Page images

Captain DIERMAN. I am Captain Dierman of the Office of the Navy Comptroller. The CHAIRMAN. Talk out so we can hear you. Captain DIERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I think there may be some misunderstanding about the two bills under discussion. The Navy position was originally presented on a bill which requested that the Secretary of the Navy designate certain funds from the proceeds of sale of ships to be placed in a separate account in the Treasury for the use of this commission. The present bill, 13265, o authorizes appropriations equal in amount to the proceeds of sales from the surplus disposal program of naval vessels. In other words, these funds Mr. SMART. Well, to bring this to a point, my suggested amendment the Navy does not propose. Captain DIERMAN. That is correct, sir. That was made with respect to the earlier bill. Mr. SMART. That is all. The CHAIRMAN. I couldn't catch the last statement. Mr. SMART. The Navy does not propose this amendment as I had suggested. The CHAIRMAN. Well, without objection the bill will be agreed to. With objection, the bill will be favorably reported. Mr. KILDAY. Report it without amendment. Mr. SMART. Without amendment. The CHAIRMAN. All right. The bill will be favorably reported. General Devereux, the author of the bill, will report the bill. Thank you very much. Now, Mr. Durham has a bill. Thank you, Mr. O'Neal. Mr. O'NEAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. A little order is suggested by Mr. Gavin. Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, there is one it. bill that was reFo by the committee, but we were asked by Congressman Moss to old it up. I would like for Mr. Kelleher—I think it has been adjusted now and should be reported. The CHAIRMAN. What bill? Mr. KELLEHER. This is a bill, copies of which the committee does not have before it, Mr. Chairman. It is H. R. 11122, and there are only a few copies left. I will pass those out, if you would like. The CHAIRMAN. Has the subcommittee acted on it, Mr. Durham? Mr. DURHAM. Yes, we acted on it favorably, and Congressman Moss asked us to hold it up and not report it to the full committee until he could get some information that he wanted to get about that. The CHAIRMAN. Well, let's see: To provide for the conveyance of certain real property of the United States, comprising a part of Beale Air Force Base, California, to the South Sutter Water District, East Nicolaus, California. Mr. KELLEHER. Most of it is description, Mr. Chairman. Actually, what the bill would do would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to convey 1,936 acres to the South Sutter Water District—this land is a part of Beale Air Force Base—for the construction of a dam and reservoir. Fair market value would be paid for the property.

It would also permit the water district to remove gravel from another 598 acres. The CHAIRMAN. Do we sell the gravel or give it to them? l Mr. KELLEHER. We give them the gravel, but they pay for the 8. In Ol. The Bureau of the Budget is opposed to the bill. The CHAIRMAN. What? Mr. KELLEHER. The Bureau of the Budget is opposed to the bill. Mr. KILDAY. How about the Air Force? Mr. KELLEHER. The Air Force has no objection if it is amended in certain minor respects. Mr. DURHAM. They have no use for it. As I understand the report, there is a question in my mind of getting some of this land back The CHAIRMAN. In view of the fact that the Budget is opposed to it, let's don't get bogged down with too much controversy, as it is the end of the session. I suggest we hold it for the time being for further study. s Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, this is quite important to a large community out there. The CHAIRMAN. I know water is very important to California. But 1,900 acres is very important to the Government. Mr. DURHAM. We have too much now, and we ought to sell it, if we can get the proper price for it. The CHAIRMAN. I think the thing to do, in view of the facts and circumstances on it, is to let it lie for the time being. Mr. Rivers, do you have any report from your subcommittee? Mr. RIVERs. Mr. Chairman The CHAIRMAN. Now, let all the members be here. We have other business to attend to. Mr. RivKRs. We have two remaining projects that ought to be brought to the attention of the committee. One of them is the Nike-Hercules site for the Dallas-Fort Worth 8 tea. We had a lengthy hearing on this installation. It requires the acquisition of 121 acres of land. We went into the overall subject. To start with, the committee had no objection to the construction of this installation in the Dallas area. But in the course of our hearing we developed that the continental air defense setup has no program for defending certain sections of the United States. We have a vast area from Norfolk, Va., to and including New Orleans, La., which are completely exposed. There is Wilmington, N. C., Charleston, S. C., Jacksonville, Fla., Miami, Fla., Atlanta, Ga., where they make the Hercules—the Consolidated air plant, the Savannah River H-bomb plant, New Orleans, La., Mobile, Ala., and all of these areas are not within the program for the defense. Yet they jump over all this area and go into the Dallas-Fort Worth area, which they say is a No. 1 target. Now, the Nike-Hercules is to knock down conventional aircraft. While we don't object to defending the Dallas-Fort Worth area, We call to the committee's attention that you have a vast segment of the United States exposed. The Navy has no picket ship offshore. The Army has no plans for Nike installations. And the only thing we

have-wait a minute. The only thing we have are a few ADC planes strewn up and down the coast.

As I say, we have no objection to the project, but we want to bring to the attention of the committee that a great segment of this country is exposed, with no plans to protect it. Yet they jump way out into the prairie country to defend something else. We give it to you for your attention. We have no objection to it.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Rivers.
Mr. Gavin. What was your description?
The CHAIRMAN. One minute.
What is the number of the project?
Mr. RIVERS. The number of the project is Army
Mr. KELLEHER. 296.
Mr. RIVERS. What is it?
Mr. KELLEHER. 296, sir.
Mr. RIVERS. 296.
Mr. KELLEHER. Army project 296.
Mr. RIVERS. As I say, we have no objection to it.
Mr. Gavin. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. RIVERS. Yes.

Mr. Gavin. What was your description of the country? Did you say prairie country?

Mr. Bates. I suggest we bypass that portion of the discussion in open session.

The CHAIRMAN. What did you say?

