Mr. THOм. As a matter of fact, did not the President's order impounding or reserving sums of money available to you this year result in cutting down your program for harbor craft? Admiral BowEN. No, sir; not for the harbor craft. Mr. THOM. You have some sort of harbor craft or ferry at Newport? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir; the Aquidneck-named after the island on which Newport is located. Mг. THOм. Did you see the criticism of that boat in the publication Marine Engineering? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir; I did. I have ridden that ferryboat and have talked with the engineer and the pilot. The engineer is an old steam engineer, and, of course, he says that it is rather hard to get accustomed to diesel engines after steam, and he feels kind of lonesome, and so forth, but he admits that it is a very efficient boat. The pilot says that the ferry is the easiest thing to handle that he has ever handled in his life. Mr. TнOм. The man who wrote the criticism was the naval architect who drew the plans; is that right? Admiral KIMMEL. Yes, sir; that is correct. I suggest, Mr. Thom. that you question Admiral Du Bose on that subject. He can tell you all about it. He has it at his fingertips. Mr. THOм. The criticism was that you were equipping the boat for ferry purposes to ply but a small distance, although it had sufficient power and sufficient machinery to go out in the ocean and trave. around anywhere. Was not that the gist of the criticism? Admiral KIMMEL. That was the gist of this criticism; but I think Admiral Du Bose will tell you that this man who made the criticism is the one who drew up the plans, based upon the characteristics. and the Navy Department approved the plans that he drew up. Mr. THOм. But his story is that you proceeded to add a number of unnecessary features or improvements. Admiral KIMMEL. I suggest that you get Admiral Du Bose to give you all the information on that. He will be able to answer you in considerable detail. RETRIEVER BOATS-NAVAL TORPEDO STATION, ALEXANDRIA, VA. Admiral BOWEN. The next is item 40, "Retriever boats, Alexandria," $100,000. The Bureau of Ordnance proposes to reopen the Naval Torpedes Station at Alexandria, Va. It is intended to relieve the congestion at Newport by running some of the torpedo tests at Alexandria Such tests will require that eight retriever boats be available a Alexandria for the purposes described under item 38. There are r retriever boats unemployed and available for this duty at the presen ime. It will be necessary to construct new ones. The estimated ost is $12,500 per boat, engineering, total of $100,000. Incidental cost to other appropriations-Construction and repair, $100,000. MISCELLANEOUS BOATS-NAVAL TORPEDO STATION, ALEXANDRIA, VA. Item 41: Miscellaneous boats, Naval Torpedo Station, Alexandria, $17.000. Reopening of the Naval Torpedo Station at Alexandria, menioned under item 40, will require, in addition to retriever boats, that he following boats be assigned to this station. It will be necessary o draw these boats from the naval supply account or to manufacture new ones at costs shown below: After the Item 42, "Collateral expenses, Public Works," $15,000. Bureau of Yards and Docks has completed a new building for industrial purposes in navy yards, the cost of occupation of the building becomes a charge jointly to the Bureaus of Engineering and Construction and Repair. This cost is due to such things as relocating machine tools from an older building, installing bins, shelves, and furniture, relocating lockers, and labor involved in moving portable equipment. In some cases, new machine tools, beyond those contemplated by the regular machine tool replacement program, are required. During the latter part of 1938 the extension of the machine-shop building No. 171 to the Norfolk Navy Yard will be completed. There are no current funds available to cover the cost of occupying this extension. The estimated cost of the occupation is $30,000, as follows: $5,000 for new equipment, $25,000 for the various changes described above. Of this total of $30,000, $15,000 is requested herein, the remainder being included in the "Construction and repair" estimate. Incidental costs to other appropriations, construction and repair-------- $15,000 CONVERSION OF TWO DESTROYERS TO SEAPLANE TENDERS Item 43, "Conversion of two destroyers to seaplane tenders," $220.400. FLEEET MARINE FORCE BOATS Item 44, "Fleet Marine Force boats," $60,000. RECOMMISSIONING "PYRO" Item 45, "Recommissioning Pyro," $236,900. The recommissioning of the Pyro is required by the operating force plan for 1939. Estimates for the recommissioning are as follows: Object 1291: Repairs to vessel, including thorough overhaul boilers, main engines, and replacement of evaporating plant, and refrigerating plant. Object 1293: Repairs to the vessel's equipage now on hand to make it serviceable. Object 15: To provide an initial outfit of consumable supplies to put the vessel on an operating basis-- $164,900 3,000 3,400 Object 30: For the procurement of new equipage not now on hand, including radio equipment_ 65, 600 Total 236,900 RECOMMISSIONING "EIDER" Item 46, "Recommissioning Eider," $132,700. The recommissioning of the Eider is required by the operating force plan for 1939. Estimates for the recommissioning are as follows: Object 1291: Repairs to vessel, including complete overhaul boilers, main engines, evaporating plant, and refrigerating plant $100, 000 Object 1293: Repairs to the vessel's equipage now on hand to make it serviceable_--. Object 15: To provide an initial outfit of consumable supplies to put the vessel on an operating basis 1,500 1,200 Object 30: For the procurement of new equipage not now on hand, including radio equipment--- 30,000 Total 132, 700 RECOMMISSIONING "TURKEY" Item 47, "Recommissioning Turkey," $132,700. The recommissioning of the Turkey is required by the operating-force plan for 1939. Estimates for the recommissioning are as follows: Object 1291: Repairs to vessel, including complete overhaul boilers, main engines, evaporating plant, and refrigerating plant-‒‒‒‒‒‒‒ Object 1293: Repairs to the vessel's equipage now on hand to make it serviceable_-_ Object 15: To provide an initial outfit of consumable supplies to put Total $100,000 1,500 1,20 30,000 132, 700 LIMITATION FOR PERSONAL SERVICES Limitation for personal services under this appropriation applies to clerical and technical employees who are included in the foregoing estimate under "Objects:" "01 Personal Services" and "14 Maintenance and operation of shore stations." The limitation for the fiscal year 1938 was established at $1,758,500 by the committee. The estimated maximum pay roll for 1938 is $1,790,800. It is believed that lapses will be sufficient to bridge the gap, $32,300, between the two figures. For 1939 increases in number of employees of $100,000, $60,000 for administrative promotions and reclassifications, $9,800 for contingencies, have been requested. A limitation for fiscal year 1939 of $1,960,000 is requested. ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES REQUESTED Mr. UMSTEAD. Admiral, will you state to the committee your justification for the item of $100,000 for additional employees? Admiral BowEN. This is for additional drafting work. ADMINISTRATIVE PROMOTIONS AND RECLASSIFICATONS Mr. UMSTEAD. You are requesting authority to spend $60,000 additional for administrative promotions and reclassifications. Of course, reclassification takes place automatically under the Classification Act. Admiral BowEN. That is correct; yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. And that is a matter over which you have no control? Admiral BowEN. We have no control over that. Mr. UMSTEAD. What about promotions, as used in that connection? Do you mean promotions other than those which are brought about by reclassification? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir; we mean promotions within a man's block. In other words, a position is classified, we will say, between $2.500 and $3,500, and there are certain definite steps or increments which are established. A man enters that block, we will say, at $2,500, and after a certain length of time we feel that his services. to the Government warrant his advance in that block to a higher rate of pay; but that does not constitute a reclassification. JUSTIFICATION FOR CHANGE IN WORDING OF THE ACT It is requested that "of which $400,000 shall be available immediately" be added to the wording of the act immediately following the figure of the amount appropriated. This money is needed as a portion of item 23 "Renewal of cables in magazines" to enable the Bureau to obtain necessary material and to begin the cable replacements immediately in those ships which are to be overhauled between the date of the passage of the act and 30 June 1938. DIESEL LABORATORY, ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION Mr. SCRUGHAM. Reverting to my question as to the reason for eliminating the Diesel engine specification from the contract recently let for a seaplane tender and a destroyer tender, what would have been the saving in space and weight, and what would have been the increased cruising radius at full speed, if the Diesel engine specification had remained? In other words, if the bid had been let on the Diesel-engine specification? Admiral BowEN. With the Diesel-engine installation, the weight and space would have been about the same as steam. The saving in fuel would have been from 33 to 50 percent. Mr. SCRUGHAM. Yes. Admiral BowEN. Of course, that is based on the test-stand data. INCREASE OF CRUISING RADIUS WITH DIESEL ENGINES Mr. SCRUGHAM. Through the limitation on the cost of this seaplane tender and the destroyer tender, you were unable to obtain the eruising radius which you otherwise could have gotten by some 30 percent; is that correct? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir; but I think the statement should be slightly turned around; that is, that if we had had the Diesels the cruising radius for the same amount of fuel would have been 33 to 50 percent greater. Mr. SCRUGHAM. But you are not to have the Diesels because of this limitation in cost in your initial authorization? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir; we took bids for steam, and we took bids for Diesel engines, and the Diesel was ruled out on account of the limitation of cost. Mr. SCRUGHAM. It would appear to me that because of a limitation set by a congressional committee, and apparently on recommendation of some competent authority, you will be unable to get the cruising radius which you otherwise could have obtained? Admiral BowEN. If my memory serves me correctly, the Navy Department attempted to raise the limit of cost on the auxiliary vessels, but that was lost during congressional procedure. Is that correct, Admiral? Admiral KIMMEL. Yes, sir. ESTIMATE PRESENTED FOR COST OF AUXILIARIES Mr. UMSTEAD. During the hearings on the authorization bill which was passed at the last session of Congress, representatives of the Navy Department appeared before the legislative committee and presented an estimate of cost of the auxiliary vessels, did they not? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. The estimate of that cost was approximately $48500,000 for the six vessels authorized? Admiral BOWEN. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. And then after the hearing and before the bill was considered in the House the Navy Department took the position that it would cost about $60,000,000 to build those six vessels? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. And Congress passed an authorization act with a limitation of $50,000,000? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir. Mr. UMSTEAD. Then, is it not true, Admiral, that the Navy Department, or appropriate officials thereof, appeared before the subcommittee on deficiencies of this committee and testified that the six ships could be built for $50,000,000, and was there not included in the hearings, both before the legislative committee and before the deficiency subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, a statement listing the cost of each vessel? Is that so or not? Admiral KIMMEL. Yes. Admiral BowEN. Yes: but the exact sequence I do not remember. Mr. UMSTEAD. Then Congress included, in the Third Deficiency Appropriation Act, an authorization for the Department to begin the construction of two of these auxiliary ships? Admiral BowEN. Yes, sir. |