Guam Realignment Annual Report 2010

4,619 views
4,507 views

Published on

Published in: Travel, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
4,619
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
125
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Guam Realignment Annual Report 2010

  1. 1. Interagency coordInatIon January 25, 2010 v1 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)
  2. 2. 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 111-84 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 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.
  3. 3. 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 Guam RealiGnment RepoRt FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  4. 4. Guam RealiGnment RepoRt FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  5. 5. 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). Guam RealiGnment RepoRt FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  6. 6. Proposed Actions on Guam R i t i d ian P o i n t Munitions Storage Upgrades North Gate and Access Road Army Earth Covered Magazine Air Mobility Command lAir Embarkation ~-...;,."... ______ P ati USMC Main Cantonment P oi nt and Housing Philippine Sea Oka Agallll BlIJ' O ro Poi Pacific Ocean Legend o Route Number Landing Zone F acpi P o int Surface Danger Zone C:::::: i 000 Lands ~ 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 Improve ments CJ Existing Channel C-J Minimal Aircraft Carrier Turning Radius Cocos Training IS~ Ag a P oi nt Convoy Course Existing Road Convoy Course New Road Advanced Motor Vehicles - Operations Course (AMVOC ) Military Operations and Miles 4 Urban Train ing (MOUT) I Non-Firing Maneuver Training Area 6 12 Kilometers Safety Buffer ISurface Danger Zone Live Fire Range Guam RealiGnment RepoRt FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  7. 7. 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 Office Testimony D. Acronyms 51 E. Endnotes 53 F. Source Documentation 55 Guam RealiGnment RepoRt FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  8. 8. USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) entering Apra Harbor, Guam Guam RealiGnment RepoRt FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  9. 9. 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. Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 1 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  10. 10. 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 eventS Since 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. Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 2 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  11. 11. 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. USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) approaching carrier berthing at Apra Harbor 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. Secretary of State Clinton and Japan’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Nakasone signing the bilateral Agreement (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan Photo) 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. Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 3 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  12. 12. F-22s on patrol over Pacific Ocean Marine Corps personnel from the Okinaw and an Indonesian service member carry and disaster relief effor 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. FoRceS According 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.” Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 4 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  13. 13. Japan Air Self Defense Forces participate in exercise on Guam wa-based Combat Logistics Battalion 31 y supplies for a humanitarian assistance rt in Padang, Indonesia FundinG aRRanGementS The 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 $3.29 $3.18 GOJ Direct Cash Contributions GOJ Equity and Loans to Special Purpose Entities U.S. Funds (Facilities and Infrastructure) U.S. Funds (Road) $1.00 $2.80 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 Guam The 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 Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 5 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  14. 14. 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 Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 6 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  15. 15. effortS of the interagency coordination group of inSpectorS general for guam realignment Section 2835(e)(1) Guam RealiGnment RepoRt Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 7 FebRuaRy 1, 2010 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  16. 16. Efforts of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors Generals for Guam Realignment 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 supervision 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 Section 2835(e)(1) 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. Guam RealiGnment RepoRt Guam RealiGnment RepoRt FebRuaRy 1, 1, 2010 FebRuaRy 2010 88
