[No. 461] TO AID THE NATIONAL DEFENSE BY FOSTERING SHIPBUILDING ON THE PACIFIC COAST IN ORDER TO MORE PERFECTLY PROVIDE THE NECESSARY SHORE SUPPORT FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PACIFIC FLEET BY ENCOURAGING SHIPBUILDING ON THE PACIFIC COAST (H. R. 9652). MR. WELCH NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, January 27, 1936. The CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The bill (H. R. 9652) to aid the national defense by fostering shipbuilding on the Pacific coast in order to more perfectly provide the necessary shore support for the maintenance and operation of the Pacific Fleet by encouraging shipbuilding on the Pacific coast was, on January 13, 1936, referred to the Navy Department by your committee with a request for comment and recommendation. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to allocate a certain percentage of naval shipbuilding to shipbuilders on the Pacific coast provided the bids of responsible Pacific-coast shipbuilders do not exceed those of the Atlantic coast by more than 6 percent of the bid of the Atlantic-coast shipbuilder. It has been the experience of the Navy Department since the World War that ships can be constructed fully as economically on the Pacific coast as they can be on the Atlantic coast, and that the transportation rates are so small in proportion to the contract prices that they may be neglected without prejudice to the west-coast shipyards. The estimated cost of transportation does not represent more than 1 percent of the total cost. The Navy Department therefore believes that a 6-percent differential in favor of Pacific-coast shipbuilders would be a discrimination against builders located elsewhere and that furthermore an increased cost to the Government of 6 percent for those ships allocated to the Pacific-coast shipyards would result. The bill (H. R. 9652) is not in accord with the financial program of the President. The Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill H. R. 9652. Sincerely yours, CLAUDE A. Swanson. (1955) O 23697-36-No. 461 FOR THE RELIEF OF CLYDE W. SNELL (H. R. 9683). NAVY DEPARTMENT, The CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The bill (H. R. 9683) for the relief of Clyde W. Snell was referred to the Navy Department by your committee with a request for comment and recommendation. The purpose of this bill is to consider Clyde W. Snell as having been honorably discharged from the United States Marine Corps as a private on October 5, 1917. The records of the Navy Department show that Clyde W. Snell enlisted as a private in the Marine Corps on April 16, 1917, for a period of 4 years, giving his date of birth as August 5, 1898. Private Snell's parents furnished evidence that he was born on August 5, 1900, and was therefore under 17 years of age when he enlisted without their knowledge, and they requested his discharge from the service. He was accordingly discharged on October 5, 1917, "as undesirable, having fraudulently enlisted by concealing fact of minority." Under the provisions of the act of January 19, 1929 (45 Stat. 1084; .S. C. 34:204), Private Snell is held and considered to have been honorably discharged from the Marine Corps on October 5, 1917. This bill, if enacted into law, would result in no cost to the Navy; however, it is probable that a charge under the Veterans' Administration would be involved now or in the future. As the proposed legislation is considered unnecessary for the reasons stated, the Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill H. R. 9683. If Private Snell will make request therefor, the Navy Department will grant to him a discharge certificate showing that he is held and considered to have been honorably discharged from the Marine Corps under the provisions of the above mentioned Act. Sincerely yours, CLAUDE S. SWANSON. 23697-36-No. 462 (1957) |