Department of the Army Historical Summary: FY 1976

XI.

Special Functions

Each year the Army carries out a variety of functions that affect the civil sector of the nation. These range from projects in flood control to the sponsorship of national rifle matches. Reflecting the same concerns that occupy the minds of most Americans, the Army has devoted much attention to such major problems as protection of the environment and the conservation of energy resources. The close relationship between the military and civilian segments of American society has become an important feature of the country’s growth and development during the past two centuries.

Taking into account the importance of civil works projects to communities around the nation in terms of social and economic implications, the yearly sums appropriated for this purpose are of considerable interest. For the fiscal year, civil works appropriations were funded at $2.2 billion and supplemental appropriations and transfers at $659 million. The breakdown of the appropriations by category is shown below.

CIVIL WORKS APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976 AND TRANSITION QUARTER (INCLUDES SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND TRANSFERS)

(In thousands of dollars)

The largest appropriation, General Construction, included funds for the following planning and construction projects:

BREAKDOWN OF GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

[142]

Of the twenty-five new planning projects started over the last five quarters, the enterprise involving the largest federal investment was on the Arkansas River above John Martin Dam, Colorado, with a federal cost of $72.4 million. The project consists of eight separate undertakings, which together will provide flood control and recreation benefits along a substantial portion of the river. Of the eighteen construction projects started over the last five quarters, the most important, in terms of federal investment, was on the Park River in Connecticut, where federal expenditures will be $71 million. In conjunction with previous federally funded efforts, this local project for flood control will provide complete protection to especially valuable portions of the city of Hartford.

For many years the Corps of Engineers has administered a regulatory permit program that controls structures and work in the navigable waters of the United States. During the last fifteen months the corps received over 25,000 permit applications, issued over 20,000 permits, and denied 226 applications under this program. Pursuant to court order, the corps is now preparing to expand its regulatory work to include navigable waters and their tributaries, interstate waters, intrastate waters used for interstate recreation and commerce, all coastal waters and adjacent wetlands subject to the ebb and flow of tides, and lakes of five acres or larger.

In April 1976 the corps exercised its authority to deny applications for permits to fill more than two thousand acres of mangrove wetlands off Marco Island, Florida. But it granted a permit to continue the nearly completed operations involved in developing Collier Bay at Marco Island. These actions constitute perhaps the most significant decisions the corps has made since assuming responsibility for this kind of regulation at the end of the last century.

For several years, at a time when older structures needed more maintenance and the requirements for dredging were growing, funding limitations impaired the efficient operation of the corps’ navigation program. The result often meant problems for shippers that were passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. In fiscal year 1976 the Office of Management and Budget and the Congress provided additional funds for dredging. This appropriation highlighted a change in the pattern of navigation expenditures over the past two years. During fiscal years 1975 and 1976, construction declined and operation and maintenance took a larger portion of the civil works budget.

For the last forty years the Corps of Engineers has had primary federal responsibility for studying flood problems and recommending solutions. The traditional method of meeting this responsibility has been to modify the behavior of floods. More recently, however, the corps, along with other members of the U.S. Water Resources Council, has recog-

[143]

nized that other techniques can reduce the potential for flood losses and at the same time be less harmful to the environment. Alternate techniques include land use regulations and permanent floodplain evacuation.

Because most floodplain management decisions are made at the local level, the Corps of Engineers operates a Flood Plain Management Services program that offers technical assistance and planning guidance to individuals and agencies at all levels of government. In 1976, the corps responded to 19,000 requests for information and assistance. The cost of this program has averaged $10.5 million in recent years.

During fiscal year 1976 the Army added more operations in disaster relief to its long record. In the Pacific northwest, heavy winter rains and unusually rapid melting of snow caused flooding throughout the Columbia River basin. Though short-lived, floodwaters destroyed numerous flood-protection structures and inundated thousands of acres of agricultural land. The Corps of Engineers spent more than $7 million, alone, in repairing the damaged flood-protection structures. In March and April 1976, when the city of Minot, North Dakota, faced the prospect of catastrophic flooding, the corps responded by building emergency levees that cost $7 million along a 25-mile stretch of river. No floodwaters reached the city, and losses estimated at $67 million were prevented. When the Teton Dam in Idaho failed, the corps stepped in to repair damaged flood-protection works, restore the hydraulic capacity of the Teton River, and help in the cleanup that followed the flood.