  17. 17. Efforts of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors Generals for Guam Realignment annual oveRSiGht plan The 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 Section 2835(e)(1) 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. Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 9 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  18. 18. Efforts of the Interagency Coordination Group of Inspectors Generals for Guam Realignment 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 teStimony GAO 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 inveStiGationS From 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. Section 2835(e)(1) B-52 and B-2 aircraft taxiing at Andersen Air Force Base Guam RealiGnment RepoRt Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 10 10 10 FebRuaRy 1, 1, 2010 FebRuaRy 2010
  19. 19. 1 u.S. government obligation and expenditure data Section 2835(e)(1)a) Guam RealiGnment RepoRt Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 11 11 FebRuaRy 1, 2010 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  20. 20. Section 1: U.S. Government Obligation and Expenditure Data (Section 2835(e)(1)(A)) 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 typeS DoD 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. Existing Naval housing on Guam u.S. FundinG FoR RealiGnment The 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. Section 2835(e)(1)(A) Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 12 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  21. 21. Section 1: U.S. Government Obligation and Expenditure Data (Section 2835(e)(1)(A)) Figure 4. Military Construction Appropriations FY 2008-FY 2010 (Dollars in millions) $324.7 $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $28.0 $11.0 $50 $0 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 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 expendituReS The 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 Section 2835(e)(1)(A) the amounts obligated and expended for each appropriation from January 1 to December 31, 2009. Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 13 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  22. 22. Section 1: U.S. Government Obligation and Expenditure Data (Section 2835(e)(1)(A)) Table 1. DoD Obligations and Expenditures Related to the Guam Realignment (January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2009) Appropriation* Obligations Expenditures Military Construction, Navy and $ 585,676 $ 520,724 Marine Corps Military Construction, Army $ 0 $ 0 Operation and Maintenance, Navy $ 6,115,735 $ 6,078,926 Operation and Maintenance, Marine $ 52,712,715 $ 28,957,909 Corps Operation and Maintenance, Army $ 59,516 $ 59,516 Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine $ 848,050 $ 73,161 Corps 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. otheR GoveRnment aGencieS From 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 Section 2835(e)(1)(A) Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 14 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  23. 23. 2 government of Japan revenue Section 2835 (e)(1)(c) Guam RealiGnment RepoRt Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 15 FebRuaRy 1, 2010 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  24. 24. Section 2: Government of Japan Revenue (Section 2835(e)(1)(C)) 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 account The “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 DoD Component NAVFAC executes GOJ provides OUSD(C) provides DFAS tracks and provides the funds all GOJ funded direct cash funds to the funds to the reports the GOJ to NAVFAC for construction OUSD(C) DoD Component financial data execution contracts 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. Section 2835(e)(1)(c) Japanese frigates - Apra Harbor, Guam U.S. Marine Corps Marine Corps Air Station Fute Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 16 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  25. 25. Section 2: Government of Japan Revenue (Section 2835(e)(1)(C)) GoveRnment oF Japan FundinG FoR RealiGnment The 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. Table 2. GOJ Funding Breakout (in Billions) Special Purpose Direct Funds Entity Financing Operating Facilities $ 1.29 $0 Utility Infrastructure $0 $ .74 Family Housing $0 $ 2.55 Barracks / 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. RevenueS (contRibutionS) / inteReSt / obliGationS / expendituReS In 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 3. Funds Received from the GOJ Revenue Earnings on (Contribution) Investment Obligations Expenditures Activity for the GOJ $336,000,000 $369,315 $0 $0 Funds Source: DFAS, response to DoD OIG data call, 1/7/2010. Section 2835(e)(1)(c) Japanese frigates - Apra Harbor, Guam s personnel - enma, Okinawa, Japan Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 17 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  26. 