Naval Service:
Direct appropriations..
Naval supply account fund..
Total, naval service
Grand total..
$4,205,000.00 $4, 295, 780.00 $4, 283, 940. 00
912, 840.00
907,000.00 897,000.00
5, 117, 840.00 5,202, 780.00 5,180, 940.00
375, 535, 803. 26 342, 591, 468.00 339, 162, 012.00-36,373,791.26-3, 429, 456.00
2,000,000.00
-2,000,000.00
377, 535, 803. 26 342, 591, 468. 00 339, 162, 012. 00-38,373,791.26-3, 429, 456. 00 -------- 382, 653, 643. 26 347, 794, 248. 00 344, 342, 952. 00-38,310,691.26-3, 451, 296.00
Grand total, direct appro-
priations.....
380, 653, 643. 26 347, 794, 248. 00 344, 342, 952. 00-36,310,691.26-3, 451, 296.00
The foregoing summation excludes permanent annual appropriations, which are enumerated on the last two pages of this report. The Budget estimates for such items for 1932 aggregate $1,839,470, or $12,080 less than estimated for the present fiscal year. The committee has deducted $960, intended for promotions, from the item for the Naval Home. Otherwise the permanent annual appropriations remain in the Budget figures.
A wide disparity ($32,859,395.26) is indicated in the foregoing table between the estimates for 1932 and the total of the appropriations for 1931. This grows out of a substantially lesser amount required for ship construction, because of large unexpended balances that will be available at the end of the present fiscal year, the omission of funds for continuing modernization of capital ships, appropriations for which are current with authorizations to date, and to the curtailed and modified operating force program already effective, which also will reflect sizeable savings in appropriations now cur
While lesser amounts are estimated for in a few instances, the occasions are rare where the reductions are not either in consequence of the reduced number of ships that will be in operation or because of the omission of appropriations for nonrecurring needs. Neither in directions nor amounts should they occasion any impairment of the efficiency of the establishment afloat or ashore, but, rather, in a number of instances, look to a better degree of maintenance, equipment, and repair.
A statement that includes the vessels that it is planned to have in commission during the fiscal year 1932 under the Budget for such year appears on page 84 of the hearings. Similar information is contained in the table appearing on page 118 of the hearings, the latter also showing distribution of personnel, commissioned and enlisted. A comparison of the vessels in commission on July 1, 1930, with those which it is proposed to have in commission during the fiscal year 1932, shows the following differences: