to realize and maximize the effectiveness of the overall util ity system’’ and inserting ‘‘should support proposed utility infrastructure improvements on Guam that incorporate the civilian and military infrastructure into a single grid to realize and maximize the effectiveness of the overall utility system, rather than simply supporting one or more military installations’’.

SEC. 2833. WORKFORCE ISSUES RELATED TO MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND CERTAIN OTHER TRANSACTIONS ON GUAM.(a) PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENTS.—Subsection (c) of section 2824 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (division B of Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘‘(5) APPLICATION OF PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENTS.—‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The requirements of subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, U.S. Code, shall apply to any military construction project or other transaction authorized by paragraph (1) that is carried out on Guam using contributions referred to in subsection (b)(1) or appropriated funds.‘‘(B) SECRETARY OF LABOR AUTHORITIES.—In order to carry out the requirements of subparagraph (A) and paragraph (6) (relating to composition of workforce for construction projects), the Secretary of Labor shall have the authority and functions set forth in Reorganization Plan Num ber 14 of 1950 and section 3145 of title 40, U.S. Code.‘‘(C) WAGE RATE DETERMINATION.—In making wage rate determinations pursuant to sub-paragraph (A), the Secretary of Labor shall not include in the wage survey any persons who hold a visa described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)).‘‘(D) ADDITION TO WEEKLY STATEMENT ON THE WAGES PAID.—In the case of projects and other transactions covered by subparagraph (A), the weekly statement required by section 3145 of title 40, U.S. Code, shall also identify each employee working on the project or transaction who holds a visa described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)).

40


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S



FebRuaRy 1, 2010

‘‘(E) DURATION OF REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary of Labor shall make and issue a wage rate determination for Guam annually until 90 percent of the funds in the Account and other funds made available for the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam have been expended.’’.

(b) REPORTING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING SUPPORT OF CONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE.—Sub section (e) of such section is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘Not later than’’ and inserting the following:‘‘(1) MILITARY CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION.—Not later than’’; and (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ‘‘(2) CONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE INFORMATION.—The annual report shall also include an as sessment of the living standards of the construction workforce employed to carry out military construction projects covered by the report, including, at a minimum, the adequacy of contract standards and infra structure that support temporary housing the construction workforce and their medical needs.’’.

SEC. 2834. COMPOSITION OF WORKFORCE FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH THE SUPPORT FOR U.S. RELOCATION TO GUAM ACCOUNT.(a) COMPOSITION OF WORKFORCE.—Section 2824(c) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (division B of Public Law 110–417; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended by inserting after paragraph (5), as added by section 2833, the following new paragraph:

‘‘(6) COMPOSITION OF WORKFORCE FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.—‘‘(A) LIMITATION.—With respect to each construction project that is carried out using amounts described in subparagraph (B), no work may be performed by a person holding a visa described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)) unless—

‘‘(i) the application for that visa has been approved pursuant to the issuance of a temporary labor certification by the Governor of Guam as provided under section 214.2 of title 8, Code of Federal Regulations; and ‘‘(ii) the Governor of Guam, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, makes the certifica tion described in subparagraph (C) to the Secretary of Defense.

‘‘(B) SOURCE OF FUNDS.—Subparagraph (A) applies to—‘‘(i) amounts in the Account used for projects associated with the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam; ‘‘(ii) funds associated with activities under section 2821 of this Act; and‘‘(iii) funds for authorized military construction projects.

‘‘(C) CERTIFICATION.—The certification referred to in subparagraph (A) is a certification, in ad dition to the certifications required by section 214.2 of title 8, Code of Federal Regulations, that—

‘‘(i) there are not sufficient U.S. workers who are able, willing, qualified, and avail able at the time of application for a visa and admission to the U.S. and at the place where the persons holding visas described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)) are to perform such skilled or unskilled labor; and‘‘(ii) the employment of such persons holding visas described in section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b)) will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in Guam similarly employed.

‘‘(D) SOLICITATION OF WORKERS.—In order to ensure compliance with subparagraph (A),


A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

42


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

as a condition of a contract covered by such subparagraph, the contractor shall be required to adver tise and solicit for construction workers in the U.S., including Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, in accordance with a recruitment plan approved by the Secretary of Labor. The contractor shall submit a copy of the employment offer, including a description of wages and other terms and conditions of employment, to the Secretary of Labor at least 60 days before the start date of the workers under a contract. The contractor shall authorize the Secretary of Labor to post a no tice of the employment offer on a website, with State, territorial, and local job banks, with State and territorial workforce agencies, and with any other referral and recruitment sources the Secretary of Labor determines may be pertinent to the employment opportunity.‘‘(E) RECRUITMENT PERIOD.—The Secretary of Labor shall ensure that a contractor’s recruitment of construction workers complies with the recruitment plan required by subparagraph (D) for a period beginning 60 days before the start date of workers under a contract and continuing for the next 28 days. During the recruitment period, the contractor shall interview all qualified and avail able U.S. construction workers who have applied for the employment opportunity, and, at the close of the recruitment period, the contractor shall provide the Secretary of Labor with a recruitment report providing any reasons for which the contractor did not hire an applicant who is a qualified U.S. construction worker. Not later than 21 days before the start date of the workers under a contract, the Secretary of Labor shall certify to the Governor of Guam whether the contractor has satisfied the recruitment plan created under subparagraph (D).‘‘(F) LIMITATION.—An employer, its attorney or agent, the Secretary of Labor, the Governor of Guam, and any designee thereof, may not seek or receive payment of any kind from any worker for any activity related to obtaining an H–2B labor certification with respect to any construction project that is carried out using amounts described in subparagraph (B).’’.

(b) REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.—(1) SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.—Not later than June 30, 2010, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional committees specified in paragraph (3) a report containing an assessment of efforts to es tablish a Project Labor Agreement for construction projects associated with the Guam realignment as en couraged by Executive Order 13502, entitled ‘‘Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects’’ (74 Fed. Reg. 6985), as a means of complying with the requirements of paragraph (6) of section 2824(c) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, as added by subsection (a).(2) SECRETARY OF LABOR.—Not later than June 30, 2010, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the congressional committees specified in paragraph (3) a report containing an assessment of—

(A) the opportunities to expand the recruitment of construction workers in the U.S., in cluding Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, to support the realignment of military installations and the reloca tion of military personnel on Guam, consistent with the requirements of paragraph (6) of section 2824(c) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, as added by subsec tion (a);(B) the ability of labor markets to support the Guam realignment;(C) the sufficiency of efforts to recruit U.S. construction workers; and(D) the costs to the U.S. for recruitment plans required by such paragraph (6) and a pro posed method to cover such costs.

(3) COVERED CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The reports required by this subsection shall be submitted to the congressional defense committees, the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate.

42


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S



FebRuaRy 1, 2010

SEC. 2835. INTERAGENCY COORDINATION GROUP OF INSPECTORS GENERAL FOR GUAM REALIGNMENT. (a) INTERAGENCY COORDINATION GROUP.—There is hereby established the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors General for Guam Realignment (in this section referred to as the ‘‘Interagency Coordination Group’’)—

(1) to provide for the objective conduct and supervision of audits and investigations relating to the programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military con struction on Guam in connection with the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam; and (2) to provide for coordination of, and recommendations on, policies designed—

(A) to promote economic efficiency and effectiveness in the administration of the programs and operations described in paragraph (1); and(B) to prevent and detect waste, fraud, and abuse in such programs and operations.

(b) MEMBERSHIP.—(1) CHAIRPERSON.—The Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall serve as chairperson of the Interagency Coordination Group.(2) ADDITIONAL MEMBERS.—Additional members of the Interagency Coordination Group shall include the Inspector General of the Department of Interior and the Inspector General of such other Federal agencies as the chairperson considers appropriate to carry out the duties of the Interagency Coordination Group.

(c) DUTIES.—(1) OVERSIGHT OF GUAM CONSTRUCTION.—It shall be the duty of the Interagency Coordination Group to conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations of the treatment, handling, and expenditure of amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam and of the programs, operations, and contracts carried out utilizing such funds, including—

(A) the oversight and accounting of the obligation and expenditure of such funds;(B) the monitoring and review of construction activities funded by such funds;(C) the monitoring and review of contracts funded by such funds;(D) the monitoring and review of the transfer of such funds and associated information between and among departments, agencies, and entities of the U.S. and private and nongovernmental entities;(E) the maintenance of records on the use of such funds to facilitate future audits and investigations of the use of such fund; and(F) the monitoring and review of the implementation of the Defense Posture Review Initiative relat ing to the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam.

(2) OTHER DUTIES RELATED TO OVERSIGHT.—The Interagency Coordination Group shall estab-lish, maintain, and oversee such systems, procedures, and controls as the Interagency Coordination Group considers appropriate to discharge the duties under paragraph (1).(3) OVERSIGHT PLAN.—The chairperson of the Interagency Coordination Group shall prepare an an-nual oversight plan detailing planned audits and reviews related to the Guam realignment.

