Page images
PDF
EPUB

USE OF FACILITY

This is a very important part of training crewmembers and pilots in the operation of new aircraft. This building for which we are asking the $150,000 will be an addition to the previously authorized training building. It will provide an additional 7,000 square feet onto a building that is 5,000 square feet in size which was approved in 1964.

However, since the approval and funding of the 5,000-square-foot structure, we find that the trainers require much more space than originally thought necessary. We will have to have an additional 7,000 square feet to make the building usable to house the training devices that must be put in it.

Senator SALTONSTALL. With the increased use of helicopters, if we don’t give you the funds for the aircraft systems training building, will the training have to be done at another station?

Captain CowART. We would have to do it at the overcrowded Fort Rucker where we are now sending the personnel to be trained in this type aircraft.

go. SALTONSTALL. With the increased use of helicopters does this mean we have to have more trained personnel?

Captain CowART. Yes, sir.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Thank you.

ADDITIONAL DATA on NAVAL AIR STATION, OCEANA, VA.

Senator STENNIS. Back to this Oceana matter for just a minute, I can see where you have to have some facilities there. But do you need this much? This is virtually $3 million. That is a good deal of money in my book. Captain CowART. The number of aircraft being assigned there and being home based at Oceana is increasing; the recommended or required floor area of hangar space is 800,000 square feet of which we now have only 330,000 and some-odd square feet. So, we have less than half right now of what is needed. Senator STENNIS. How many planes will pass through this building permonth for repairs? Captain CowART. It is difficult to say exactly how many, sir, because the work is not the kind that can be scheduled. Senator STENNIS. I mean approximately? On the average. Captain CowART. Captain MacDonald, can you give any estimate at all on the number of aircraft that would be processed? We know how many are assigned there. Captain MACDONALD. Mr. Chairman, it is really not a matter of processing aircraft through for maintenance. It is a building that will provide shop and crew space for some of our about 20 squadrons of modern fighter or attack aircraft, such as the F-4 aircraft, the A–6, and later the F-111B, if it proves successful. We will provide in this hangar—and it is expensive, there is no getting away from it—the modern shop and open bays for the repair and upkeep of these complicated systems in the aircraft.

Also the administrative and organizational space for the Squadrons that are stationed at the field. Senator STENNIs. Thank you very much.

* * MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, CHERRY POINT, N.C.

Captain CowART. The next item, sir, is the reduction at Cherry Point, N.C.; $590,000 was cut by the House from the request for $3,590,000 for “Rehabilitation of Barracks.” Commander Washburn from the Bureau of Yards and Docks is prepared to speak to this item. Senator STENNIs. Please proceed, Commander. Commander WASHBURN. Mr. Chairman, this cut of $590,000, of course, we can live with. However, what this does in effect is to cut back the number of living spaces that we will rehabilitate in these structurally sound barracks—the required rehabilitation to the livability standards that we are trying to provide for our personnel. This reduction in adequate spaces will require a stretchout of this program and will, ultimately, probably cost more money to do this at a later time. We have looked into the contracting capabilities in this area, and a $3,590,000 contract in that area is not too large for the capabilities of the contracting industry. Senator STENNIs. You are going to take care of the 3,240 enlisted men.” Commander WASHBURN. That is right, sir, but with this cut it would allow taking care of only some 2,600 enlisted men at this time. - Sonator TENNIs. You will continue at the same level of rehabilitation . Commander WASHBURN. That is correct. We would not plan to cut back the habitability standards in this rehabilitation, but would plan to cut back on the number of spaces that we would rehabilitate. Senator STENNIs. The next item.

MARINE CORPS AIR FACILITY, SANTA ANA, CALIF.

Captain CowART. The Marine Corps Air Facility at Santa Ana, Calif., for “Aircraft Parking Apron.” The House committee denied funding for the parking apron in the amount of $809,000. This Marine Corps Air Facility supports 116 helicopters. By the end of 1966, the number of helicopters at this activity will increase to 176. Senator STENNIs. Why is that? Captain CowART. There will be more units put in there, sir; additional squadrons will be brought in. Senator STENNIs. Why are you putting more units in there? Rear Admiral GRIMM. To support the buildup for Vietnam. Senator STENNIS. Do you have any more companies, as helicopter companies per battalion or per regiment, than you did? Rear Admiral GRIMM. There are some adjustments that are being made within the Marine Corps. Senator STENNIs. Up or down? Rear Admiral GRIMM. Up. Captain CowART. These additional aircraft are also a newer model. Senator STENNIS. Did you make this presentation before the House? Captain CowART. This was contained in the justification, yes, sir, but was not spelled out in the same detail. Senator STENNIs. The House said they denied it because you did not ask for enough. You asked for a Government contract, and they wanted one contract. Do you want to increase it? Commander WASHBURN. I think the point was made during the House markup on this item, based on Admiral Corradi’s testimony, that it might be cheaper to do this whole apron construction in one contract. What Admiral Corradi was speaking to was that it would be cheaper to do all this construction this year, but because of budget limitations we cannot program all of our requirements in any one year. It is difficult to argue with the fact that one contract would be cheaper. Senator STENNIs. Let us see what he says now. Where is Admiral Corradio Commander WASHBURN. He had a speaking engagement, sir. I can speak for Admiral Corradi that it will be cheaper for us to do this

at this time.
TOTAL AUTHORIZATION

Senator SALTONSTALL. How much is the authorization for this? Commander WASHBURN. The same amount, Mr. Saltonstall. Senator SALTONSTALL. $809,000? Commander WASHBURN. Yes, sir. - senator SALTONSTALL. And we would have to go above the authorization? Commander WASHBURN. That is correct, sir. We do have a followon increment in a future program. Senator SALTONSTALL. How much would we have to go above the authorization? Commander WASHBURN. The followon increment is about half again as much, about $400,000. Senator STENNIs. You say you don’t have the authorization? Commander WASHBURN. No, sir. Senator STENNIS. Well, we will have to drop it if you do not have the authorization. The next item.