26. Vintage Photograph of U.S. Navy Seabees constructing Apra Harbor Wall Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 18 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  27. 27. 3 proJect and program coStS Section 2835(e)(1)(b) Guam RealiGnment RepoRt Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 19 FebRuaRy 1, 2010 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  28. 28. Section 3: Project and Program Costs (Section 2835(e)(1)(B)) 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 Construction of Kilo Wharf to accomodate Guam will have other reporting requirements. Public Law the future supply class vessel 110-417, “Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization (Apra Harbor, Guam) 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. Section 2835(e)(1)(B) Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 20 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  29. 29. Section 3: Project and Program Costs (Section 2835(e)(1)(B)) dod pRoJect and pRoGRam liSt NAVFAC 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 Cost Total Incurred to Estimated Budgeted Date Cost to Project Description / Scope Start Date Cost (US Funds) Complete Headquarters Marine To Be Program Support $ 49,480 $0 $ 49,480 Corps Contractor Support Determined Headquarters Marine To Be Program Support $ 528,240 $0 $ 528,240 Corps Contractor Support Determined Headquarters Marine To Be Program Support $ 55,000 $0 $ 55,000 Corps Contractor Support Determined S-10 Headquarters Contract Support – Program Support * $ 31,100 $ 151,991 $ (120,891) Environmental S-10-Program Support To Be Program Support $ 1,328,488 $0 $ 1,328,488 Contract Determined S-10-Program Support To Be Program Support $ 1,775,850 $0 $ 1,775,850 Contract Determined S-10-Program Support Program Support * $0 $ 81,840 $0 Contract S-10 Program Support Program Support * $0 $ 5,057,408 $0 Contract S-10-Program Support To Be Program Support $ 3,000,000 $0 $ 3,000,000 Contract Determined N-13-Carrier Vessel Carrier Vessel Nuclear Spring April 8, 2009 $ 414,283 $ 413,639 $ 644 Nuclear Spring Survey Survey Section 2835(e)(1)(B) N-7-Carrier Vessel Carrier Vessel Nuclear September 25, Nuclear Turbidity $ 146,511 $ 13,088 $ 133,423 Turbidity Monitoring 2009 Monitoring N-9-Habitat Equivalency Coral Habitat Equivalency September 25, $ 12,589 $ 25,570 $ (12,981) Analysis Analysis 2009 P-1-Master Plan Phase II Master Plan, Phase II * $ 676,212 $ 13,000 $ 663,212 On-base water, wastewater, P-17, 18, 19-Water, and electrical system layout Prior Year Waste Water, and $0 $ 397,383 $0 and cost estimates to support Award Electrical Plan, On-base 1391 submittals Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 21 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  30. 30. Section 3: Project and Program Costs (Section 2835(e)(1)(B)) Cost Total Incurred to Estimated Budgeted Date Cost to Project Description / Scope Start Date Cost (US Funds) Complete Traffic study for Marine Corps main base which provides P-20-On-base Traffic September 30, technical level of details $ 275,262 $ 1,200 $ 274,062 Analysis 2009 on road width, alignments, controls P-28-DPRI Master CPM schedule for JGPO and Prior Year $0 $ 8,800 $0 Integrated Schedule NAVFAC project activities Award P-29-Commonwealth of Master plan for Marine Corps Northern Mariana Islands Prior Year and DoD joint training on $0 $ 419,776 $0 (CNMI) Joint Military Award Tinian and other CNMI study Training Master To Be P-2X-Federal Highways Federal Highway Study $ 1,595,940 $0 $ 1,595,940 Determined Master Plan for Tinian, Phase P-30-Tinian Master Plan II Guam Joint Military Master July 23, 2009 $ 651,456 $ 120,300 $ 531,156 Phase II Plan (AM) Prepare DD1391 for FY 2010 and Japanese FY 2009 for P-4-Project September Guam Joint Military Master $ 922,000 $ 945,126 $ (23,126) Documentation 30,2009 Plan. Funding was accelerated to FY 2008 P-50-Historical Ordinance Historical Ordinance July 8, 2009 $ 108,447 $0 $ 108,447 Assessment Assessment Detailed NEPA Alternatives Development Plans for Alternatives 1, 2, 3, & 8 for P-55-Alternatives 1, 3, U.S. Marine Corps Agreed June 24, 2009 $ 99,817 $ 82,346 $ 17,471 &8 Implementation Plans for Guam Joint Military Master Plan September 10, P-57-Traffic Study Off-Base Traffic Study $ 215,392 $0 $ 215,392 2009 Solid Waste Management plan P-58-Construction and for construction and demolition September 22, Demolition Recycling $ 249,609 $0 $ 249,609 debris for Finegayan to include 2009 Study green waste Prior Year P-58-Solid Waste Study Solid Waste Study $0 $ 3,500 $0 Award Section 2835(e)(1)(B) Basic Facilities Basic Facilities Requirements Prior Year Requirements $0 $ 56,604 $0 Revalidation Award Revalidation Prior Year Guam Naval Master Plan Guam Naval Master Plan $0 $ 156,481 $0 Award Planning for Deployment of Master Planning for Prior Year Ballistic Missile Defense Task $0 $ 82,682 $0 Ballistic Missile Defense Award Force Prior Year Revise Sprinkle System Revise Sprinkle System $0 $ 24 $0 Award Prior Year Waste Water Study Waste Water Study $0 $ 2,022 $0 Award Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 22 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  31. 