(d) ASSISTANCE FROM FEDERAL AGENCIES.—(1) PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE.—Upon request of the Interagency Coordination Group for information or assistance from any department, agency, or other entity of the Federal Government, the head of such entity shall, insofar as is practicable and not in contravention of any existing law, furnish


A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

44


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

such infor mation or assistance to the Interagency Coordination Group.(2) REPORTING OF REFUSED ASSISTANCE.—Whenever information or assistance requested by the Interagency Coordination Group is, in the judgment of the chairperson of the Interagency Coordination Group, unreasonably refused or not provided, the chairperson shall report the circumstances to the Secretary of Defense and to the congressional defense committees without delay.

(e) REPORTS.—(1) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Not later than February 1 of each year, the chairperson of the Interagency Coordination Group shall submit to the congressional defense committees, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of the Interior a report summarizing, for the preceding calendar year, the activities of the In teragency Coordination Group during such year and the activities under programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam. Each report shall include, for the year covered by the report, a detailed statement of all obligations, expenditures, and revenues associated with such construction, including the following: (A) Obligations and expenditures of appropriated funds.

(B) A project-by-project and program-by-program accounting of the costs incurred to date for military construction in connection with the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam, together with the estimate of the Department of Defense and the Department of the Interior, as applicable, of the costs to complete each project and each program.(C) Revenues attributable to or consisting of funds contributed by the Government of Japan in con nection with the realignment of military installations and the relocation of military personnel on Guam and any obligations or expenditures of such revenues.(D) Operating expenses of agencies or entities receiving amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam.(E) In the case of any contract, grant, agreement, or other funding mechanism described in paragraph (2)—

(i) the amount of the contract, grant, agreement, or other funding mechanism;(ii) a brief discussion of the scope of the contract, grant, agreement, or other funding mecha nism;(iii) a discussion of how the department or agency of the U.S. Government involved in the contract, grant, agreement, or other funding mechanism identified, and solicited offers from, potential individuals or entities to perform the contract, grant, agreement, or other funding mechanism, together with a list of the potential individuals or entities that were issued solicitations for the offers; and(iv) the justification and approval documents on which was based the determination to use procedures other than procedures that provide for full and open competition.

(2) COVERED CONTRACTS, GRANTS, AGREEMENTS, AND FUNDING MECHANISMS.—A con tract, grant, agreement, or other funding mechanism described in this paragraph is any major contract,grant, agreement, or other funding mechanism that—

(A) is entered into by any department or agency of the U.S. Government with any public or private sector entity; and(B) involves the use of amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam.

(3) FORM.—Each report required under this subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex if the Interagency Coordination Group considers it necessary.(4) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the public disclosure of information that is—

44


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S



FebRuaRy 1, 2010

(A) specifically prohibited from disclosure by any other provision of law;(B) specifically required by Executive order to be protected from disclosure in the interest of na-tional defense or national security or in the conduct of foreign affairs; or(C) a part of an ongoing criminal investigation.

(5) SUBMISSION OF COMMENTS.—Not later than 30 days after receipt of a report under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of the Interior may submit to the congressional defense committees any comments on the matters covered by the report as the Secretary concerned considers appropriate. Any comments on the matters covered by the report shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex if the Secretary concerned considers it necessary.

(f) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY; WAIVER.—(1) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—The Interagency Coordination Group shall publish on a publically-avail able Internet website each report prepared under subsection (e). Any comments on the report submitted under paragraph (5) of such subsection shall also be published on such website.(2) WAIVER AUTHORITY.—The President may waive the requirement under paragraph (1) with respect to availability to the public of any element in a report under subsection (e), or any comment with respect to a report, if the President determines that the waiver is justified for national security reasons.(3) NOTICE OF WAIVER.—The President shall publish a notice of each waiver made under this subsec tion in the Federal Register no later than the date on which a report required under subsection (e), or any comment under paragraph (5) of such subsection, is submitted to the congressional defense committees. The report and comments shall specify whether waivers under this subsection were made and with respect to which elements in the report or which comments, as appropriate.

(g) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:(1) AMOUNTS APPROPRIATED OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE.— The term ‘‘amounts appro priated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam’’ includes amounts derived from the Support for U.S. Relocation to Guam Account.(2) GUAM.—The term ‘‘Guam’’ includes any island in the Northern Mariana Islands.

