« PreviousContinue »
and mobilization requirements, located where required to fulfill apparent missions, present or future.
Though easy to state in simple terms, this is a tremendously complex problem. The result of the plan to date has been a phased program for deactivation, reduction or consolidation of depot activities throughout the continental United States. The plan is, of course, constantly under study and the results in each fiscal year are dependent upon the progress of the plan at that time. .
It is apparent that such a plan as this, though not directed by anyone outside the Army, has an immediate, but not specifically determinable impact on personnel, yet it is mandatory if we are to apply our resources to the best possible advantage.
In production-type military overhaul, we supplement our inhouse capability by contract facilities, and have since 1948. One factor considered in contracting out overhaul is the inability of the Army to perform the service because of a lack of facilities or a shortage of required skills. Weaponry changes are so rapid that often we find it uneconomical to invest the time and funds in training or facilities necessary for maintenance even though the weaponry is combat related. There are, in fact, decided advantages to contracting in some areas. As a general rule, contractors are used for overhaul when
(a) Workloads in support of mission-essential equipment exceed the established capacity of depot maintenance activities. (6) Workloads
in support of nonmission-essential equipment.
(c) Complex new mission-essential equipment is introduced into the inventory for which a depot maintenance capability has
not been achieved. As a result of these policies, approximately 14 percent, or $22 million, of the $155 million depot maintenance overhaul program was accomplished by private industry in fiscal year 1960. Of this amount $16.5 million was for aircraft maintenance; the remainder was spent for the overhaul of engineer construction, marine, and rail equipment, and missile secondary items. A small amount of electronic equipment also is programed for overhaul by contract in fiscal year 1961. I will discuss engineer construction, marine and rail equipment maintenance briefly. You will note that much of the equipment in these categories is essentially commercial-type and obtaining a source of contractual assistance is no problem.
The contracting policies for engineer equipment have enhanced our mobilization readiness position. During the past 13 years, contractual relationships have been established with over 250 firms, any one of which could be activated on short notice under emergency conditions. Due to low workloads, only 35 of these contractors are presently engaged in the overhaul of Army engineer equipment, supplementing the inhouse capability which we must retain.
Marine craft maintenance is accomplished by contract facilities with the exception of one inhouse facility maintained at Charleston, S.C. This one capability has been retained primarily as a mobilization base and accomplishes maintenance on mission-essential equipment in the Charleston area to insure an operating workload. Since commercial repair facilities are readily available, it is more economical to contract
marine repairs in the general locale of operations rather than to establish inhouse capabilities.
Depot maintenance of rail equipment also is accomplished by both contract and inhouse facilities. The one maintenance facility retained in house is at Ogden, Utah. It, as a primary mission, performs depot maintenance on locomotives and locomotive cranes in the western area; maintenance of this equipment in the East, where we have a reduced workload, is accomplished by contract. Commercial repair facilities for rolling stock-i.e., boxcars, tankers, et cetera—are readily available throughout the country and, with minor exceptions, this maintenance is accomplished by contract.
As you can see, we do not compromise on our efforts to have an inhouse capability for depot maintenance of mission-essential equipment. Another example of this is in the field of aircraft maintenance which represented the majority of the contract maintenance in fiscal year 1960. The Army started work at the aircraft depot maintenance facility at Corpus Christi, beginning July 1 of this year, picking up an inhouse capability which we have not had previously. We have prepared a separate presentation on aircraft maintenance which will be given, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, after my discussion.
What is the result of contracting? In personnel, although there is no way of identifying what specifically is reflected in these statistics, civilian employment in the Army decreased from 429,217 on June 30, 1957, to 390,046 on June 30, 1960. A significant portion of this reduction resulted from lower workloads and congressional and Presidential limitations on personnel spaces. To a much larger degree, the reduction has resulted from work and management improvements made by the Army by continuation of its own policies. It is doubtful that contracting out per se had any very great effect on civilian personnel employment.
