“I thank our distinguished witnesses for appearing before this subcommittee today. Today the Readiness Subcommittee will hear about our military construction and BRAC programs.  In general, I am pleased with the budget request this year.  I think it does a good job of advancing a number of important initiatives, including fully funding the BRAC 2005 process, providing the infrastructure to support our growing force, and recapitalizing an aging infrastructure.

 “However, I am also concerned about trends that I see within the Department.  First of all, in the BRAC 2005 process, I am disturbed at the apparent cost escalation over the past few years.  Since the Department submitted the first budget request to implement the findings of the BRAC 2005 Commission, the costs to implement this program have almost doubled to 34 billion dollars.

 “While a variety of reasons have been attributed to this growth, I believe the assumptions underlying the 2005 BRAC recommendations were flawed.  The Department has indicated that its analysis of the BRAC recommendations was based on consistent planning assumptions.  Unfortunately, those planning assumptions were completely inadequate.  This type of bad cost data leads to bad decisions.

 “I am also concerned about whether we can meet the statutory completion date of September 2011.  With so many of the chess pieces moving in 2011, I am concerned that shortcuts may be taken and money may be wasted in an attempt to meet the deadline.

 “It is important that the Department take a critical look at this program and review the implementation timelines to ensure that government waste is eliminated and artificial acceleration initiatives are avoided.

 “We owe the men and women of our armed services, and the taxpayers of this nation, the very best BRAC implementation plan that smoothly relocates forces in strict compliance with the BRAC decisions.

 “On another subject, I wanted to discuss strategic realignment of U.S. forces in the Pacific.  The most pressing issue relates to Marine Corps realignment from Okinawa to Guam.  In Guam alone, we are expecting more than 10 billion dollars in construction in the next few years.

 “It is important to note that Guam is not the only expanding location.   Included in this realignment is the expansion of forces to the Futenma Replacement Facility at Camp Schwab in Okinawa.  I believe it is important to get both of these decisions right and to make sure our long-term relations with our Pacific partners remain vibrant and viable for the foreseeable future.

 “Let me turn our attention to another equally important subject, the basing of aviation assets.  I understand the Department is facing a number of basing decisions this year.  The most expansive involves the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).  The Air Force alone needs to determine the location of four operational JSF bases and one additional pilot training center. 

 “The problem is that the Joint Strike Fighter is much louder than the F-15, F-16 and F-18 aircraft.  In the basing of future aviation assets, the Department needs to take great caution in balancing the needs of the armed forces with the competing requirements of expanding, local communities.  A long-term outlook needs to be taken into account to ensure that the nation has a viable, unencumbered aviation infrastructure that fully supports the missions of the armed forces.

 “Finally, I remain concerned about the continued underfunding of the sustainment of our military infrastructure.  Funding only 90% of the maintenance requirement is shortsighted and only raises costs over the long term.  This chronic underfunding of infrastructure will remain a critical issue of interest for this subcommittee.  We can do better and I look forward to working with the Department on making this a reality.

 “Gentlemen, I think that we have a lot to discuss today and I look forward to hearing you address these important issues.  The Chair recognizes the distinguished gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Forbes, for any remarks he would like to make."