But you do have other items not classified? Captain CHEW. The housing and the amendments, sir. Captain CHEW. No, sir; the housing and the amendments. The general provisions are in a different title of the bill, sir. Senator STENNIS. What do you call them? Senator STENNIS. All right. Captain CHEW. This is not classified now, sir. Senator STENNIS. All right, proceed with the next item which you wish to present. Captain CHEW. We would like the amended authorization from Public Law 534 83d Congress which was in the fiscal year 1955 program to increase the authorization from $6,569,000 to $6,719,000 for advanced underseas weapon shops. That is an increased cost we did not anticipate. We would like to increase the authorization for turbojet engine test facilities at three locations-Memphis, Key West, and Cherry Point. These are previously authorized in 1957 under Public Law 968 and then we would like to withdraw Senator STENNIS. What is your added item there? What do you propose to put in the naval air station? Captain CHEW. Nothing at all, sir. We want to increase the authorization in one case from $511,000 to $664,000. In the other case it is from $273,000 to $330,000 and then we wish to withdraw completely the item of the turbojet engine test facilities at Key West because we have found a way of using a portable cell. That is a straight withdrawal. Senator STENNIS. How much was that? Captain CHEW. It is a total increase of $160,000. Captain CHEW. Well, actually we had it in for the amendment to the bill. It was an increase from $170,000 to $330,000, but we wish to withdraw the item completely. Senator STENNIS. All right. Captain CHEW. The next amendment would be at the Marine Corps Air Facility, New River, N. C., and that is an increase from $39,000 to $52,000 for a tactical air navigation facility and at the Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, Calif., replace the barracks heating at Camp Margarita, an increase from $1,469,000 to $1,496,000, sir. Senator STENNIS. Well why is that? Did you increase your operation there? Captain CHEW. I think Admiral Peltier can respond to that. Admiral PELTIER. Mr. Chairman, this was due to foundation trouble-unsatisfactory soil conditions that we didn't anticipate. Captain CHEW. The last one is an increase from $130,000 to $320,000 for a naval security group activity at Istanbul-the operations building, barracks with mess, for an increase from $130,000 to $320,000. Senator STENNIS. How will that be financed, with the regular dollar financing? Captain CHEW. Yes, sir. Senator STENNIS. All right, what is your next one? Captain CHEW. Actually, for your information that is a total increase, overall, of $690,000. Captain CHEW. The text is mily housing, sir, which is section 204 LMI VOLLE BUIT re de Bisraction si bu mits of family housing SPENNIS Suppose ve er i special hearing on that and let jer ti leter Tolle ase and I believe we can Admiral WILSON. We don't have any extensive experience in this, sir. Senator STENNIS. Anything else you have except the submarine? I think we better go back to that. Captain CHEW. Senator, you asked for pictures of the Great Lakes barracks and we have them available if you would like to see them. Senator STENNIS. Let's turn back into the classified area. Proceed.. [Deleted for security purposes.] Senator STENNIS. We have Navy housing yet. If the witnesses will come around, please. Senator STENNIS. All right, gentlemen of the Navy, on the matter of housing which seems to be the only major item left in the bill which has not been directly covered, as a start on that we have had a statement here from the Department of Defense. We have had a part of your statement, I think, Captain Chew. We also had questions that we submitted to you and you have those answers have you not? Captain CHEW. The answers to those questions can be submitted at this time for the record. Senator STENNIS. You may put them in now as part of your testi mony. (The document referred to follows:) 1. This committee has long been concerned about the family housing program, feeling that it is too costly and is programed without proper coordination with long-range defense plans and troop strengths. What sort of review was made by your office of housing units requested in this bill? Answer. The housing program in the bill has been developed in a careful and conservative manner. My staff works closely with the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and the bureaus and offices in reviewing family housing projects. This staff, in conjunction with responsible personnel of the foregoing organizations, has reviewed the plans for each activity, including the permanent, planned level of personnel; the number and quality of existing housing units; the possible effect of the construction of a Capehart project on any existing Government-controlled housing; and the extent to which private housing is available in the area at rents which service personnel can afford. This review, often at field level, has been timeconsuming, but I feel confident that the time has been well spent and the requirements for housing which are in the bill are conservative and realistic. In providing housing, our objective is to provide living quarters as nearly comparable as possible to those which the families would have if they were in civilian life. In achieving this objective, the following factors have received major consideration: (1) Selection of sites which will permit personnel to benefit from available community facilities; are suitable for residential development; and, if possible, are so located to facilitate disposition should the need arise. (2) Good design of housing in respect to utility, economy, and attractiveness. (3) Construction of units which are adequate in terms of size, particularly with respect to number of bedrooms needed by today's families. 