Despite Navy appropriation of approximately $15 billion annually, personnel, both officer and enlisted, live in substandard facilities at many stations. Trained military manpower remains the most vital element to the successful accomplishment of the military mission, sophisticated weapon systems notwithstanding; yet many of the facilities available to support these personnel are substandard. Although their effect on combat readiness is indirect, the prolonged deferral of morale-promoting projects can be detrimental indeed when it results in the loss of well-trained, experienced individuals or discourages talented young people from choosing a military career. In order to man a highly complex, modern Navy and Marine Corps, we must compete for able, intelligent men, who are accustomed to present-day civilian standards of living. If we are to attract and retain personnel of high caliber, we must provide conditions which will encourage them to pursue military careers. Key factors in promoting enlistment and reenlistment are decent living conditions, afloat and ashore, and adequate family housing. Recognizing these facts, we are embarking on a program designed to remedy these conditions. Approximately 22 percent of this year's military construction program is devoted to living condition improvements in the form of barracks, bachelor officer quarters, and messes, and an additional 4 percent is for other types of personnel support facilities. We consider this to be the minimum amount which can be assigned to troop housing and community facilities if this effort is to have effect. To provide essential facilities for our service families, we are also requesting an authorization of almost $89 million in fiscal year 1966 for 5,040 family housing units. The family housing program and the significant start that we are making on needed personnel support facilities will boost morale, increase career incentive and, ultimately, increase the effectiveness of the skilled and dedicated men who make up our Navy and Marine Corps. We cannot hope to maintain the effective fighting force we need unless we recognize and attempt to satisfy the personal needs of our servicemen and their families. I should like, now, to make a few general comments regarding the shipyard modernization program. Shipbuilding and repair yards, in this country and abroad, have been the subject of an extensive study by Bureau of Ships personnel over a period of about 5 years. This study has resulted in the development of a comprehensive plan to modernize the Navy shipyard industrial complex over a 4-year period and at a total cost of approximately $95 million. The implementation of this improvement and modernization program has been deferred until this time because of the shipyard appraisal study which only recently designated yards for retention or inactivation. The shipyard modernization program omits the yards scheduled for closure and is aimed at enabling the hard-core yards to service the fleet more effectively by repairing and constructing ships in less time, at a lower cost. This will be accomplished by incorporating the most advanced cost and laborsaving equipments, techniques, and processes with the necessary supporting industrial facilities. The $22.5 million first increment for which we are requesting authorization this year represents an important, though modest, start toward the achievement of the goal of this long-delayed modernization program. Vice Adm. Lot Ensey, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Logistics; Rear Adm. Harry Hull, Director of the Shore Activities Development and Control Division, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations; Maj. Gen. John A. Masters, Assistant Quartermaster General of the Marine Corps; and Rear Adm. Peter Corradi, Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks, have all played an important part in the development of the Department's program and each will assist in presenting this program to the committee. Before these gentlemen present the details of our overall program, however, a word or two about the Navy's efforts in the area of base utilization, would appear to be in order. The retention of any unneeded real estate and facilities would be unquestionably a major hidden cost in Navy and Defense operation. Only by subjecting our installations to continuous scrutiny can we be certain that we are not maintaining properties for functions which could be eliminated or combined with others without reducing overall Navy effectiveness. To this end, and consistent with an overall Department of Defense program, we have equipped ourselves to study and review various functional areas on a regular basis. We have made a good start in our efforts to improve base utilization and we believe that our continuing program for comprehensive review will bring about not only reductions in costs, but improved operational facilities as well. 47-232-65-19 The operation and maintenance of the complex weapon systems we presently have in the fleet requires the support of an adequate Shore Establishment. We believe that the items in the construction program presented today, will by the replacement of deteriorated and obsolete facilities and by supporting technology's rapid advances, afford our existing Shore Establishment an increased capability to meet the demand placed upon it. Mr. Chairman, thank you and the members of the committee for this opportunity to introduce the discussion of the Navy's fiscal year 1966 military construction program. Admiral Ensey will continue with the Navy's presentation. He, Admiral Hull, Admiral Corradi, and General Tyler will be pleased to discuss the details of this program. (The prepared statement of Vice Adm. Lot Ensey follows:) STATEMENT OF VICE ADM. LOT ENSEY, U.S. NAVY, DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS AND LOGISTICS Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am Vice Adm. Lot Ensey, U.S. Navy, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Logistics. It is a pleasure to meet with you and to present, in summary, a basic justification for the Navy's military construction program for fiscal year 1966. Our entire program this year, as in the past, has been prepared to meet the needs of the operating forces. It supports the fleet directly and indirectly. We have endeavored to attain a proper balance between direct support of the fleet, immediate and clear in its effect, and the indirect support, which is less spectacular but equally important, in its contribution toward the accomplishment of our tasks. The new ships, both combatant and