to their army area and they in turn have allocated it to the Army Corps, Reserve, and the corps to the localities within their areas. Now to get specifically to Nevada, we have under construction at present two centers, one at Las Vegas and one at Reno, and I think that that takes care of 100 percent of your troop program units in Nevada. Of course, I realize you're losing this one unit. I don't happen to have the complete figures as to what your loss as far as individual paid drill spaces are in Nevada, but I will be happy to supply it to you, sir, if you would like to have that. Senator CANNON. I think I have that information at hand, showing a total assigned strength in Nevada for the entire State under your reorganization of 396 people in two centers. Now we have pretty sizable State there, 87.7 percent of which is owned by the Federal Government. It is not consistent to me to see a State in that position assigned 396 spaces, and then you come in with a request for six construction projects, major construction projects in one State. I think we need some balance in this, and I am inclined to agree with Senator Stennis that in my opinion this is one of the most important programs that you have, but it is certainly not important from the standpoint of having the concentration in a few States and not keeping it well balanced throughout our entire country. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator STENNIS. Thank you, Senator Cannon. I know one problem we have had in Mississippi, Senator, was the relatively small available manpower, relatively small. There is no Reserve unit construction program in here for Mississippi, and I think that is one reason why. I don't know how you would score on your relative position for manpower. Senator CANNON. I am not personally concerned so much about the construction as I am about them taking out a unit where we have the manpower. Senator STENNIS. That is what I was concerned about in Mississippi, reducing the units there. You mentioned California not having any in the bill. There are five here in the State of California. Senator CANNON. Not in the bill, Mr. Chairman. Senator STENNIS. Yes, the Army Reserve construction program. Not in the National Guard I believe, but in the additional list that you looked at there awhile ago. The Army National Guard does not show anything for California at this time. Then are there any other questions on this? General Palladino, do you have anything more you wish to say? General PALLADINO. No, sir; I have made my statement. Senator STENNIS. General McGowan? General McGOWAN. No, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. General SEEMAN. No, sir. Senator STENNIS. Do you have any response, General Seeman, to what both members of the committee who have expressed themselves have had to say about the Reserve, as being a source of strength and public opinion support for the military program as a whole? General SEEMAN. Not in my character, sir. In the construction program; no, sir. It is a very important issue, of course. Involved in this is much bigger problems of which you are much more aware than I am. Just what kind of a mobilization we are going to have in the future and how much money we will lay on the line as opposed to what is going to be available in 6 months. Senator STENNIS. I wasn't talking about money so much but public opinion and public support for a military program. I think the Reserve units being close to the people, I think they generate a lot of support and interest. General SEEMAN. It is a very vital program. Senator STENNIS. All right, thank you very much. What phase do we come to next, now, generally of the Reserve program? All right, will you make room for the Navy now? Thank you very much for your testimony. All right, gentlemen of the Navy, those of you have not been sworn, will you you hold up your hands, please? Do you and each of you solemnly swear that your testimony before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Rear Admiral KEITH. I do. Captain FOSTER. I do. Captain CORRADI. I do. Capt. L. F. STEFFENHAGEN. I do. Commander McCoy. I do. Commander CRITTENDEN. I do. Major HEINEMANN. I do. Commander SWOPE. I do. Senator STENNIS. Proceed, Admiral. TESTIMONY OF REAR ADM. R. T. S. KEITH, ASSISTANT CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS (NAVAL RESERVE), U.S. NAVY Admiral KEITH. Mr. Chairman and gentleman, it is a pleasure to appear before you today, in support of the Naval Reserve Forces construction program as proposed in S. 1086. This program provides for the physical facilities required in the training of the Naval and Marine Corps Reserve. Through fiscal year 1958, projects for this program were provided under the general authorization procedures of the National Defense Facilities Act, Public Law 81-783. The fiscal year 1959 program as you know, was authorized on a line-item basis in Public Law 85-685. These two sources provided authorization available for the current fiscal year as follows: Carryover from fiscal year 1958 and prior__ Total available, fiscal year 1959- $11,500,000 11, 900, 000 23, 400, 000 The total obligation since the first authorization in 1954 under the referenced laws, is $70.3 million up to this fiscal year. An additional $4 million plus have been obligated this fiscal year with the expectation that $11 million more-a fiscal year total of $15 million-will be obligated by June 30, 1959, making a grand total of about $86 million by that date. This effort has gone to provide modern aviation operational facili ties to accommodate modern aircraft now operated by the Air Reserve squadrons, up-to-date training centers in limited numbers and, this year, a few berthing facilities for ships of the Selected Reserve. However, most of the facilities now in use were acquired from World War II surplus installations. As a result, an increasingly large amount of modernization or replacement will be required as time goes on. The overall program is composed of three budget activities. (a) The Naval Reserve aviation program, which also supports Marine Corps Reserve aviation, in fiscal year 1960 will be made up of 18 installations-5 of these are Naval Air Reserve training units situated on Regular air stations and the remainder are Reserve naval air stations. A continuing minimal replacement of deteriorated buildings, plus modernization of other buildings and operations facilities, will be required in the future. (b) The Naval Reserve surface program consists of 319 training centers and facilities, and 160 electronics facilities and stations. Modernization or replacement of most of these will ultimately be required. For example, 80 percent of the training centers are temporary wooden, quonset, or Butler-hut construction. In addition berthing facilities for Selected Reserve ships are needed in some locations. (c) The Marine Corps Reserve ground program consists of 228 training centers, 159 of which are combined with the Naval Reserve training centers mentioned above. Replacement