« PreviousContinue »
Mr. Bray. Mr. Chairman, shouldn't you have somebody go up there and look at it, before agreeing to it?
The CHAIRMAN. Well, I don't think so. I think you see from what the witness has stated, the facts would warrant it.
Mr. RIVERS. There is not much we can do.
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. Bray, this has been under study and consideration for something over a year, about a year.
The CHAIRMAN. Any objection to approving the item, with the amendment? If not, the item is approved and the amendment is agreed to. Now, members of the committee, that gets down to the increase in appropriations for authorization last year.
How much-was it $23 million for the Navy? Admiral AILES. No, sir. Mr.KELLEHER. This year, Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. No, on these items. Mr. KELLEHER. Yes, but you mean this year? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. KELLEHER. $15 million, I believe. The CHAIRMAN. How much? Mr.KELLEHER. $15 million, I believe. The CHAIRMAN. It is $13 million for the Army. Mr. KELLEHER. It is about the same. The CHAIRMAN. All right. We all understand these items in section 205. That is previous authorizations where the line item amounts had to be increased on account of the cost.
Mr. Rivers. What is the hospital at Norfolk finally going to cost? Admiral Ailes. We hope this will complete it-$13,979,000 sir.
Mr. RIVERs. That has caused more trouble than any hospital I know, to build.
Mr. HARDY. We are getting along fine.
The CHAIRMAN. You are not in order, to get into any controversial hassle between Mr. Hardy and Mr. Rivers.
Now, that finishes the Navy's bill.
Admiral AILES. Mr. Chairman, before we go all the way back, in this housing, on page 25, line 1, Naval Air Facility, Sigonella, Italy, 122 units, we would like to propose that the words “and community support facilities" be added to that, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. What do you mean? You are going to have to feed them?
Admiral Ailes. No, sir. These are community-support facilities that we thought, since the Army was responsible in this area, they would provide the community support in these stations.
The CHAIRMAN. What do you term "community support"? Elec
Captain ETTER. The community-support facilities, Mr. Chairman, are such things as a community building where necessary
The CHAIRMAN. Recreation facilities?
Captain ETTER. Yes, sir, recreation facilities and such things as that, that are necessary to support any large community.
The CHAIRMAN. Why shouldn't you put that at each one, then, each one of the items abroad?
Admiral AILES. In the others, that is taken care of by other means, sir. This is one where the Army has the responsibility in the area for everything except our family housing, and the Secretary of Defense elected that if we wanted community-support facilities to support this housing, we should ask for it.
Mr. Bates. What is the additional cost?
Captain ETTER. There is no additional dollar cost, sir, The problem, Mr. Chairman, is that the statute which allows us to use Commodity Credit funds for overseas housing also provides for community
facilities. Since the housing must now be specifically authorized the Department of Defense feels that we also need specific authority for community support facilities. That is the reason we would like to have this additional language.
Mr. Rivers. But there is no appropriated money for it?
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the language is added to line 1 on page 25, after the word "units.”
Now, members of the committee, I think-we briefly want to turn back here to
Mr. RIVERS. Page 16.
All these California items we are passing over in deference to our four colleagues from California, who are necessarily absent.
Now, on page
The CHAIRMAN. “Naval Shipyard, San Francisco, Calif.: Operational training facilities, $766,000.”
I have a note here, “Rivers amendment pending.'
Mr. KELLEHER. This would be on page 16, Mr. Chairman, following line 21. It would read as follows
The CHAIRMAN. That is right.
Mr. KELLEHER. "Naval Shipyard, South Carolina. Operational facilities, $10 million.”
The CHAIRMAN. Wait one minute.
Mr. KELLEHER. The Secretary of Defense's office has imposed these categories on all three services, and a drydock falls under the heading of "Operational facilities.” There is no reason why it couldn't be "drydock,” however.
h Te CHAIRMAN. You say “Operational facilities, drydock.” Put it in that way.
Mr. KELLEHER. That is right.
The CHAIRMAN. This is offered by Mr. Rivers. A full hearing has been had on it. A very heavy, voluminous record, as to its justification, no doubt has been made.
Mr. RIVERS. Without objection.
The CHAIRMAN. I don't know how many pages it is going to cover, but I imagine it is very voluminous. And the facts are sufficient to warrant a drydock. How many drydocks, Mr. Rivers, have you at Charleston Navy Yard!