(h) TERMINATION.—(1) IN GENERAL.—The Interagency Coordination Group shall terminate upon the expenditure of 90 percent of all funds appropriated or otherwise made available for Guam realignment.(2) FINAL REPORT.—Before the termination of the Interagency Coordination Group pursuant to para graph (1), the chairperson of the Interagency Coordination Group shall prepare and submit to the congres sional defense committees a final report containing—(A) notice that the termination condition in paragraph (1) has occurred; and(B) a final forensic audit on programs and operations funded with amounts appropriated or otherwise made available for military construction on Guam.

SEC. 2836. COMPLIANCE WITH NAVAL AVIATION SAFETY REQUIREMENTS AS CONDITION ON ACCEPTANCE OF REPLACEMENT FACILITY FOR MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, FUTEN MA, OKINAWA.(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense may not accept, or authorize any other official of the Department of Defense to accept, a replacement facility in Okinawa for air operations conducted at Marine Corps Air Station, Futenma, Okinawa until the Secretary reports to the congressional defense committees that the replace ment facility and its planned operating procedures are consistent with naval aviation safety requirements.(b) EXERCISE OF WAIVER AUTHORITIES.—

(1) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing the Secretary from exercising existing waiver authorities provided the Secretary first determines the waiver


A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

46


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

is necessary in the interest of national defense.(2) REQUIRED REPORTING OF EFFORTS.—The report specified under subsection (a) shall clearly identify efforts made to mitigate deviations from criteria in the planning and construction of the replacement facility described in such subsection.

SEC. 2837. REPORT AND SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MARINE CORPS REQUIREMENTS IN ASIA-PACIFIC REGION.(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the training and readiness requirements necessary for Marine Forces Pacific, the field command of the Marine Corps within the U.S. Pacific Command.

(b) CONTENTS OF REPORT.—The report required under subsection (a) shall contain each of the following:(1) A description of the units of the Marine Corps expected to be assigned or realigned on a permanent or temporary basis to Marine Forces Pacific, including the type of unit, the organizational element, the current location of the unit, and proposed location for the unit.(2) A description of the training requirements necessary to sustain the current and planned realignment of forces specified in paragraph (1).(3) A description of the strategic- and tactical-lift requirements associated with the training, operational readiness, and movement of Marine Forces Pacific, including programming information regarding the intent of the Department of Defense to eliminate deficiencies in the strategic-lift capabilities.

(c) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that an evaluation of training and readiness requirements for Marine Forces Pacific—

(1) should be conducted and completed as soon as possible; (2) should include an analysis that, at a minimum, reviews the capabilities required to support the training, operational readiness, and movement of Marine Air-Ground Task Force; and(3) should not impact the implementation of the recently signed international agreement entitled ‘‘Agreement between the Government of the U.S. of America and the Government of Japan concerning the Implementation of the Relocation of the III Marine Expeditionary Force Personnel and their Depen-dents from Okinawa to Guam’’.

46


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

Appendix B. Federal Spending in Guam Not Directly Related to the Realignment


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

Appendix B. Federal Spending in Guam Not Directly Related to the Realignment

Appendix B. Federal Spending in Guam Not Directly Related to the Realignment*

Agency, Subagency, or Bureau Providing Funds (in milions)

FY 2008 (Actual)

FY 2009 (Estimate)

FY 2010 (Estimate)

Army Corps of Engineers $ 0.3 $ 0.5 $ 0.5

Department of Commerce $ 8.2 $ 12.0 $ 14.8

Department of Defense $ 39.7 $ 37.4 $ 36.5

Department of Education $ 58.0 $ 60.4 $ 56.6

Department of Energy $ 0.1 $ 0.4 $ 0.4

Department of Health and Human Services $ 46.3 $ 54.9 $ 55.0

Department of Homeland Security $ 33.0 $ 37.2 $ 56.8

Department of Housing and Urban Development $ 41.2 $ 41.3 $ 45.8

Department of the Interior $ 66.0 $ 67.4 $ 70.5

Department of Justice $ 4.2 $ 4.6 $ 3.2

Department of Labor $ 5.8 $ 5.9 $ 5.9

DepartmentofTransportation $ 83.5 $ 52.6 $ 45.7

DepartmentoftheTreasury $ 0.1 $ 0.2 $ 0.2

Environmental Protection Agency $ 6.7 $ 6.7 $ 21.4

Federal Communications Commission $ 16.6 $ 18.1 $ 17.5

National Endowment for the Arts $ 0.3 $ 0.3 $ 0.6

National Science Foundation $ 0.2 $ 0.3 $ 0.0

Social Security Administration $102.0 $112.0 $117.0

U.S. Department of Agriculture $ 84.0 $ 98.8 $126.9

Total $ 596.2 $ 611.0 $ 675.3

* This table does not include American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding provided to these Federal agencies.

Source: Office of Management and Budget, August 2009 BDR 09-39 Tracking Federal Spending in the Territory of Guam: Summary of Responses by Agency, provided 12/10/2009.

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

48


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

48


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

49


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

Appendix C. Guam-Related Completed Audits and Government Accountability Office Testimony


FebRuaRy 1, 2010


Agency and Office Project Title

Report Number

ReportDate

GAODefenseInfrastructure:GuamNeedsTimelyInformationFromDoDto Meet Challenges in Planning and Financing Off-Base Projects and Programs to Support a Larger Military Presence

GAO-10-90R

November 13, 2009

GAODefense Infrastructure: DoD Needs to Provide Updated Labor Requirements to Help Guam Adequately Develop Its Labor Force for the Military Buildup

GAO-10-72 October 14, 2009

GAODefense Infrastructure: Planning Challenges Could Increase Risks for DoD in Providing Utility Services When Needed to Support the Military Buildup on Guam

GAO-09-653 June 30, 2009

GAO High-Level Leadership Needed to Help Guam Address Challenges Caused by DoD-Related Growth

GAO-09-500R April 9, 2009

GAODefenseInfrastructure:OpportunitytoImprovetheTimelinessofFuture Overseas Planning Reports and Factors Affecting the Master Planning Effort for the Military Buildup on Guam

GAO-08-1005

September 17, 2008

GAODefense Logistics: Navy Needs to Develop and Implement a Plan to EnsureThatVoyageRepairsAreAvailabletoShipsOperatingNearGuam When Needed

GAO-08-427 May 12, 2008

GAODefense Infrastructure: Planning Efforts for the Proposed Military BuilduponGuamAreinTheirInitialStages,withManyChallengesYet to Be Addressed

GAO-08-722T May 1, 2008

GAODefense Infrastructure: Overseas Master Plans Are Improving, but DoD Needs to Provide Congress Additional Information About the Military Buildup on Guam

GAO-07-1015

September 12, 2007

NAVAUDSVCDepartment of the Navy Proposed FY 2011 Military Construction Projects Related to the U.S. Marine Corps Okinawa/Guam Base Relocation

N2009-0051 September 30, 2009

NAVAUDSVC Department of the Navy Acquisition Checks and Balances at Naval Base Guam Supported Activities N2009-0050 September 30,

2009

NAVAUDSVC Ocean Bills of Lading for Naval Facilities Engineering Command Marianas Contracts N2009-0047 September 16,

2009

NAVAUDSVCStatus of the Department of the Navy Processes and Controls Regarding the Management of the Government of Japan Funds Related to the Marine Corps’ Relocation

N2009-0038 July 9, 2009

NAVAUDSVC VerificationofanAcquisitionStrategyfortheU.S.MarineCorps’Relocation Effort N2009-0028 May 8, 2009

NAVAUDSVC Auditor General Advisory: Department of the Navy’s Processes Used to Establish Water Rates for Guam Waterworks Authority N2009-0024 April 7, 2009


A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

50


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Agency and Office Project Title

Report Number

ReportDate

NAVAUDSVCDepartment of the Navy Proposed FY 2010 Government of Japan-Funded Military Construction Projects Related to the U.S. Marine Corps Okinawa/Guam Base Relocation

N2008-0050 September 17, 2008

NAVAUDSVC StatusofInternalControlsattheJointGuamProgramOffice N2008-0030 April 8, 2008

50


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

Appendix D. Acronyms


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Appendix D. AcronymsCNMI Commonwealth of Northern Mariana IslandsDFAS Defense Finance and Accounting ServiceDPRI Defense Posture Review InitiativeDoD Department of DefenseDOI Department of the InteriorEIS Environmental Impact StatementFY Fiscal YearGAO Government Accountability OfficeGOJ Government of JapanICG Interagency Coordination Group Of Inspectors General for Guam RealignmentIG Inspector General IPG Interagency Planning GroupJGPO Joint Guam Program OfficeNAVAUDSVC Naval Audit ServiceNAVFAC Naval Facilities Engineering CommandNEPA National Environmental Policy ActOIG Office of the Inspector GeneralOUSD(C) Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/Chief Financial Officer)SPE Special Purpose Entity

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

52


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

52



FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

Appendix E. Endnotes


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Appendix E. Endnotes“Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of the United States of America 1. Concerning the Implementation of the Relocation of III Marine Expeditionary Force Personnel and their Dependents from Okinawa to Guam,” February 17, 2009, www.mofa.go.jp/.