or modernization of most of these will be required. We are requesting authorization for $8.3 million in fiscal year 1960 which will include: (a) Improvements and modernization at nine naval air stations. (b) Five ship's berthing facilities. (c) Replacement of six training centers. (d) Replacement of one electronics facility. (e) Rehabilitation of one electronics facility. Joint construction and utilization with other Reserve components is entered into wherever possible. The extent of joint utilization now is as follows: (a) All Naval Reserve aviation facilities are jointly used; (b) 75 percent of the Naval Reserve surface training centers facilities are jointly used; (c) 72 percent of Marine Corps Reserve training centers are jointly used. Electronics facilities stations are mostly small, leased spaces which are generally unsuited for joint use. However, they are so used wherever possible and the need exists-about 12 percent presently. Section 502(a) of S. 1086 proposes an amendment to Public Law 85-685 which will strike out $1,304,000 of the authorization contained therein. This is coincident to the planned disestablishment of Naval Air Stations, Denver, Colo., and Niagra Falls, N.Y.-a part of the readjustment of the Shore Establishment to make it commensurate with the size of the operating forces. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I have not mentioned the individual projects but am prepared, with the assist ance of the Marine Corps and Bureau witnesses, to provide any detailed information the committee desires. Senator STENNIS. All right, Admiral, thank you for a good state ment. Do you have someone with you to speak for the Marine Corps especially? Admiral KEITH. Yes, sir. Senator STENNIS. Will you call on them now if they wish to add to your statement and then we will have questions. Major HEINEMANN. We have nothing to add to the statement, sir. Senator STENNIS. Senator Cannon? Senator CANNON. No questions. Senator STENNIS. You don't wish us to consider each item individually, do you, Admiral? I don't think it is necessary myself. Admiral KEITH. I think the justification is in the books. NAVAL RESERVE (AVIATION) The items requested for Naval Air Station, Atlanta, are for the newly constructed naval air station at Dobbins Air Force Base in the Atlanta area and are need to eliminate deflciencies and to provide a complete and usable air support facility. NAVAL AIR STATION (DOBBINS AIR FORCE BASE), ATLANTA ($838,000) Addition to aircraft parking apron This requirement is generated by applying standard aircraft parking criteria to the currently programed base loading for the station. It is proposed to construct this parking apron contiguous to the present parking area which is immediately adjacent to the hangar and which was constructed at the same time as the hangar and which is inadequate to handle the proposed loading. Optical landing system This system is a safety of flight and training device which may be used either aboard a carrier deck or as a runway installation. The optical landing system is a device which was originally developed to replace the landing officer system for guiding planes aboard aircraft carriers. It gives directional and glide-angle guidance and enables a pilot to make a near perfect approach and to touch down at approximately the same (optimum) spot on either the carrier deck or runway on each landing. Experience has proven it to be invaluable as a safety device as well as a training facility for the landing of carrier planes. It has been shown that the use of the optical landing system has effected a marked decrease in the carrier landing accident rate (to approximately one-fifth of the previous rate). Cold storage and dry stores building This facility is to provide for galley, dry stores, and refrigerated storage space in accordance with current DOD criteria. This would be an addition to the messing and subsistence building which was designed to permit the addition of the proposed facility. Storage in the present galley is designed for day-to-day consumption only. The proposed addition_would eliminate many trips to the basic supply point for the area, Fort McPherson, which is 40 miles away and would result in a substantial saving in manpower, transportation equipment, and procurement costs. The Air Force facility is of temporary construction and does not currently meet Air Force requirements. Thus, joint use of that facility is infeasible. Covered storage shed This facility is needed to provide weather protection for the required amounts of spare parts, aircraft components, engines, wings, landing gear, tires, etc. It will provide as well for personnel equipment, barracks' supplies, and other general usage material which much have secure storage and have at least limited protection from the weather. There is no facility of this type existing at this new station. Navy exchange building This facility is to provide a small exchange activity to furnish only the most essential items and services needed on a frequent-use basis by naval personnel; such as cafeteria and snack bar for off-hours feeding of flight crews and other support personnel who much necessarily work through normal meal hours in order to obtain efficient utilization of the aircraft; barber shop, canteen furnishing personnel items such as toilet articles, etc.; a Navy uniform shop, a pickup station for laundry and drycleaning services provided by commercial firms. All other services will be provided at the Air Force PX location on the other side of the field, approximately 4 miles distance. Standby generator plant This item would provide a limited but flexible alternate powerplant to provide emergency service to certain vital and essential equipment, such as aviation gasoline farm, sump pumps, boilers, refrigeration units, fire-alarm system, and other operational equipment. Experience indicates that power outages when occurring usually last from a few hours to a few days. When occurring on a weekend the repair services are frequently more difficult to accomplish expeditiously, resulting in the loss of a major portion of an entire drill weekend effort. An alternate source of commercial power is not available and a second powerline from a different substation would cost more than the proposed item. NAVAL AIR STATION, DALLAS, TEX. ($348,000) Liquid oxygen This facility is needed to provide efficient and economical liquid oxygen service to the more modern jet aircraft coming into the program which utilize the new liquid oxygen system exclusively. This would also provide gaseous oxygen for the conventional facilities at no additional cost. Modern jet aircraft use only the more efficient liquid oxygen system and the current usage at this station is now well beyond the capability of the portable liquid oxygen equipment now being used. This type facility must be remotely located from normally inhabited areas for safety reasons and the conventional oxygen shop is therefore not suitable for conversion. The existing hardstand |