Page images
PDF
EPUB

a telephone exchange. Present and future requirements to support the North American Defense Control Center indicate a requirement for greater than a maximum utilization of 70 percent line available usage factor. Existing facilities cannot be expanded due to adverse conditions prevalent in the crypto facility, which presently requires construction and relocation in order to meet minimum security switchroom. The switching facilities were predicated on a small load. The all-relay equipment installed at this installation has reached its capacity and cannot be expanded in present location. The existing facility will be retained to house administrative offices. No other existing facilities are available that could either be expanded or rehabilitated to satisfy the requirements. If this item is deferred, additional signal communications requirements of the North American Defense Control Center and the Joint Manual Direction Center now under construction will not be provided.

Senator STENNIS. All right, without objection.

FORT ORD, CALIF.

General SEEMAN. The next one is Fort Ord, page 282.

There are three items there, and there was a fourth added at the time of our House hearings, sir.

The first two are an access apron and a hangar with shops for their field maintenance aircraft equipment.

Senator STENNIS. For what aircraft now?

General SEEMAN. These are

Senator STENNIS. Small planes?

General SEEMAN. Small Army aircraft and helicopters that are integrated with the

Senator STENNIS. General, I thought we had fairly well completed that last year. We had many items for those projects of that kind.

General SEEMAN. We have done fairly well with the primary airfield facilities. However, as our aircraft increase in inventory, our maintenance load is building up both in the field maintenance and in the depot maintenance and fifth echelon maintenance, and we have only come into those as we really needed them.

Senator STENNIS. Your maintenance costs, by the way, on those little planes, would that be less than the Air Force, not as involved, or what would be the costs? It seems to me that the maintenance cost runs into huge money.

General SEEMAN. Well, for the less complicated equipment, of course, the unit costs are probably smaller, but there is no question about it that an airplane is more costly to maintain than an automobile or a vehicle because of the service that it is in.

Senator STENNIS. Let us have a short recess.

(Short recess.)

Senator STENNIS. All right. Are we ready to start again? Let us have quiet, please.

General, that brings us over to-well, is there anything further on Fort Ord?

General SEEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I feel I should highlight for you a fourth item, enlisted men's service club, brought up in the House. Senator STENNIS. Yes.

General SEEMAN. The enlisted men's club had burned down there last year, and in our emergency authorization request to replace it we took it up with the Department of Defense, and we approached the Appropriations Committees with a view to replacing it and providing a permanent building to the full size authorized.

That was deemed to be improper, and we are now formally before you-we have the approval of the House-to program the authorization for this enlisted men's service club at an estimated amount of $715,000.

Senator STENNIS. Where are you going to get the money, reprogram some money?

General SEEMAN. No, sir. This will be a new authorization and new appropriation complete for fiscal year 1961; and we mentioned this in the letter to Senator Russell, the chairman of the committee, on the 30th of March.

Senator STENNIS. All right.

General SEEMAN. The last item is for 500 family quarters (Capehart). This completes Fort Ord, sir.

Senator STENNIS. All right. The next item.

PRESIDIO OF MONTEREY, CALIF.

General SEEMAN. The next item is Presidio of Monterey where we have just one request, sir, for a student dormitory for 440 men at an estimated cost of $1,633,000.

This is a rather special building for the language students at the language school with somewhat more insulated and separated facilities to help them in their language studies.

They are now using frame-type buildings, and they use group study programs there and recordings and playbacks which

Senator STENNIS. How long have you had this language school there?

General SEEMAN. It has been there for several years; I believe it has been there since the last war.

Senator STENNIS. Does the Air Force have a language school, and does the Navy have a language school?

General SEEMAN. There is a language school here on the east coast, I believe, which all the services participate in. This is a joint school. They have taken students from all services, whether or not they exactly have those there now I am not sure. I heard recently that the Air Force had withdrawn some students there.

Senator STENNIS. Well, maybe the services will lead the country in being more proficient in foreign languages.

General SEEMAN. The problem here, sir

Senator STENNIS. This is foreign language, is it?

General SEEMAN. Yes, sir.

Senator STENNIS. They will teach English, too?

General SEEMAN. No, sir. So far as I know this is for foreign languages, and our problem is not the conventional languages like French, German, and Spanish; it is the many languages in the remote places of the world where there is just no comparable commercial teaching except in very small-scale facilities.

Senator STENNIS. Well, I would say the military leads us in many ways, and maybe in this field they will lead us, but I do not see why

we could not have a unified program and one setup and do it all at

once.

Senator CASE. Mr. Chairman, I agree with you. I think we ought to have a statement from the Department of Defense outlining for us what language schools are maintained by the several different sources, what courses are taught, whether or not there could be a consolidated language school here.