During fiscal year 1976 the Corps of Engineers managed over eleven million acres of land and water at its various water resource projects. Facilities at the corps’ 419 operations were sufficient to support 376 million recreation days, the highest usage to date. The corps also stepped up its lakeshore management program by preparing plans for each of its lakes where private facilities exist. The purpose of the plans is to establish and maintain acceptable fish and wildlife habitats and to promote the safe use of shorelines by the public.

Several corps offices sponsored studies last year to evaluate possible manpower savings in using comparative (time-phased) aerial photography to monitor portions of the corps’ regulatory program. A preliminary study by the Goodyear Aerospace Corporation suggested that this method of analysis was probably the most economical. The corps’ New England office has used the technique to coordinate the regulation of the thirty-five flood control reservoirs in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Forty-one remote stations collect data on river stage, wind, air temperature, and water quality and relay the information to twenty-seven data collection platforms. The platforms transmit the data to the LANDSAT satellite, which in turn retransmits the data to the New England office’s center in Boston. The rapidity with which the information is received makes possible more precise regulation

[144]

of the reservoirs. The corps’ office in Vicksburg, Mississippi, is presently installing a similar system for the lower portion of the Mississippi River, and demonstrations have been given at other corps offices to help popularize use of the technique.

The Corps of Engineers currently operates and maintains sixty-five hydroelectric power projects with 295 generating units having an aggregate capacity of nearly 16 million kilowatts, or approximately 11 percent of the estimated conventional hydroelectric potential in the United States. During the fiscal year, corps power projects produced almost 108 billion kilowatts of net energy, an amount equivalent to the energy potential of more than 184 million barrels of oil. The revenue from this energy production was $271 million. Twelve new generating units came into service during the year, with a total capacity of 1 million kilowatts. Three of the units were added at the Ice Harbor project on the Snake River in Washington, 4 went into service at the Libby project in Montana, the first 2 units of the Carters project in Georgia went on line, and the Jones Bluff project in Alabama was completed with the installation of the last 3 units. Six new projects, with a potential of nearly 1 million kilowatts, are presently under construction. Additionally, as part of the country’s effort to use as many renewable energy sources as possible, the corps is adding units, with nearly 3.5 million kilowatts total capacity, at eight existing sites.

The problem of streambank erosion in the United States has been a serious matter. A Corps of Engineers survey of the problem in 1968 and 1969 suggested that damage was occurring on more than half a million miles of streambank, and on 148,000 miles the degree of erosion was severe enough to require further study to determine whether corrective measures should be taken. In response to the problem, Congress passed the Streambank Erosion Control Evaluation and Demonstration Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-251), authorizing the Secretary of the Army to establish a national streambank erosion prevention program. The funds authorized were $50 million, and Congress is to receive a report on the matter by the end of 1981.

The program consists of (1) an evaluation of nationwide streambank erosion, (2) a survey and evaluation of literature dealing with bank protection methods, (3) hydraulic research on the effectiveness of various bank protection methods, (4) research on soil stability, (5) demonstration projects on selected rivers, and (6) the report to Congress. Presently a survey of the extent of streambank erosion is under way, the survey of literature is complete, and preparatory steps have been taken on the hydraulic and soils research programs. Sites for demonstration projects have been identified and approved, and construction at some of these sites has already begun.

[145]

The corps continued to operate training programs whose purpose is to disseminate information on water resource development activities to engineers and researchers from other countries. During the fiscal year the corps instructed twenty-eight trainees from Afghanistan, Argentina, Brazil, Burma, Egypt, India, Kenya, Mexico, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Rumania, South Africa, Sweden, and Taiwan. Typical subjects studied were river engineering and navigation, urban hydrology, fill dams and treatment of foundations, mathematical modeling of coastal areas, design techniques of hydraulic works, floodplain management, and the design of harbor and marine structures.