NAVAL STATION, RoosevelT RoADs, P.R.

Captain CowART. Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads, P.R. There are three items at Roosevelt Roads that were denied funding, sir, under the same reason. A Vehicle Filling Station; the Gatehouse, and Employment Office; and Recreational Facilities, all were included under the Sanne TeaSOI).

This first one is for a Vehicle Filling Station for $25,000. Right now there is only 1 vehicle filling station on the station to provide fuel, motor oil, water, and air to 920 pieces of station equipment assigned. This filling station is located 8 miles from the administrative area and 5 miles from the air operations area where the majority of the vehicle traffic is concentrated.

It requires 45 minutes to make a round trip to refuel a vehicle. We estimate that a total of 15 man-days are wasted daily for refueling. Elimination of the long refueling run by construction of a new vehicle filling station in the operations area will save $10,000 annually in terms of lost manpower and will amortize the costin 3 years. The existing filling station will continue to be used in support of the vehicular operations in the industrial area of the station. The second item is for the Gatehouse and Employment Office for $45,000. A proper gatehouse facility, containing a security office and industrial relations office (IRO) with appropriate waiting rooms, is urgently required by this station to correct a serious security problem. Existing facilities are completely inadequate to handle the volume of visitor traffic now experienced by the station and the situation will become worse when construction is begun on approved military construction projects. Gate No. 1 is the easiest gate to reach by visitors to the station. The post is maned by a sentry operating out of a small booth. The security office is located 7 miles away at gate No. 3.

SECURITY PROBLEM

Consequently, visitors must be sent to gate No. 3 for security clearance and a pass. The security problem is created when jobseekers are then sent to the IRO which is located 1 mile from gate No. 3. The jobseeker becomes a security problem when he fails to locate the IRO and must be rescued by the security force. This line item will provide a proper gatehouse at gate No. 1. Only those persons who have a need to enter the station will be issued a pass. Jobseekers will be processed at the gatehouse.

We request restoration of the $45,000 for that item.

RECREATION FACILITIES

The next item is for $96,000 for recreation facilities. The House denied funding for this item. The provision of adequate athletic and recreational facilities is essential to the morale and well-being of station and fleet personnel. The opportunity to participate in an organized sports even or an impromptu off-duty game is a necessity for shipyard personnel. The existing facilities at the Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads, are insufficient and do not provide this needed wholeSome outlet for all the personnel.

This line item will provide additional fields and playing courts and will correct the deficiency and thus enhance the morale of the 4,000 assigned station and fleet personnel.

These facilities will be down near the port and near the piers and will be used mainly by the personnel aboard ship. Those are the three items at Roosevelt Roads that were not funded because of the ruling on page 24. The last item at Roosevelt Roads is the cargo pier.

PIER EXTENSION

Our request for $531,000 for the cargo pier extension was denied. The basis for the denial of approval was stated to be that additional consideration should be given to the requirement for the construction of a cargo pier including maximum utilization of existing facilities.

At the present time the existing cargo pier, pier No. 2, is 397 feet long and 38 feet wide. In order to unload a ship over this pier we must bring the ship in, unload the forward cargo holds, take the ship away from the pier out into the harbor, turn it around and bring it in again alongside the pier and unloading the aftercargo holds. This is time consuming. This is certainly costly. Beside the short length of the pier which necessitates the ship having to turn around to completely unload, the narrow width of the pier restricts unloading. There is only room, because of its 38-foot width, for one truck to be on the pier at a time to be loaded or unloaded. Any ship on the opposite side of the pier also attempting to unload must be coordinated very carefully with the other ship because the cargo-handling booms will overhang the ship on the far side and interfere with its unloading. The increasing utilization of Roosevelt Roads is due to its being the headquarters of the Atlantic Fleet Missile Range, and the increased number of missile ships using the station facilities. We are handling more cargo, we have more people in the area. We have more spare parts required. The use of this pier is increasing and the need for an extension of this pier is certainly urgent. It is planned to extend this pier 500 feet in length, and to widen it to 70 feet. This will allow us to completely unload a ship without having to turn it around and it will allow us to unload ships on each side of the pier without interference from the cargo-handling booms.

POSSIBLE DEFERRAL OF PROJECT

Senator SALTONSTALL. If we are going to send money to Vietnam this could wait a year without any trouble; could it not? Captain CowART. Yes, sir; if it were necessary. Senator SALTONSTALL. You have an aircraft carrier that can come in at the existing pier so the Navy will not be handicapped if we do not go along with the extension at this time? Captain CowART. Senator Saltonstall, I have to admit that we will make do, sir, if we have to. The Navy will make do with the facilities we have. Senator STENNIS. I imagine, if you want to get a pier in there you will want one larger than this, one that will cost more money. Captain CowART. We have a carrier pier under construction now, sir. This cargo pier is to be extended whenever we can get the money, SII’. Senator STENNIS. The next item. Captain CowART. That is the last of the items for the Navy’s regular program. Senator STENNIS. You have covered all of them? Captain CowART. Yes, sir. Senator STENNIs. You have finished up your classified items? Captain CowART. Yes, sir; we finished the two classified items together, one following the other. The Reserve Forces program is to

Senator STENNIs. All right, we will take the Reserve program now for the Navy.

« PreviousContinue »