General SEEMAN. I cannot answer specifically to that. I do know that they reviewed it very thoroughly, and the Bureau of the Budget also. This has their approval.

Senator CASE. I assume there is some language taught by contract schools or by sending students to universities.

General SEEMAN. I believe there is existing authority, sir. I know there is one here in Washington, in Arlington Towers, which various services use. I believe it is under the authority of the Department

of State.

Senator CASE. Mr. Chairman I think you put your finger on something rather interesting. Let the Department give us an answer on this in a comprehensive manner.

Senator STENNIS. Give us a letter; Mr. Clerk, request it in writing, and send a copy of the letter to the State Department and ask them the same question as to what their viewpoint is, and we will compare the answers, and maybe we can get some information.

(The information referred to follows:)

During fiscal year 1959 the Department of Defense foreign language training program had a student input load of 3,269. Of this total number, 1,751 were Army personnel, 211 Navy personnel and 1,307 Air Force personnel. All of the 1,751 Army students were in attendance at the Army Language School, Presidio of Monterey, Calif. The Department of Defense maintains only one other language school, that being the Navy Language School at the Naval Intelligence Center, Anacostia. Four universities and the Foreign Service Institute participate in the Defense Department language program on a contract basis. These schools and the number of service students in attendance, and the specific languages taught follows:

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

The contract with the University of Indiana for teaching the Russian language to Air Force personnel became effective at the beginning of fiscal year 1960. This action was necessary due to the overload of students in the Russian language course at the Army Language School at Monterey, Calif.

FOUR COMMERCIAL INSTITUTIONS (BERLITZ, SANZ, LACAZE, VOX)-7 NAVY
PERSONNEL, 36 AIR FORCE, 43 TOTAL

[blocks in formation]

During fiscal year 1959 the Army Language School, Presidio of Monterey, Calif., taught foreign languages to Army, Navy, and Air Force personnel as indicated below:

[blocks in formation]

The Navy Language School, Naval Intelligence Center, Anacostia, taught foreign languages to 152 Navy personnel as indicated below:

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

The matter of control and direction of foreign language training in the Department of Defense has been under intensive study by the responsible elements of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the current program has been found satisfactory to the needs of the services.

Senator CASE. I noticed the other day, I was impressed by the fact that some people trained by the State Department in one language were assigned to a country where they did not use that language. For example, Chinese linguists were assigned to France or some other place, and we might profitably just see what the practice of the Defense Department is.

Senator STENNIS. We are not trying to sidetrack you here on the language, because I think both of us are strongly in favor of America more and more going into these foreign languages.

General SEEMAN. It is part of the problem of fitting the round pegs in round holes and the square pegs in square holes.

On the other hand, I believe that news story that you mentioned was with regard to Chinese, and there are probably only limited places where we can assign people with that facility.

Senator CASE. What I think the House Appropriations Committee went into was that, and that is what started them off, but they found several questions to be concerned about. There were several men trained in the Chinese language who did not wind up using that language.

General SEEMAN. As regards a man in the military service, we would make the best use of his language capability.

PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.

Senator STENNIS. What is your next one?

General SEEMAN. Page 291; Presidio of San Francisco.

Senator STENNIS. That is where we have been talking about the language schools?

General SEEMAN. That is Presidio of Monterey.

Presidio of San Francisco is in San Francisco where the 6th Army headquarters is, and they have a storm drainage problem there, as indicated on page 292.

Senator STENNIS. Where is Monterey; just south of San Francisco? General SEEMAN. It is down the coast some distance, 125 miles. Senator STENNIS. What are you asking for for the Presidio here? General SEEMAN. An addition to their storm drainage system at an estimated cost of $202,000.

They have a problem there, with increasing runoff of rainfall in the areas built up, and more roofs and streets, and they get more rapid runoff, and it is an area

Senator STENNIS. Well, I visited that delightful place once previously. It seems to me like you ought to make a shrine out of part of it, and convert it into a park or something of that kind. It is not adapted to a modern military installation, is it?

General SEEMAN. It is a headquarters area and control and command area very similar to New York City. Regardless of the living conditions in New York City, millions of people live and work there, and it is the nerve center of control and responsibility, and San Francisco is, in its area, much the same. To a certain extentSenator STENNIS. Well, that is a small item.

Next item.

WEST COAST RELAY AND TRANSMITTER STATION,

CALIFORNIA

General SEEMAN. The next item on page 294 is the West Coast Relay and Radio Transmitting Station, Sacramento, Calif.

This is a primary relay station of the Signal Corps, the Army Command and administrative network.

« PreviousContinue »