“BDR 09-39 Tracking Federal Spending in the Territory of Guam: Summary of Responses by 2. Agency,” August 2009, provided by the Office of Management and Budget on December 10, 2009.

“Where is the Money Going,” Agency Reported Data Map: 2009 Guam American Recovery and 3. Reinvestment Act Funding, January 6, 2010, http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/agency/Pages/AgencyReportedDataMap.aspx

NAVFAC Fact Sheet, “About the Naval Facilities Engineering Command,” June 19, 2008, 4. https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/portal/page/portal/navfac/.

Department of Transportation, response to DoD OIG data call, December 28, 2009.5.

“JGPO: Guam Military Realignment Overview,” February 5, 2008, 6. http://www.jgpo.navy.mil/.

“Japanese Note,” July 11, 2009, 7. http://www.mofa.go.jp/.

“NAVFAC, “Construction Capacity Analysis,” February 25, 2009, 8. http://www.samehonolulu.org/COP/Presentations.htm.

GAO-08-722T, “Defense Infrastructure: Planning Efforts for the Proposed Military Buildup on Guam 9. Are in Their Initial Stages, with Many Challenges Yet to Be Addressed,” May 1, 2008, http://www.gao.gov/.

“Draft: Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement: Guam and 10. CNMI Military Relocation,” November 2009, http://www.guambuildupeis.us/documents.

http://www.mofa.go.jp/

http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/agency/Pages/AgencyReportedDataMap.aspx


https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/portal/page/portal/navfac/


http://www.jgpo.navy.mil/


http://www.samehonolulu.org/COP/Presentations.htm

http://www.samehonolulu.org/COP/Presentations.htm

http://www.gao.gov/

http://www.gao.gov/

http://www.guambuildupeis.us/documents

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

54


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

54


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S

Appendix F. Source Documentation


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Appendix F. Source DocumentationPublic Law 111-84, “National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010,” October 28, 2009, Sections • 2831 - 2837, http://thomas.loc.gov.Congressional Research Service Report, “Guam: U.S. Defense Deployments,” May 22, 2009, • http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/. Department of the Interior Office of Insular Affairs, “Insular Area Summary for Guam,” • http://www.doi.gov/oia/. (Updated: August 24, 2009) “United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation,” May 1, 2006, • http://www.usfj.mil/. “Implementation Guidance for the Department of Defense of the United States of America and the • Ministry of Defense of Japan on Projects funded by Japanese Cash Contributions,” June 30, 2009, provided by JGPO. “Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of the United States of America • Concerning the Implementation of the Relocation of III Marine Expeditionary Force Personnel and their Dependents from Okinawa to Guam,” February 17, 2009, www.mofa.go.jp/. NAVFAC Fact Sheet, “About the Naval Facilities Engineering Command,” June 19, 2008, • https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/portal/page/portal/navfac/. “Guam Realignment Program Overview,” July 2009, provided by JGPO. • GAO-07-145 - Summary, “Military Operations: High-Level DoD Action Needed to Address Long-• standing Problems with Management and Oversight of Contractors Supporting Deployed Forces,” December 18, 2006, http://www.gao.gov/. Statement of Admiral Timothy J. Keating, U.S. Navy Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, Before • the House Armed Services Committee on U.S. Pacific Command Posture, March 12, 2008, http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5588750/FOR-OFFICIAL-USE-ONLY-UNTIL-RELEASED-BY-THE-HOUSE. (Accessed: December 8, 2009) “U.S.-Japan Alliance: Transformation and Realignment for the Future,” October 29, 2005, • http://www.usfj.mil/. “Joint Guam Program Office (JGPO),” Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum, August 25, • 2006, provided by JGPO. GAO-09-653, “Defense Infrastructure: Planning Challenges Could Increase Risks for DoD in • Providing Utility Services When Needed to Support the Military Buildup on Guam,” June 30, 2009, http://www.gao.gov/. “Overview of the Draft Guam Joint Military Master Plan,” April 2008, • www.jgpo.navy.mil/.Appendix E: Scoping Meeting Exhibits, • http://www.guambuildupeis.us/archived-documents. (Accessed: December 4, 2009) “Guam DPRI Update: Execution/Acquisition Strategy, Guam Industry Forum III,” April 28, 2009, • http://www.guamindustryforum.com/. GAO-08-722T, “Defense Infrastructure: Planning Efforts for the Proposed Military Buildup on • Guam Are in Their Initial Stages, with Many Challenges Yet to Be Addressed,” May 1, 2008, http://www.gao.gov/.