The Army environmental program has met with limited success during the past fifteen months. Cutbacks in funds and personnel, increased opposition to Army projects, and failure to meet some compliance deadlines have combined to permit only modest gains in the field.

The budget request for fiscal year 1976 was $187 million for all environmental programs. Three-fourths of this amount was allocated for air and water pollution projects and environmental management. A number of the pollution control projects encountered delay or disruption because of inadequate funding or, in some cases, the withdrawal of funds. As a result, requirements without deadlines were not carried out, and some with deadlines were not completed on time.

The Army did conduct an inventory of all its fixed facility air pollution sources in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) guidance of May 1975. The listing contains both major and minor emission sources subject to federal, state, or local limitations. A major emitter is one capable of putting more than 100 tons per year of a single pollutant into the atmosphere. Now that each Army installation has submitted an air pollutant emissions report to the Environmental Protection Agency, representatives of the Army, EPA, and the state concerned will determine whether antipollution standards are being met. When installations are in violation of these standards, they will develop compliance schedules in conjunction with EPA and state officials. The compliance schedules will be incorporated into consent agreements in accordance with EPA guidance.

The Army had no major difficulties with the Clean Air Act’s provisions on vehicle emission standards. The manufacturers of commercially designed vehicles have to certify that they are observing current federal vehicle emission standards at the time of production, and Army tracked and combat vehicles do not have to meet these standards. In complying with emission specifications for light-duty military-design trucks (jeeps),

[146]

however, the Army did have to obtain a temporary exemption until December 1978 from the Environmental Protection Agency.

As one part of the program to reduce vehicle emissions, the Army began to switch from leaded to unleaded gasoline in the continental United States, Alaska, and Hawaii, but only seven installations completed the conversion by July 1975. With more unleaded gasoline available and with indications from the Army Research Laboratory at San Antonio, Texas, that Army vehicles could run successfully on unleaded gasoline, the process accelerated. By the end of September 1976, all installations had made the conversion.

In water pollution control, the Army’s goal remained the same—to conserve water resources and to prevent contamination by controlling the release of pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency has established specific levels of control required for discharges at Army point sources such as pipes, tunnels, conduits, ditches, channels, and the like. These levels are expressed in discharge permits for which the Army applies to the Environmental Protection Agency. Discharge permits specifying the levels of control are issued by this agency, and thus far, of the 307 permits required by Army installations, 257 final and 15 draft permits have been received and 35 applications are pending.

In some instances, the Army has found it more advantageous to join regional or municipal sewage treatment systems rather than to construct new plants or to improve existing ones. By the end of the year, it had concluded twenty-five such agreements and completed connections to thirteen systems.

The disposal of treated effluent on land has been used in the past primarily to conserve water at some installations. With the imposition of more stringent effluent standards, the Army has found that the land disposal technique has become a feasible alternative to the more costly advanced waste treatment technologies, and it is considering land disposal at seven installations. At Fort Ord, California, spray irrigation is planned to meet discharge standards. Further research on the problem is under way at the Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, where the work is being coordinated with the Office of The Surgeon General to take possible health hazards into consideration.

Throughout the fiscal year, the amount of solid waste reprocessed or reclaimed by the Army has not been significant, chiefly because recovery and recycling operations have been solely voluntary. During the period, however, the Environmental Protection Agency developed guidelines to be published early next year that will make recycling and recovery mandatory for all federal agencies. The Army is preparing regulations to carry out the new policy and will place greater emphasis on this activity in the upcoming year.

[147]

In the past most of the solid waste generated at Army installations has been placed in sanitary landfills. To find out whether the Army was complying with federal standards for handling such materials, the Environmental Protection Agency conducted a survey of the installations. Posts that do not conform to standards will be required to take corrective action.