support, are joining our fleet at an average of approximately one every 2 weeks. They are vastly superior to those being replaced. As this modernization takes place and the overall striking power of the fleet is increased, we must concurrently adjust and modernize our shore facilities. These facilities exist solely for the purpose of supporting our fleet units. The magnitude of this change in the shore facilities can be demonstrated by citing the requirements for one item. For instance, the electrical power needed ashore for maintenance and support for the new destroyers and destroyer leaders coming into the fleet today, has increased almost 500 percent over that required for the World War II destroyers. Steam requirements have also increased in a similar manner. To accommodate changes in the fleet, there are several items in this year's program for improving and increasing capacities of utilities and berthing facilities at several of our naval stations. This will enable our ships to shut down their engineering plants in order to conduct essential maintenance and repair while in port. The increase in size and complexity of our aircraft that have come into service in recent years has brought with them entirely new facilities support requirements. We have included in this year's program several aircraft systems training buildings, as well as a patrol plane support facility necessary to support the new P-3 Orion aircraft. This aircraft represents a major step forward in our continuing efforts to advance in antisubmarine warfare. Full use of this newly developed weapon system would not be possible, and the methods of combating the ever-increasing submarine threat cannot be exploited to the maximum extent, without such adequate facility support. As more and more of our ships and aircraft are being armed with missiles, it becomes necessary to provide support for those sea and air units that are undergoing training at the Atlantic Fleet weapons range. This year we are continuing the developing of the Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads, the logistic centroid for this important training. After World War II the Navy concentrated on providing facilities for the operation, maintenance, and training in technologically advanced weapons systems. These improvements were of immediate need. Personnel facilities were relegated to a lesser position because of the squeeze on military construction funds. Facilities such as barracks and bachelor officers quarters continue to lag far behind the minimum standards and goals we need. If the Navy and Marine Corps are to improve the retention rate of the officers and enlisted personnel who are required to man today's modern and highly technical weapons systems, this aspect of the program needs immediate increased support. The deterioration of the troop housing facilities of the Naval Shore Establishment since World War II is a matter of serious concern to the Department of the Navy. A 5-year improvement program is being implemented. As a result, $74 million, or approximately 22 percent of this year's military construction program, is devoted to improvements of barracks, BOQ's, and messes. This compares with the much lower average percentage of 10 to 12 percent of the programs during the past several years. The fiscal year 1966 military construction program that you are now considering is designed to achieve the foregoing aims. It is an essential phase of the Navy's continuing efforts to modernize and to improve the overall effectiveness of the operating forces. The program amounts to a total of $13,593,000 in new authorization, a relatively small percentage of the overall Navy budget. The military construction program has undergone a most rigorous review within the Navy itself, the Department of Defense, and the Bureau of the Budget. This year the line items support the following Department of Defense programs. Program III for "General purpose forces," $161,513,000.-These line items are for facilities that provide direct support to fleet operations, in order that we may maintain our position in control of the seas. Facilities sponsored by the Marine Corps are included in this program. Program V for "Reserve and Guard Forces," $8,906,000.-This is for essential facilities required to support the training of the Naval and Marine Corps Reserve. Program VI for "Research and development," $18,563,000.-This will provide for those new and expanded facilities required to insure our technological progress. Program VII for "General support," $123,517,000.-This program provides for the overall logistic support of the operating forces. It includes the support facilities for recruit, technical, professional, and flight training. These are necessary so that we may train our personnel in the operations of the highly complex ships and weapons of the present day Navy. Included in this program is $22,971,000 for communications, intelligence, and security facilities. Rapid and reliable communication is vital to effective command and control and is an important aspect of our overall deterrent capability. Our 1966 military construction program is essential to meet our most urgent needs. Rear Adm. Harry Hull, the head of our Shore Activities Development and Control Division is here to present the details of our program. Rear Adm. Peter Corradi, Civil Engineering Corps, is here to speak of the engineering aspects of the proposed construction. Admiral HULL. I have a brief statement; may I read it? Senator STENNIS. Yes; we don't put any limitations on the witnesses. You can put all of it in the record if you wish, and then fortify it and underscore it with such summary as you wish. Admiral HULL. Well, sir, I am quite willing just to submit mine for the record also, and I think Admiral Corradi will do the same, and we can get on with the repetitive items, if you prefer. Senator STENNIS. I am not cutting you off, but we get the benefit of your thought by putting it in the record, you see. Admiral HULL. All right, sir. Senator STENNIS. And then if you want to emphasize any of it, you can do so now. Admiral HULL. I think perhaps the emphasis would come better at the time of certain line items. Senator STENNIS. Very good. Admiral HULL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Rear Adm. Harry Hull, U.S. Navy, Director of the Shore Activities Development and Control Division in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations. It is an honor for me to appear before this committee to testify on the Navy military construction program. In the fiscal year 1966 program being presented today, we