Mr. RIVERS. I have two small ones, that have been there since 1900. And the Navy has asked
The CHAIRMAN. Admiral, what is the size of the present drydock?
Admiral Ailes. It will be one of our cruiser docks, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there space in the Charleston Navy Yard, on the Cooper River, for these?
Admiral AILES. Yes, sir.
In the long-range plan that we have for this, the detailed development plan of the yard, there is a plan for putting it in there.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there a demand for a drydock of that type down in that section of the southeast part of the country?
Admiral AILES. Well we are making a study of the actual drydock situation.
The CHAIRMAN. How many drydocks have you below Norfolk?
The CHAIRMAN. That is right. There is no drydock out from Norfolk down to Roosevelt Roads in Puerto Rico.
Admiral AILES. That is right, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. And nothing but drydocks for destroyers.
Admiral Ailes. There are drydocks for destroyers. We can dock them
The CHAIRMAN. Now, outside of Charleston, where are the other drydocks for destroyers in the southeast?
Admiral Ailes. There are docks in Jacksonville, where we can dock destroyers.
The CHAIRMAN. One at Jacksonville.
The CHAIRMAN. Let me go ahead. I was just trying to make the case for
you. Then, from Corpus Christi to Norfolk, the committee can understand there is no drydock large enough to take care of the cruiser!
Admiral AILES. That is right, sir. The CHAIRMAN. There is no drydock large enough to take care of an airplane carrier? Admiral AILES. No, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Then, the drydocks to accommodate that type of ship-they would have to either go to Norfolk or Roosevelt Roads in Puerto Rico?
Admiral AILES. That is right, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. You have docks sufficient to take care of submarines and docks sufficient to take care of destroyers, but you do not have a dock to take care of that type of ship?
Admiral AILES. Of the cruiser ?
The CHAIRMAN. Then, if a ship is brought out of the mothballed fleet, where it is down in Florida, and if it were a sizable cruiser, it would have to go to Norfolk to be drydocked?
Admiral AILES. Norfolk or farther north.
Mr. Bates. They can put the Salem in mothballs there, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. I think that makes the case. I think we are on good ground.
Without objection, the amendment is written into the bill at this place.
Now, let's go on.
The CHAIRMAN. Now, I don't think the committee was warranted in authorizing $11,215,000 at the Naval seaplane facility, Harvey Point.
I think, from the study Mr. Kelleher and myself have made and others on this item, that we will be warranted in reducing that item to $7,041,000. And I am going to ask the committee to reverse its decision, because we are not warranted in making that appropriation, but only $7,041,000.
Mr. KILDAY. Which item is that?
The CHAIRMAN. I ask the committee to reconsider. Without objection, the committee reconsiders Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman, why would you cut this $4 million off of here? The CHAIRMAN. What?
Mr. PRICE. If the $7 million is warranted, why won't the full amount be warranted?
The CHAIRMAN. No. Because it is not warranted. We are warranted in doing what we are doing.
Mr. PRICE. I mean it is just for the sake of reducing the item, or is there some good reason?
The CHAIRMAN. No. It is so low in their funding, that $4,174,000 will not be funded for a great many years. I think the committee would not be warranted, from the information we have, in giving the full amount of $11,215,000, and I ask that we reconsider and reduce the item to $7,041,000. Without objectionAdmiral Ailes. May I speak to that, Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. No, sir. Mr. PRICE. Let's hear the Navy on that. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection it is so agreed to.
Mr. PRICE. Wait a minute. I may object. I would like to hear the Navy position on it.
The CHAIRMAN. Of course you can always find naval officers that are going to testify this and that.
Go ahead, Admiral.
The CHAIRMAN. We understand that. We know exactly what we are doing here.
If there is no objection on the part of the committee, we rescind our former
Captain SANGER. Mr. Chairman, that P6M is a year behind already, at that base.
The CHAIRMAN. We know all about that.
Now, the next item in here now is an amendment agreed to insert-
Mr. KELLEHER. Page 19, line 9. The new figure would be $17,666,000.
Mr. KILDAY. Wasn't that amendment adopted ?
Mr. KELLEHER. That was adopted. The installation was passed over, however,