Since some Army actions have produced controversy and the threat of court litigation over possible violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Army took steps to develop better management of the activities covered by the legislation. It issued regulations and reports to supplement the existing management systems at major commands and installations. This new guidance deals with water resources, air pollution abatement, hazardous and toxic materials, noise abatement, historic preservation, and spills of oil and other hazardous substances and with instructions on preparing the required Environmental Protection Control Report. Other regulations in preparation will furnish specific directions for submitting environmental impact assessments and statements and more guidance on overall environmental program management.

The Army has come under attack in the federal courts because it has not submitted environmental impact statements in connection with certain military activities that were allegedly required. At least five realignment actions were under litigation during the report period. As a result, the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff have expressed the need for principal commanders to place more emphasis upon environmental protection. The Chief of Staff instructed all concerned to improve their performance and to comply with the spirit as well as the letter of the law.

During the report year, two environmental education courses have been offered at the Army Logistics Management Center at Fort Lee, Virginia. A one-week course for executives covered ecology, environmental impact statements, and adapting the responsibilities of military commanders and civilian managers to legislative requirements. Although the course was given ten times and 246 participants graduated, five classes had to be canceled because of fund shortages. The second course, lasting two weeks, covered the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Ecology and pollution, conservation and recycling of resources, and environmental impact assessments and statements were the major topics. The course was given five times and 146 participants graduated, but again five classes had to be canceled, this time because of a lack of students. One of the biggest problems in carrying out the program was the difficulty in getting military commanders, civilian managers, and staff members at the decision making level to attend the courses.

[148]

To alleviate this problem, the Agency sponsored briefings on command responsibilities in enforcing the provisions of the act. These were given at the Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command, the Army Forces Command, and the Health Services Command installations to over 2,100 people by representatives from Fort Lee. Training and Doctrine Command personnel gave similiar briefings to over 1,100 people at twenty-three facilities. A new one-week course on recycling and recovery will be offered at Fort Lee during the coming year.

As an incentive to installation commanders, the Environmental Quality Award is presented each year by the Secretary of the Army to the installation that has done the most to protect the environment. In 1976 Fort Carson, Colorado, won the 1975 award for integrating environmental considerations into planning and decision making; presenting newcomers to the post with ecology handbooks; developing solid waste, land management, pesticide, and wildlife management programs; and educating its people on environmental matters. Fort Carson also became the Army’s candidate for the Secretary of Defense’s Environmental Quality Award.

Research during the period to support Army compliance with environmental standards cost $10 million, and an initial five-year plan for research on environmental quality was prepared. A primary objective of the plan is to develop cost effective methods to abate pollution from munitions plants; this will involve toxicological studies to establish standards for environmentally safe levels of munition waste material and methods to monitor and control these pollutants. The Army submitted interim standards for five pollutants to the Environmental Protection Agency and made progress in developing methods for monitoring and abating pollutants. Also, research on the use of computers to assist in preparing environmental impact assessments received high priority in the search for closer conformity to the Army’s obligations under the law.

The Army’s energy conservation goal for the first twelve months of fiscal year 1976 was to keep consumption below the 270.9 trillion British Thermal Units (BTU’s) used the previous year. With intensive management the Army surpassed this objective by 5.4 percent, consuming only 256.4 trillion BTU’s. Savings were made in all energy sources, except for aviation fuel and purchased electricity and steam, with installations using 84 percent and vehicles 16 percent. The savings are shown in the following table.

[149]

ARMY ENERGY CONSUMPTION

(In trillion BTU’s)

Mobility Operations

^a Indicates percent of increase in fiscal year 1976 consumption.

As part of the fuel conservation effort, the Corps of Engineers is carrying out seven programs involving solar heating and cooling. Some are being solely managed by the Corps of Engineers; others are being conducted in conjunction with the Energy Research and Development Agency, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. One of the seven is the installation of solar heating and cooling systems for Army Reserve centers at Greenwood, Mississippi, Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Seagoville, Texas. Another is experimental and includes seventeen Army housing units on seven posts using solar heating systems provided by the Energy Research and Development Agency and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. At Forts Bragg, Hood, and Riley, concept design has been approved for incorporating solar preheaters in barracks. These units, if successful, will reduce other energy requirements by preheating domestic water.