http://thomas.loc.gov/

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/

http://www.doi.gov/oia/

http://www.doi.gov/oia/

http://www.usfj.mil/





http://www.gao.gov/

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5588750/FOR-OFFICIAL-USE-ONLY-UNTIL-RELEASED-BY-THE-HOUSE





http://www.gao.gov/


http://www.guambuildupeis.us/archived-documents

http://www.guamindustryforum.com/

http://www.gao.gov/

http://www.gao.gov/


APP

END

ICES

AN

D E

ND

NO

TES

56


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

“Draft: Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement: Guam and • CNMI Military Relocation,” November 2009, http://www.guambuildupeis.us/documents. “Statement of Admiral Timothy J. Keating, U.S. Navy Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, Before • the Senate Armed Services Committee on U.S. Pacific Command Posture,” March 19, 2009, http://www.pacom.mil/. N2008-0050, “Department of the Navy Proposed Fiscal Year 2010 Government of Japan-Funded • Military Construction Projects Related to the U.S. Marine Corps’ Okinawa/Guam Base Relocation,” September 17, 2008. “JGPO: Guam Military Realignment Overview,” February 5, 2008, • http://www.jgpo.navy.mil/. “Japanese Note,” July 11, 2009, • http://www.mofa.go.jp/. “Joint Guam Program Office: SAME International Business Opportunity Workshop,” February 22, • 2007, www.same.org/. “Government of Guam: 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) - Federal • Stimulus Funding, Department/Agency Grant Information,” June 30, 2009, http://www.guamnewsfactor.com/images/stories/Adelup/govguam%20-%202009%20arra%20fund%20report%20pe%206-30-2009.pdf. DoD Financial Management Regulation, Volume 2B, Chapter 6, “Military Construction/Family • Housing Appropriations,” July 2008, http://comptroller.defense.gov/fmr/. Title 10, United States Code, Section 2350k, • http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml. DoD Financial Management Regulation, Volume 12, Chapter 24, “Burdensharing and Overseas • Relocation Contributions by Foreign Allies,” August 2008, http://comptroller.defense.gov/fmr/. Public Law 110-417, “Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal • Year 2009,” October 14, 2008, http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/olc/docs/2009NDAA_PL110-417.pdf.DFAS Manual 7091.01, Chapter 2-8358, “Departmental Reporting,” August 4, 2009, • http://asafm.army.mil/Documents/OfficeDocuments/Budget/Guidances/dfas/709701/fy2010/docs//2-8358.doc. NAVFAC Instruction 7820.1J, “Recovering Supervision, Inspection, and Overhead (SIOH) Services • at Engineering Field Divisions/Activities (EFD/EFA) and their Subordinate Organizations,” February 9, 1998, https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/portal/page/portal/18543F15F935507DE0440003BA8FC471.Federal Acquisition Regulation - Part 5, “Publicizing Contract Actions,” October 14, 2009, • http://farsite.hill.af.mil/. N2009-0038, “Status of the Department of the Navy Processes and Controls Regarding the • Management of the Government of Japan Funds Related to the Marine Corps’ Relocation,” July 9, 2009. N2009-0051, “Department of the Navy Proposed Fiscal Year 2011 Military Construction Projects • Related to the United States Marine Corps’ Okinawa/Guam Base Relocation,” September 30, 2009. N2009-0029, “Internal Controls Over the Department of the Navy’s Construction in Progress • Account,” May 21, 2009. “Naval Facilities Engineering Command Marianas,” June 2009, • www.guamchamber.com.gu/docs/2009/navfac-jun-09.pdf. (Accessed: December 7, 2009)NAVFAC Pacific Background Information, • https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/portal/page/portal/navfac/. (Accessed: December 7, 2009)

http://www.guambuildupeis.us/documents

http://www.pacom.mil/

http://www.pacom.mil/



http://www.same.org/

http://www.guamnewsfactor.com/images/stories/Adelup/govguam - 2009 arra fund report pe 6-30-2009.pdf



http://comptroller.defense.gov/fmr/

http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml


http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/olc/docs/2009NDAA_PL110-417.pdf

http://asafm.army.mil/Documents/OfficeDocuments/Budget/Guidances/dfas/709701/fy2010/docs/2-8358.doc

http://asafm.army.mil/Documents/OfficeDocuments/Budget/Guidances/dfas/709701/fy2010/docs/2-8358.doc

https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/portal/page/portal/18543F15F935507DE0440003BA8FC471

https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/portal/page/portal/18543F15F935507DE0440003BA8FC471