Mr. Bates. I suggest we bypass that portion of the discussion in open session.

The CHAIRMAN. I think he said he had no objection to it.
Mr. RIVERS. I don't bave any particular objection.

Mr. HARDY. Mr. Chairman, there are some aspects of this matter that make it very doubtful in my mind that we ought to do it.

I think the request for this installation is in direct conflict with other testimony that has been made to the Real Estate Subcommittes on other matters. And because of the conflict, I think it is of a nature that we can't very well discuss in open session. But there is considerable doubt in my mind that there is any more justification--that there is any justification in this, unless we rule out previous conflicting testimony.

Mr. RIVERS. I want to say this
The CHAIRMAN. I want to make this statement-

Mr. Rivers. Mr. Chairman, I want to say this. You can approve this if you please--and we have no objection to the Fort Worth-Dallas area—but there is no plan extant to give certain sections of this country protection, and you are skipping over them and jumping way down some other place to do it.

If you want to do that, it is your business. But our committee couldn't consistently assume such a position.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to say, members of the committee, that I have given study and consideration to this for some time. I think the facts and circumstances warrant it from the military standpoint, and so do the people who are supporting it. And the defense of the country is involved in their decision.

Mr. RIVERS. The person whom they sent to our committee to defend this project couldn't defend it.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that a thorough study should be made of all sections of the country Mr. Rivers. That is right. The CHAIRMAN. To see if they are adequately defended. I think that is going on, and I think the Department has recommended to the committee where in their judgment they think this kind of a military installation should be located. I think the committee is fully warranted in acting favorably upon this matter. Mr. HARDY. Mr. Chairman Mr. GAVIN. Would the gentleman yield? The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir. Mr. GAv IN. In view of the fact that the gentleman has outlined the fact that there has been no comprehensive study of the entire overall picture as far as the Nation is conerned, of which is the most important projects to proceed with, before we just promiscuously start to allocate to various areas what they think should be the protection necessary, we should wait until such a time as we receive this report and then make the allocation according to the importance of the particular protection that is needed. Mr. Rivers. I will say that most of the members of our committee—and we spent a lot of time. We spent at least 5 hours one afternoon on this project. Mr. Cunningham was there, Mr. Bates was there, Mr. Bray was there, Mr. Hardy was there—the full membership was present. The CHAIRMAN. I think Mr. Rivers. Wait. Let me say this. I think this committee should be advised of these things. And I would urge you, most respectfully and urgently, to direct some kind of a study to be made. Because they are not doing it. Mr. GAviN. Then how can they come in here and report this particular project, when there may be— The CHAIRMAN. Let me say this Mr. Rivers. We have the Savannah River plant down there at Augusta, where they are making H-material. Not a thing but an ADC unit to intercept them as they pass over Charleston, S. C., 100 miles away. There is your big Hunter Air Force Base in Savannah, Ga. The only thing they have is a few planes to protect that. There is Miami, Fla. There is a big Air Force base at Jacksonville,

8. * is Atlanta, Ga., where they make the 130—the Consolidated ant. All these things are exposed, and they jump over here to some other place. I can’t honestly make such a recommendation, and I will not. Mr. HARDY. Mr. Chairman, I can't honestly vote for this. The CHAIRMAN. I think this, of course * Rivers. You can do what you please. That is your responsibility. The CHAIRMAN. That is right, exactly. I think the committee is clearly warranted in doing it. The Department has said that the security of the country requires the installation. Mr. GAviN. Why doesn't—

The CHAIRMAN. Now, wait one minute, Mr. Gavin. And it does not preclude installations being built in other sections. I don't think we should pork-barrel these kind of installations. Mr. HARDY. Well now The CHAIRMAN. It should be built now— Mr. Rivers. Wait, now. The CHAIRMAN. Let me make my statement. Then I will yield to everybody. I don't think we should pork-barrel these installations. They should be built entirely upon the military justification. Now, the Department has said this is needed in this area. Now, we are trying to take the position that because they are not built in other sections, we are not proposing to build this one. (Chorus of “Mr. Chairman.”) The CHAIRMAN. Now, that is not good, sound ground to be on. Mr. Rivers. Mr. Chairman, let me say this. The only area where I know we got any protection against manned aircraft is at Charleston, S. C., where we got an ADC unit. We got it all right, so you can forget about us. Mr. GAvi N. Would the gentleman yield? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. GAviN. I don't think that that last statement, Mr. Chairman, is the way the committee feels about it, because they are not built in other areas. We are only going to spend so much money. They report back that there is some question as to whether or not this particular installation should be approved. Put it that way. Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I think this should be approved without further discussion. Mr. GAviN. I have not yielded. The CHAIRMAN. Order. Go ahead, Mr. Gavin. Mr. GAvi N. Therefore, I would like to hear from the Department of Defense. Why doesn't the Department of Defense come in here? In an important recommendation of this kind, why shouldn't we hear from them as to what their thinking is? Why I am concerned is the fact that there are many places in this Nation of ours that should be protected likewise. And the question is whether or not we are promiscuously taking this spot and that spot or whether or not we are going to proceed in a regular manner and come in with a complete overall report and take the most important one first, or are we going to jump from here to three and everywhere? Mr. Riv FRs. Mr. Chairman, I would say this Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I think we should approve this without further discussion or go— The CHAIRMAN. I didn't hear you. Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I think we should approve this without further discussion or go into executive session. The CHAIRMAN. That is right, I agree with you thoroughly. Mr. BATEs. Mr. Chairman The CHAIRMAN. Wait 1 minute, Mr. Kilday. Let's get to the members of the committee. Mr. KILDAY. All right. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Bates. Mr. BATEs. Mr. Chairman, I am constrained to go along with the chairman's statement with reference to approving this particular

« PreviousContinue »