To review solar and other energy programs and policies, the Army established an Army Advisory Group on Energy in December 1975. The group, composed primarily of Army staff representatives, met frequently to exchange energy and conservation ideas and to develop courses of action on urgent energy matters.

The Army Energy Office, which is under the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, provides staff assistance to him and to the Deputy Under Secretary of the Army, both of whom are members of the Defense Energy Policy Council. During the past fifteen months, the council conducted extensive deliberations over the proper role of the Department of Defense in the National Energy Program and the effects that international energy shortages may have upon national security.

With the establishment of the Military Standard Logistics Data System for Petroleum committee at the Defense level in October 1975, the Army Energy Office acquired another function. It provides a representa-

[150]

tive to this group, which is working to set up standard procedures for petroleum management and develop a standard petroleum data system.

In August 1975 the Army requested clarification from the Department of Defense of the responsibilities of each service for operation and maintenance of bulk petroleum distribution systems. Specifically, the request sought to end the present system of assigning responsibility for the distribution of petroleum products to the service that is the principal user of each type and to give worldwide distribution of all petroleum products to the Army. After a thorough study of the matter, Defense agreed in general with the Army’s position. As a result, a draft DOD directive was issued in April 1976, which gave the Army responsibility for operating overland distribution systems and supporting land-based forces, with the Navy operating ocean terminal petroleum facilities that support the fleets and land-based forces where such support is by overwater transportation. The directive also supported the Army’s contention that the principal user concept should not determine the assignment of distribution missions.

The Army won a significant victory in the U.S. Supreme Court in Greer v. Spock, when the Court held that installation commanders may prohibit all political activities on their installations, including those areas generally open to the public, and may also forbid the on-post distribution of literature that is inimical to loyalty, discipline, or morale. In another matter of interest to the Army, the Court denied former 1st Lt. William L. Calley’s petition for certiorari. The effect is to let the decision of the Fifth Circuit stand, which had held that Calley’s claims of constitutional defects had been given full and fair consideration in the Army judicial system, that he had received a fair trial at his court-martial, and that no reason existed to interfere with the military judicial process.

Beginning with Maxfield v. Callaway, filed in April 1975, and continuing into fiscal year 1976, twenty-one separate suits challenged 1974 and 1975 Army promotion boards established for the ranks of CW-3, CW-4, major, and lieutenant colonel. All of the cases, however, were either dismissed without prejudice or stayed pending exhaustion of administrative remedies available in the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). This board conducted a formal hearing and found that the promotion boards did not contain their required complement of reserve officers. The Secretary of the Army then ordered ten new boards convened, with appropriate reserve officer membership, to consider the reconstructed records of reserve officers in the primary zone. All but two of the new boards completed their work by the end of the fiscal year, and the last two should be finished in October 1976. While the boards were studying the records, however, officers seeking restora-

[151]

tion to active duty filed seven new cases alleging that administrative remedies had been exhausted when the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records presented its findings and recommendations to the Secretary of the Army. All but two of these cases have been dismissed; the remaining suits are presently under consideration by federal courts in the District of Columbia and Connecticut.

The military system of review boards also faced significant challenges during the fiscal year. In Urban Law Institute of Antioch College, et al. v. Secretary of Defense, et al., fifty individuals and organizations brought suit against the Secretary of Defense, the service secretaries, the boards for the correction of records, and the discharge review boards. The plaintiffs seek full disclosure of final decisions, reasons therefore, facts relied on, minority or dissenting opinions, voting records of board members, and current indexes of such decisions since January 1974, the effective date of the Freedom of Information Act. The plaintiffs contend that current board procedures violate due process and fundamental fairness. In a related suit against the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records, a class action was brought forward challenging the ABCMR procedure whereby staff personnel ruled on applications for reconsideration without referring the applications to the board (Heiler v. Williams, et al.). The plaintiffs seek a court order directing the board to review all requests for reconsideration and to provide a hearing for each applicant. The plaintiffs also want the board to review past requests for reconsideration that were improperly denied by staff personnel and to notify interested individuals of the opportunity to obtain a hearing. Settlement negotiations are almost completed, and it appears that the case will be settled early in fiscal year 1977.