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

http://www.guamchamber.com.gu/docs/2009/navfac-jun-09.pdf

http://www.guamchamber.com.gu/docs/2009/navfac-jun-09.pdf



56


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

A

PPEN

DIC

ES A

ND

EN

DN

OTE

S



FebRuaRy 1, 2010

“Briefing to the Guam Chamber of Commerce,” February 25, 2009, • www.guamchamber.com.gu/pdf/2009/admiral_presentation.pdf. (Accessed: December 22, 2009) BDR 09-39, “Tracking Federal Spending in the Territory of Guam, Summary of Responses by • Agency,” provided by the Office of Management and Budget. “FY 2009 ARRA Program Funding for Guam,” provided by the Office of Management and Budget.• Marine Corps Times, “Japanese PM: No meeting with Obama on Futenma,” December 10, 2009, • http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2009/12/kyodo_futenma_121009/.No. 785, “Embassy of the United States of America Note,” November 18, 2008, • www.state.gov/documents/organization/121124.pdf. DoD Financial Management Regulation, Volume 4, Chapter 17, “Expenses and Miscellaneous • Items,” June 2000, http://comptroller.defense.gov/fmr/. “Guam Military Realignment Update and Acquisition Strategy,” August 5, 2009, • https://ndia-sd.org/. “Guam Construction Capacity Analysis,” February 25, 2009, • http://samehonolulu.org/. “Where is the Money Going,” Agency Reported Data Map: 2009 Guam American Recovery • and Reinvestment Act Funding. http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/agency/Pages/AgencyReportedDataMap.aspx (Accessed: January 6, 2010)Defense Acquisition University, “Operations and Maintenance Funds,” • https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=28980 (Accessed: January 11, 2010)“Marine Corps Bases, Japan DPRI Update,” September 24, 2009, provided by Marine Corps Bases, • Japan. “Guam Program Review,” April 11, 2007, provided by JGPO.• Secretary of the Navy, “Report on Department of Defense Planning Efforts for Guam,” September • 15, 2008. JGPO, “Guam Executive Council,” August 17, 2009, provided by JGPO. • DFAS, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 7, 2010.• JGPO, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 7, 2010.• Office of Economic Adjustment, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 7, 2010. • Office of the Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Budget), Response to DoD OIG • Data Call, January 7, 2010. Office of the Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller), Response to DoD • OIG Data Call, January 8, 2010 and January 11, 2010. NAVFAC Headquarters, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 12, 2010, January 14, 2010, and • January 5, 2010.NAVAUDSVC, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, December 29, 2009 and January 5, 2010.• Department of Transportation, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, December 28, 2009.• GAO, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, December 8, 2009.• Department of Labor, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, December 18, 2009.• Department of the Interior, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 8, 2010.• Department of Education, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, December 22, 2009.•

http://www.guamchamber.com.gu/pdf/2009/admiral_presentation.pdf

http://www.guamchamber.com.gu/pdf/2009/admiral_presentation.pdf

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2009/12/kyodo_futenma_121009/

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/121124.pdf

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/121124.pdf


https://ndia-sd.org/

https://ndia-sd.org/

http://samehonolulu.org/



https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=28980

https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=28980


APP

END

ICES

AN

D E

ND

NO

TES

58



FebRuaRy 1, 2010 58Guam RealiGnment RepoRt

FebRuaRy 1, 2010


APP

END

ICES

AN

D E

ND

NO

TES

Department of Justice, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, December 23, 2009.• Air Force Audit Agency, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 4, 2010.• Army Audit Agency, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 7, 2010.• Department of Health and Human Services, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 11, 2010.• Department of Housing and Urban Development, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, • January 13, 2010.Air Force Office of Special Investigations, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 12, 2010.• United States Marine Corps, Criminal Investigations Division, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, • January 13, 2010.Department of Homeland Security, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 14, 2010.• Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 14, 2010.• Department of Agriculture, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 14, 2010.• Department of Energy, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 14, 2010.• Environmental Protection Agency, Response to DoD OIG Data Call, January 20, 2010.• DoD Defense Imagery web site,• http://www.defenseimagery.mil

58



FebRuaRy 1, 2010


FebRuaRy 1, 2010

Guam Realignment Annual Report 2010

Travel

northern mariana islands

interagency coordination group

interagency coordination group

comptroller chief financial officer

persons holding visas

marine corps bases

navfac fact sheet

trust fund account