2. How many units were originally requested by the various bureaus of the Navy as compared to the requested units in this bill? Answer. The number of housing units reviewed by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Material) was that submitted by the Chief of Naval Operations in the amount of 8,422. As a result of an intensive review of the program with the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, and after consultation and agreement with the Department of Defense, the program was finally approved by that Department in the amount of 4,986 units. Senator STENNIS. All right. Captain CHEW. The next is family housing, sir, which is section 204 and would authorize the construction of 100 units of family housing at Bermuda, utilizing commodity credit funds. Senator STENNIS. Suppose we set a special hearing on that and let these services be here and have their whole case and I believe we can cover almost as quickly with the three of them all here together as we can with just one at a time. Captain CHEW. Whatever you prefer, sir. Senator STENNIS. Does that suit you all right, Mr. Clerk? Mr. NEASE. Fine. Senator STENNIS. We can take up the whole housing matter then and review the policy question involved, so I wonder if we just can't hold that. Captain CHEW. Would you like to discuss the $172 million emergency authorization? Senator STENNIS. Yes. Captain CHEW. As you know, that is to take care of any unforeseen technological breakthroughs. Senator STENNIS. How do you calculate that figure, Captain, that $1712 million. Captain CHEW. That $172 million was a compromise figure between $10 million and $25 million, sir. Senator STENNIS. Well, you have just given an illustration of the use of that. Captain CHEW. Yes, sir; and as you know the House recommended a reduction to $5 million. Senator STENNIS. Well, I heard that mentioned. What did we approve in the bill last year, if you remember? Captain CHEW. $17.5 million. Senator STENNIS. That is what I thought it was. Captain CHEW. And this bill is the same, $171/2 million. Senator STENNIS. Anything special you want to say on that? Captain CHEW. No, sir; I might tell you for your information that so far we have used about $600,000 of that and we anticipate the need for this additional $4 million, so the total this year looks to be about $4 to $5 million of actual use of the authorizations. Senator STENNIS. $42 to $5 million? Captain CHEW. Yes, sir. We have already used $600,000 and anticipate the use of this additional $4 million. Senator STENNIS. Well, just give us your opinion here. You say this $172 million represents a compromise between $10 and $25 million? Captain CHEW. Yes, sir. I would hate to say, Senator Stennis. I can't anticipate. It is an emergency authorization. I really don't know, sir. Senator STENNIS. Who proposed the $10? Captain CHEW. I think the House proposed the $10 million and the Senate proposed the $25 million and the compromise was $172 million. Senator STENNIS. You are talking about last year? Captain CHEW. The same provision, sir. Senator STENNIS. The bill just follows last year? Admiral WILSON. We don't have any extensive experience in this, sir. Senator STENNIS. Anything else you have except the submarine? I think we better go back to that. Captain CHEW. Senator, you asked for pictures of the Great Lakes barracks and we have them available if you would like to see them. Senator STENNIS. Let's turn back into the classified area. Proceed.. [Deleted for security purposes.] Senator STENNIS. We have Navy housing yet. If the witnesses will come around, please. Senator STENNIS. All right, gentlemen of the Navy, on the matter of housing which seems to be the only major item left in the bill which has not been directly covered, as a start on that we have had a statement here from the Department of Defense. We have had a part of your statement, I think, Captain Chew. We also had questions that we submitted to you and you have those answers have you not? Captain CHEW. The answers to those questions can be submitted at this time for the record. Senator STENNIS. You may put them in now as part of mony. (The document referred to follows:) your testi 1. This committee has long been concerned about the family housing program, feeling that it is too costly and is programed without proper coordination with long-range defense plans and troop strengths. What sort of review was made by your office of housing units requested in this bill? Answer. The housing program in the bill has been developed in a careful and conservative manner. My staff works closely with the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and the bureaus and offices in reviewing family housing projects. This staff, in conjunction with responsible personnel of the foregoing organizations, has reviewed the plans for each activity, including the permanent, planned level of personnel; the number and quality of existing housing units; the possible effect of the construction of a Capehart project on any existing Government-controlled housing; and the extent to which private housing is available in the area at rents which service personnel can afford. This review, often at field level, has been timeconsuming, but I feel confident that the time has been well spent and the requirements for housing which are in the bill are conservative and realistic. In providing housing, our objective is to provide living quarters as nearly comparable as possible to those which the families would have if they were in civilian life. In achieving this objective, the following factors have received major consideration: (1) Selection of sites which will permit personnel to benefit from available community facilities; are suitable for residential development; and, if possible, are so located to facilitate disposition should the need arise. (2) Good design of housing in respect to utility, economy, and attractiveness. (3) Construction of units which are adequate in terms of size, particularly with respect to number of bedrooms needed by today's families. 2. How many units were originally requested by the various bureaus of the Navy as compared to the requested units in this bill? Answer. The number of housing units reviewed by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Material) was that submitted by the Chief of Naval Operations in the amount of 8,422. As a result of an intensive review of the program with the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, and after consultation and agreement with the Department of Defense, the program was finally approved by that Department in the amount of 4,986 units. |