Admiral SHARP. You are correct, sir. Senator GILLETTE. In that case, what is the purpose of the bill, what is the purpose of the provision that in addition to those duties. now imposed by law on the Coast Guard, they shall have these particular duties that you specify? Admiral SHARP. Well Senator GILLETTE. If they already have them, why are you giving them? Admiral SHARP. The point is just this, that upon mobilization, or when the Coast Guard is taken over by the Navy, there will remain no vessels under the control of the Secretary of the Treasury with which he can enforce these rules, with which he can enforce the safety of shipping in harbors. Senator GILLETTE. You are transferring it here to the Secretary of the Navy? Admiral SHARP. That is correct. Senator GILLETTE. And giving the Navy the authority? Admiral SHARP. That is right. Senator GILLETTE. But what are the duties in this first provision, "that in addition to the duties now imposed by law on the Coast Guard, it shall be the duty," and so forth, what are these additional duties if they already have them? Captain REFO. If I may interject, the authority for doing that exists now. Senator GILLETTE. Where? Captain REFO. In the Coast Guard. This, however, makes that authority specifically applicable in the case of the security of vessels at a naval anchorage and makes that a specific duty of the Coast Guard to execute any definite provisions that may be necessary or considered necessary in the interests of the safety of naval vessels where merchant shipping is prevalent or congested. Senator GILLETTE. And it is a right that they do not have now? Captain REFO. They have that right. Senator GILLETTE. But this just reasserts it? Captain REFO. It emphasizes it, I will say. The CHAIRMAN. Why could you not draft a very brief bill, providing that when the Navy Department takes over the Coast Guard in times of emergency, all the authority and powers granted by law to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Commandant of the Coast Guard shall vest in the Secretary of the Navy? Captain REFO. That is, in effect, what this bill is, Mr. Chairman. Senator BREWSTER. Section 2 says just that. What would be the effect if you simply passed section 2, which says precisely what Senator Walsh has asked? Admiral SHARP. Well, for one thing, it would not be possible for the senior naval officer present in command of any naval force to control the anchorage or movement of any vessel, foreign or domestic, to the extent deemed necessary to insure the safety and security of his, that is, the naval officer's command. Senator BREWSTER. Would not the Secretary of the Navy have the power, under this section 2, which bestows that authority on him, to designate the senior naval officer, since it exists in the Secretary? Admiral SHARP. I suppose he would, but it seems to me that it would be too bad not to go ahead with the bill as drafted, because it has been given a great deal of consideration from many different angles, and it is just about what we want; and I understand, alsoI know, in fact that the Coast Guard and the Secretary of the Treasury have no objection to it. Senator BREWSTER. Well, under your statement we are unable, I assume, to see what there is in the bill other than section 2. Captain REFO. Oh, yes. Senator BREWSTER. That is what we want to know. Captain REFO. This introductory part of the bill, so-called section 1, of the present bill, would implement the hands of the Coast Guard and the Navy commander in time of peace or war. Now section 2 does not become operative in the case of the Treasury Department until an emergency or war situation is developed by Executive order. So the powers of section 2 do not exist except in a declared emergency. The CHAIRMAN. But section 1 does give new powers to the Navy in time of peace? Admiral SHARP. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. Which it has not now? Senator GILLETTE. That is the difficulty, you said there were no new powers. in Admiral SHARP. That statement is incorrect, there is new power that it gives a naval commander, in time of peace, control of "the anchorage or movement of any vessel, foreign or domestic, to the extent deemed necessary to insure the safety and security of his command", and the reason for that is that where there is no Coast Guard force present, he should have that power. We have examples where he needs that. So my previous statement is not entirely correct, and you were quite correct in catching it. The CHAIRMAN. The powers are already in the Coast Guard, but the Navy has never had it before? Captain REFO. I would say, Mr. Chairman, it is not a question of additional powers, it is a question of additional duties provided under the existing powers. The CHAIRMAN. Well, it is a new duty or power, whatever you want to call it, vested in the Navy that it has not had heretofore? Captain REFO. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. In time of peace? Captain REFO. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. But that duty has been vested in some other department of the Government in time of peace? Captain REFO. Yes. Admiral SHARP. But if I may say, sir, there are frequently occasions when the Coast Guard is not there at a naval anchorage in force to be able to insure the security of the naval vessels. The CHAIRMAN. We can understand that. Are there any other questions? If not, we will close the hearing on this bill. Is there any opposition ot this measure? (No response.) S. 1975, DOCKET NO. 173 The CHAIRMAN. The next bill to be taken up is Docket 173, S. 1975, to authorize the construction or acquisition of certain naval local defense vessels, and for other purposes. S. 1975 is as follows: [S. 1975, 77th Cong., 1st sess., Docket No. 172] A BILL To authorize the construction or acquisition of certain naval local defense vessels, and for other purposes Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the Navy, with the approval of the President, is hereby authorized to undertake the construction of or to acquire and convert not to exceed four hundred miscellaneous light-draft vessels and small craft of such sizes, types, and designs, suitable for local defense use as patrol vessels, minesweepers, and the like, as he may consider best suited for the purposes of national defense, such vessels to be in addition to those heretofore authorized. SEC. 2. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Act. The CHAIRMAN. Who is representing the Department in this matter? Admiral SHARP. Rear Admiral Alexander Sharp, of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, and Commander Hiester Hoogewerff, United States Navy, retired. The CHAIRMAN. Either of you may proceed to present the Department's views on this matter. STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL ALEXANDER SHARP, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS, UNITED STATES NAVY, ACCOMPANIED BY COMMANDER HIESTER HOOGEWERFF, UNITED STATES NAVY (RETIRED) Admiral SHARP. There is no authority remaining to the Navy Department at present to acquire or construct local defense vessels other than a few yachts for duty in the fourteenth naval district. Consequently, if we need any such authority currently, and we have many demands from commandants of naval districts, we cannot meet the demands. We have also demands from the fleet for local defense vessels to protect fleet bases. It is obviously a waste of destroyers, for example, to use these to guard bases. This authorization is sought also to permit the Navy Department to acquire the necessary privately owned vessels required for local defense purposes upon mobilization. The Department does not now possess this authority; we should have this authority now because if we have to wait to acquire this authority upon mobilization, there is introduced an undesirable delay at a critical time. For the present we expect to ask for only $15,000,000 in appropriations. Sometime ago the commandants of the various naval districts submitted estimates as to the number of the naval local-defense vessels that would be required for them to carry out tasks assigned in time of war. The commandants' estimates for all districts other than the sixteenth, for patrol types, total as follows: Large patrol types, which includes: Destroyers, gunboats, and patrol boats 165 feet in length, 440. Small patrol craft: 110-foot patrol boats, eagle boats, and coastal yachts, 313, making a grand total of 753. The commandants also estimated that they would require a total of 373 mine sweepers of all types. The War College was also called upon to estimate the requirements for the districts. These totals were remarkably close to the total estimates of the commandants. For example, the commandants' estimate of the total patrol types was 753, and that of the War College was 762. In mine sweepers, the commandants' estimate totaled 373, and that of the War College 339. The CHAIRMAN. Did the War College review the Commandants' recommendations, or was it a coincidence that, independent of each other, they reached the same figure? Admiral SHARP. It was absolutely independent, it was a check required by the Chief of Naval Operations, and I believe that the War College had no idea what the commandants had estimated. The CHAIRMAN. Is not that remarkable that the War College should almost strike the same figure that 15 commandants, scattered all over this country and all over our possessions, reached? Admiral SHARP. No, sir; I don't think so. The CHAIRMAN. It strikes me as rather remarkable, that is all. Admiral SHARP. I don't believe it is remarkable, because military men have a method of estimating the situation either as to forces required or for other purposes, measures to be taken, and it works out generally that there is only one suitable answer. The CHAIRMAN. Have you not authority now to buy private vessels and yachts and convert them into mine sweepers or any other kind of a naval vessel? Admiral SHARP. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You have been doing it. Admiral SHARP. Well, we have up to this time. The CHAIRMAN. You haven't the money, is that it? Admiral SHARP. Then the authority ran out, as I said, except for a few that we got for the commandant of the fourteenth naval district. The CHAIRMAN. Why did the authority run out? Admiral SHARP. Because we were limited in numbers. The CHAIRMAN. In numbers? Admiral SHARP. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. But as a matter of fact, you have been buying, and rather extensively, private yachts and private vessels, and converted them into naval vessels? Commander HOOGEWERFF. 44 yachts. The CHAIRMAN. Anything else besides yachts? Commander HOOGEWERFF. Oh, yes; but I am speaking of local defense vessels now, not larger ships-44 yachts and quite a few fishing vessels that were converted to mine sweepers, mainly. We converted 39 small mine sweepers. Senator BREWSTER. Are those the trawlers that you got up around Boston? Commander HOOGEWERFF. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Now the authority you had was limited to a certain number? Commander HOOGEWERFF. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Do you know what it was? Commander HOOGEWERFF. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. What number was it? Commander HOOGEWERFF. It was amended two or three times, and it finally got down to the yachts; I think it was 130. The CHAIRMAN. Whatever number you had authority to acquire, you want now 400 more; is that it? Commander HOOGEWERFF. First, about 2 years ago, we got authority to acquire and convert a certain number of vessels, which was later modified slightly, and we arrived at some certain number. Then we got authority to construct 400 small vessels, not to exceed $400,000,000. We had acquired all the privately owned vessels that we were authorized to acquire under the first act, and we have contracted for and are building all of the 400 that were authorized in the last 400 vessels. The CHAIRMAN. And this is a new program? Commander HOOGEWERFF. That is correct. Commander HOOGEWERFF. Yes; and it covers two points, sir. It permits acquisition or building. The CHAIRMAN. Acquisition or what? Commander HOOGEWERFF. Construction. The CHAIRMAN. And what amount of money do you want authorized for this purpose? Commander HOOGEWERFF. The House committee set a total not to exceed $300,000,000. The CHAIRMAN. You want that same amount incorporated in the Senate bill? The bill has not passed the House yet. Commander HOOGEWERFF. That is right. Senator GILLETTE. The estimates that the Admiral made of 753 and some 760, then the reason that the request here is for 400 is because the additional number, some 350, were taken care of by previous authorizations in previous legislation? Commander HOOGEWERFF. If you would let Admiral Sharp finish his statement, I think that would be explained. Senator GILLETTE. Pardon me. The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Admiral. Admiral SHARP. A grand total of all types of naval local defense vessels now built, building, acquired or available for naval districts' use is 777. The commandants' estimated total requirements were 1,382, including small harbor patrol vessels. This left a shortage of 605 vessels. Therefore, the Navy Department submitted to the Director of the Office of the Budget a proposed bill to permit the Navy to acquire or build a total of 600 naval local defense type vessels. At that time it was anticipated about 200 of the smaller ones would be turned over to the Coast Guard to be operated by that service for the protection of the interiors of harbors and water fronts, especially against sabotage. Since that time the Coast Guard has requested authority to obtain 200 small vessels for this duty. Consequently, the Office of the Budget approved the proposed bill on condition that the total number of vessels be reduced from 600 to 400. In other words, 200 harbor patrol boats expected to be acquired by the Coast Guard would reduce the total shortage of naval local defense vessels |