recommend new authorization in the amount of $313,593,000. The various line items that will be considered by the committee support the following Department of Defense programs: Program III for General Purposes Forces___ $161, 513, 000 18, 563, 000 123, 517, 000 Our shore facilities must be updated to meet the problems of the seagoing Navy and help it maintain its readiness to counter the continuing threat to our Nation and to our allies-the continuing threat to peace-its readiness to react to shifts in the international political scene, to respond to changes in our national policy, and to take the optimum profit from our advancing technology. There are 10 facility classes in this Navy program. They are sponsored by the Chiefs of the bureaus and offices of the Navy Department, including the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps. In this statement, I will summarize briefly the content of each section of title II, the portion of the bill devoted to Navy and Marine Corps shore activities. I am prepared to testify on the individual line items later in as much detail as the committee may desire. Section 201, the unclassified portion of the bill, would authorize 374 line items at various locations. The total amount inside the United States is $229,529,000, and the amount for oversea locations is $33,346,000. All oversea line items have been engineered to minimize the flow of gold outside the United States. Section 202 would authorize 37 classified line items in the total amount of $40,718,000. Section 203 would authorize $10 million for emergency construction. We do not intend to recommend appropriation of funds for this authorization. These are our 10 facility classes: 1. Bureau of Ships Facilities, $24,714,000. As a result of a study of our naval shipyards, we have concluded that a large-scale modernization program is long overdue. The objective of this program is to improve fleet readiness by improving the quality and reducing the time and cost of repairing and constructing ships. There is a total of 39 line items in this class, of which 33 items, amounting to $22,518,000, are distributed among our naval shipyards. These items will improve existing shipyard facilities to meet better the overhaul and repair requirements of our modern ships. 2. Fleet base facilities, $37,022,000. This class includes a total of 41 line items for improvement to naval station facilities that provide direct support to the fleet. Included are various items for ship berthing as well as 13 items for $7,817,000 at 7 naval stations for personnel support facilities to improve the living conditions of assigned personnel. 3. Naval weapons facilties, $128,803,000. This is the largest of the Navy's facility classes, comprising 6 groups of air and ordance activities, each of which supports a particular segment of naval aviation or naval ordnance. These groups are naval air training; field support of fleet operations; Marine Corps air stations; fleet readiness support; research, development, test, and evaluation; and overseas support of the fleet. The proposed projects will support five essential tasks: Training of pilots and aircrews; improvement of the air striking power of our operating forces; improvement of the ordance aspects of fleet readiness; progress in air and ordnance research, development, test, and evaluation programs; and improvement in personnel living conditions. Here are some examples of line items within these groups. The Avionics Training Building at the Naval Air Station, Memphis, Tenn., will provide classroom and laboratory facilities necessary to teach our airmen to maintain and operate the new and sophisticated electronic equipment which makes today's aircraft so remarkably versatile and effective. The first increment of the patrol aircraft support facility at the Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, Fla., is the first of two increments designed to provide efficient maintenance support for the new and complex P-3 Orion patrol aircraft. Rehabilitation of barracks at the Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, N.C. will provide a proper standard of living for our men there. The line item for the Quality Evaluation Laboratory at the Naval Weapons Station, Concord, Calif., will provide the additional space required for installation of electronic data processing machinery and its personnel. The QEL will receive reports from the fleet of the various aspects of shipboard weapon systems, its supply maintenance and operation, and will analyze and evaluate these reports for the purpose of improving the design, operation, and support of these systems. 4. Supply facilities, $846,000. This facility class includes two projects, one for POL pipelines at the Naval Supply Depot, Newport, R.I., and the other for air conditioning for administration building at the Naval Supply Depot, Subic Bay, Republic of the Philippines. 5. Marine Corps facilities $20,433,000. This class of facilities includes items inside the continental United States and on Okinawa. It is fundamental that the Marine Forces must be prepared for instant deployment to any incipient trouble spot in the world. The proposed facilities at Camp Lejeune and Camp Pendleton, in the United States, and Camp Butler on Okinawa, are needed for building up and maintaining the combat readiness of our marines. 6. Service school facilities $47,052,000. The vital ingredient in fleet readiness is the skill of our officers and men. Education and training have always been the means of attaining this skill, and have always been a continuing and endless requirement. The technological complexities of the world today are nowhere so evident as in the equipment in our ships and aircraft-equipment whose value to the Nation depends in the last analysis on the skills of the officers and men who use it. This year we seek improvements to educational facilities for officer personnel at the Naval Academy, the Naval Postgraduate School, and the Officer Candidate School at Newport, R.I. Items are also included to improve the facilities for our enlisted personnel undergoing basic training and more advanced technical training at the Naval Training Centers at Great Lakes, Ill., and San Diego, Calif. 7. Medical facilities $13,524,000. Good health of our personnel is another essential of fleet readiness. We have included in the program this year a replacement for a portion of the naval hospital at Newport, R.I., a naval dispensary and dental clinic at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and an outpatient clinic at the naval hospital, San Diego, Calif. |