In April 1976, the first allegations of extensive violations of the Cadet Honor Code at the U.S. Military Academy emerged. The Cadet Honor Committee investigated charges that over one hundred members of the class of 1977 had cheated on an electrical engineering take-home examination. On 1 June 1976, a class action suit was filed by Cadet Timothy Ringgold (Ringgold v. U.S., et al.) seeking to enjoin the officer boards and to reinstate cadets who had resigned. The court granted the government’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the Cadet Honor Code was not unconstitutionally vague or discriminatorily enforced and that the single penalty of expulsion did not infringe the Eighth Amendment proscription against cruel and unusual punishment. On 30 June 1976, Cadet Kenneth Harms, who had been found not guilty by the Cadet Honor Committee, filed a suit (Harms v. U.S., et al.) protesting the referral of his case to a board of officers, which recommended separation. He also claimed the right to be tried by court-martial. The court

[152]

held that a Cadet Honor Committee proceeding is of no legal consequence, and, since separation from the Military Academy is administrative and nonpenal in nature, Harms is not entitled to criminal justice protections. On 30 July 1976 Cadet Paul Williamson brought suit (Williamson v. U.S., et al.) alleging that the Secretary of the Army unlawfully supplanted the Cadet Honor Committee with a different system (internal review panels) and contesting the finding of collaborating on the take-home examination on the basis that the alleged co-collaborator had been found not guilty. The court dismissed the case without prejudice for lack of exhaustion of administrative remedies.

The cadets then took their cause to the United States Court of Military Appeals in petitions for extraordinary relief. The court directed the briefing of certain issues to which the Judge Advocate General responded by filing a motion to dismiss, arguing that the court’s jurisdiction is limited to criminal justice matters only. Oral arguments were held on 16 August 1976, and in September the court issued a brief order denying without prejudice the petitions to refile after exhaustion of administrative remedies.

Meanwhile, on 3 September 1976, a fourth lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York by Cadet D’Arcangelo (D’Arcangelo v. Berry and Hoff man) challenging the legal authority of the Secretary of the Army to promulgate Military Academy Regulation 1-6, which provided for the reapplication of separated cadets and waiver of service commitments. The court denied the plaintiff’s requests for preliminary relief. This and other litigation arising out of the Military Academy cases remained active through the end of the fiscal year and will probably continue for some time to come.

In Berlin Democratic Club v. Rumsfeld, a federal district court held that allegations by U.S. citizens overseas that Army officials illegally wiretapped, opened mail, infiltrated organizations, and committed other acts of harassment and intimidation were justiciable claims. The court also held that a judicial warrant was required for U.S. wiretaps on citizens overseas, that damages could be recovered for violation of First and Sixth Amendment rights, and that a nonresident alien lacked standing to sue in a federal court for actions overseas against him by U.S. officials in violation of the Constitution. The judge also denied the Army’s motions for dismissal or summary judgment, and in answering the complaint the Secretary of the Army had to assert a formal claim of privilege to protect certain military and state secrets. In May 1976, because of a potential conflict of interests, the Department of justice authorized the U.S. attorney to withdraw representation of the six individually sued Army defendants, who then retained private counsel at government expense.

[153]

In another intelligence case, Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General, court orders required a worldwide search of Army documents. The Secretary of the Army in turn asserted a military and state secrets privilege to protect documents affecting U.S. relationships with foreign governments.