31. Section 3: Project and Program Costs (Section 2835(e)(1)(B)) Cost Total Incurred to Estimated Budgeted Date Cost to Project Description / Scope Start Date Cost (US Funds) Complete Prior Year Waste Water Study Waste Water Study $0 $ 12,022 $0 Award Water System Plan (on Prior Year Water System Plan (on base) $0 $ 3,727 $0 base) Award Prior Year Water Utility Study Water Utility Study $0 $ 13,921 $0 Award Electrical Study-Power E-11-Electrical Study July 29, 2009 $ 104,601 $ 6,768 $ 97,833 Generation Natural Resources Biologist E-16-Natural Resources September 25, Support for Consultations $ 179,690 $ 35,000 $ 144,690 Study 2009 Records Natural Resource Surveys- E-16-Natural Resource September 23, Utilities Corridor Study $ 107,736 $0 $ 107,736 Biologist 2009 (Harmon) E-17-Cultural Resources Cultural/Historical Resource September 18, $ 148,271 $0 $ 148,271 Study Study 2009 Additional Cultural Resources E-17-Cultural Resources Surveys for Utilities Prior Year $0 $ 477,191 $0 Study Alternatives and Harmon Main Award Cantonment E-17-Cultural/Historical Cultural/Historical Resource * $ 125,312 $ 75,187 $ 50,125 Resource Study Study Natural Resources Surveys E-25-CNMI Natural in CNMI to Support Proposed To Be $ 7,011,986 $0 $ 7,011,986 Resource Survey Training on, at a minimum, Determined Tinian, Saipan, and Aguiguan E-29-Social Impacts Prior Year Social Impacts Assessment $0 $ 1,240,827 $0 Assessment Award Legal Record of Actions and E-31-Administrative September 24, Decisions in the Preparation of $ 1,000,000 $ 29,852 $ 970,148 Record Review 2009 the EIS Legal Record of Actions and E-31-Administrative September 24, Decisions in the Preparation of $ 76,629 $ 5,269 $ 71,360 Record Review 2009 the EIS Sierra Wharf Dredged Material E-33-Sierra Wharf September 25, Characterization for Ocean $ 387,282 $0 $ 387,282 Dredge Material 2009 Section 2835(e)(1)(B) Disposal Sierra Wharf Dredged Material E-33-Sierra Wharf September 25, Characterization for Ocean $ 330,715 $0 $ 330,715 Dredge Material 2009 Disposal E-37-Cultural Resources Prior Year Cultural Resources Study $0 $ 120,000 $0 Study Award E-38- Conduct Natural Conduct Natural Resource Prior Year $0 $ 216,984 $0 Resource Survey Survey Award Modification for Additional E-4-Draft EIS Action Alternatives and Actions June 22, 2009 $ 2,570,296 $ 974,123 $ 1,596,173 to Further Expedite EIS Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 23 FebRuaRy 1, 2010
  32. 32. Section 3: Project and Program Costs (Section 2835(e)(1)(B)) Cost Total Incurred to Estimated Budgeted Date Cost to Project Description / Scope Start Date Cost (US Funds) Complete Modification to Expand the E-40-Socioeconomic Socioeconomic Study in May 14, 2009 $ 262,523 $ 30,000 $ 232,523 Study Support of the Joint Guam Build-up EIS E-41-Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Survey/ Prior Year $0 $ 1,269,852 $0 Survey/Alternate Power Alternate Power Award E-42/E-44-Natural Prior Year Natural Resources Survey $0 $ 453,252 $0 Resources Survey Award E-43-Waste Water Waste Water Treatment Plant Prior Year $0 $ 96,021 $0 Treatment Plant Outfall Outfall Award To Be E-45-Biosecurity Biosecurity $ 205,901 $ 0 $ 205,901 Determined To Be E-45-Biosecurity Biosecurity $ 885,992 $ 0 $ 885,992 Determined To Be E-45-Biosecurity Biosecurity $ 1,350,486 $ 0 $ 1,350,486 Determined Water Well Testing Study E-46-Utility Study-New to Support EIS U.S. Marine June 1, 2009 $ 1,354,611 $ 15,000 $ 1,339,611 Wells Corps Relocation Utility Study Modification to E-46-Utility Study-New September 21, add two additional wells and $ 78,913 $ 0 $ 78,913 Wells 2009 geotechnical research 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 Groundwater Assessment E-48-Apra Landfill June 8, 2009 $ 80,172 $ 32,959 $ 47,213 Study, Apra Harbor Landfill E-49-Sustainable Yield Sustainable Yield April 15, 2009 $ 22,948 $ 22,000 $ 948 Study March 16, E-50-Recycling Study Recycling Study $ 224,827 $ 164,591 $ 60,236 2009 E-51-Arch&Bio Curation Biologist Support for September 23, $ 11,635 $ 0 $ 11,635 (Dugong Biologist) Consultation Records 2009 E-51-Arch&Bio Curation Biologist Support for September 23, $ 47,990 $ 28,794 $ 19,196 (Dugong Biologist) Consultation Records 2009 Section 2835(e)(1)(B) E-51-Arch&Bio Curation Biologist Support for September 23, $ 5,495 $ 0 $ 5,495 (Dugong Biologist) Consultation Records 2009 E-51-Archaeological Biologist Support for September 23, $ 134,323 $ 0 $ 134,323 Curation Consultation Records 2009 Biologist Support for September 23, E-51-Dugong Translator $ 98,526 $ 0 $ 98,526 Consultation Records 2009 To Be E-52-Haul Roads Haul Roads $ 505,281 $ 0 $ 505,281 Determined To Be E-52-Haul Roads Haul Roads $ 3,191,329 $ 0 $ 3,191,329 Determined September 23, E-53-Airspace Airspace Study $ 455,229 $ 12,734 $ 442,495 2009 Guam RealiGnment RepoRt 24 FebRuaRy 1, 2010

×