After the celebration of the Army’s two hundredth birthday on 14 June 1975, the primary emphasis of the Army Bicentennial program was the support of activities in the civilian domain. Ninety-nine active duty installations and organizations engaged in 645 projects. These projects fell into eight general categories: ceremonies and pageants, 180; demonstrations and drill teams, 170; displays and exhibits, 150; publications and films, 60; speakers programs, 5; promotional activities, 10; community action, 50; and other undertakings, 20. Virtually all Army installations within the United States and many overseas as well as many National Guard and Army Reserve units conducted or supported Bicentennial activities during the celebration. Reports reveal that Bicentennial funds supported over 7,300 events before audiences totaling more than 99 million people.

A number of the projects were extremely well received. The Forces Command pageant, “200 Years of Readiness,” received considerable praise and a Freedom Foundation Award. The outfitting of sixty-five Reserve Command color guards by the Office of the Chief of Army Reserve was another highlight of the Army’s Bicentennial program.

The Army also helped form the 120-member U.S. Armed Forces Bicentennial Band. At the close of the fiscal year, the band neared completion of the sixth of seven major tours and had performed before nearly one million people. Included among the assemblage’s work this year were a 35-day tour in the south and lower southwest, a 44-day swing through the midwest, and a 45-day tour through a northern tier of states. The band also participated in the Independence Day celebrations at Gettysburg, Philadelphia, and Valley Forge. Before the band’s mission is completed, it will have given over 370 performances in more than 270 cities to an estimated 1.6 million people.

The major emphasis of the Army program outside the United States was to bring the nation’s Bicentennial to Army people who could not be in the United States during the year. In Europe, virtually every Army community, installation, and activity conducted a variety of Bicentennial events ranging from open houses to parades and reenactments of historical events. In the Federal Republic of Germany, commands provided bands and color guards for Bicentennial events conducted by the host country, which spent some $10 million on the celebration of the United States’ two

[154]

hundredth birthday. In Italy, a group of Army personnel went the length of the country to bring the story of the Bicentennial to the Italian people. In Japan, where a large-scale program was conducted, two major projects gained considerable media coverage. The first was a hike across the islands of Japan by two soldiers taking the message of the Bicentennial celebration to the Japanese people. Later in the year, United States Army, Japan, with the assistance of Fort Riley, Kansas, shipped two bison from Fort Riley to Japan for presentation to the Japanese people on behalf of the American community as a reminder of the Bicentennial; the two bison are now on exhibit in the Fukuoka City Zoo. In Korea, the Army conducted primarily festive and commemorative events on military installations. All told, the events conducted by the Army overseas were a major extension of the celebration of the nation’s Bicentennial.

The National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice (NBPRP) was established by Congress in 1903. Marksmanship training and certain marksmanship competition programs are carried out for the board by the Office of the Director of Civilian Marksmanship. Appropriated funds for NBPRP programs amounted to $230,000 in fiscal year 1976.

With equipment and materials provided by the Secretary of the Army, the Director of Civilian Marksmanship furnished .22-caliber ammunition and targets and loaned .22-caliber rifles to 2,200 civilian rifle clubs and their 130,000 members, of whom about 70,000 were from twelve to nineteen years old. Over 19,000 medals were awarded to junior members who achieved qualifying scores over approved courses of fire. Additionally, some 5,500 undergraduate members of eighty-three college clubs took part in rifle marksmanship training during fiscal year 1976.

The Director of Civilian Marksmanship also furnished medals to the top 10 percent of teams firing in the National ROTC Interscholastic-Intercollegiate Smallbore Rifle Match, in which 118 teams of ten members each participated, representing high schools and colleges throughout the United States.

The National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice again authorized the National Rifle Association to include four National Trophy matches in the program of the 1976 National Rifle and Pistol Championship Matches held at Camp Perry, Ohio, during August 1976. A total of eighty-five teams, including thirty-one civilian teams and 1,503 individuals, participated in the National Trophy Service Rifle and Service Pistol events.

[155]

Return to Table of Contents

	Return to CMH Online
	Last updated 7 September 2004