In regard to comparative cost, we find it difficult to discuss comparisons between inhouse and contracting out. A comparison of out-ofpocket cost with a contract price is clear cut. The difficulty arises when elements of depreciation, interest, and taxes on funds previously spent for capital assets have to be taken into consideration. On a case-by-case basis, valid comparisons can be made, but these cannot be gathered together into overall statistics which compare cost in broad
Contracting out is a closely reviewed area, but the Army's method of management does not provide comprehensive data at our level related to personnel, specific funds, or to a specific fiscal year. Under our system, which we believe gives the maximum management at the minimum cost, available resources are distributed to subordinate commanders who also receive missions, priorities, and policies to insure that these resources are applied effectively toward meeting the overall Army requirement.
A commander, under this system, often can and does make the decision to go to contract. Before he does, however, he must weigh the decision against his mission, attempt to adjust available personnel, or try to obtain relief from the workload. He must measure the adverse impact upon the existing work force, decide the advantage to the Government, and consider the policies and criteria from higher authority under which the decision must be made.
Has contracting out affected our combat potential, not only now but in the future! I can find no specific instance of loss in our combat readiness position caused by contracting out. If we had unlimited resources, we would try to keep our inhouse capabilities at a higher level. This, I believe, would enhance our combat capability.
However, within limited resources, we believe that we have the proper balance for our present situation. Our decisions to date as to what we will do inhouse and what must be done by contract, whether as a result of external directives or internal improvement, have represented our very best judgment and experience. As the missions and resources change, we must constantly go through the process of determining the best mix. This we will do. (The annexes attached to the statement are as follows:)
Contracts for depot maintenance, fiscal year 1960–Missiles
Contracts for depot maintenance, fiscal year 1960-Engineer construction
Service contracted for
Amount of contract
$65, 020. 46 143, 444. 37
5, 151. 57 101, 521. 19
10, 197.39 36, 553. 47 40, 912.02 13, 042. 49 99, 481.36
43, 372. 12 204, 319.24
J. C. George Service Corp... Syracuse, N.Y. Snowplows..
and trucks. Graves Equipment..
Northampton, Mass. Graders.
Center Brunswick, Trailers, snow plows, and
trucks. J & P Implement Co.
Central Bridge, N.Y.. Engines and components,
snowplows, and cranes.
and trucks. Holt Bros
Tractors Shepherd Machine Co..
Los Angeles, Compressors, generators, trac-
tors, and sweepers.
El Paso, Texas.
Generators Industrial Division.
Tractors, compressors, and
cranes. General Machine Co.....
Snowplows, tractors, graders,
Sweepers, and trucks. United Aircraft, Sikorsky Divis- Stratford, Conn... Main gear box..
Damper assembly ---------
Burbank, Calif.. Pump fuel boost emergency---
Great Neck, N.Y. Gage fuel indicator..
Cooler assembly. United Aircraft Sikorsky Division. Stratford, Conn.. Clutch assembly, Vertol Aircraft Corp.
236, 250. 91 131, 196.55
184, 980. 82
427, 673. 78
33, 612. 78
4, 382.42 10, 065. 51 96, 956.76
Central transmission. Nasco Service Corp.
Starter assembly Central Air Repair.
Burbank, Calif. Generator, multiple. Aeronautical Instrument Labora- Middletown, Pa.. Instruments.
tories, Inc. Big State Industries, Inc.
Mineral Wells, Tex.. Tail rotor blade.
Main rotor blades.
8,090.21 16, 949.00 209, 750.00 111, 507. 86 25, 645. 08 15, 295.70 21,171.80
9,008. 24 26, 123. 34 Engine repair
Contracts for depot maintenance, fiscal year 1960—Engineer construction
Service contracted for
$31, 793. 24
62,053.00 284, 540.00
10, 650.00 10,600.00 30, 650.00
8,165.00 25,000.00 28, 875.00 703, 187.00 180, 245.00
70, 276.76 121, 218.85
Central Air Repair.
Pump assembly.. Flight Enterprise, Inc.
Hartford, Conn. Scamp and crash damage H-21. Aeronautical Instrument Labora- Middletown, Pa. Altimeter and indicator repair.
tory, Inc. SMS Instruments Co...
San Bernardino, Calif. Cooling fan.
Stockton, Calif. Crash damage. Central Air Repair, Inc.
Burbank, Calif. Shimmy damper De Havilland Aircraft of Canada. Ontario, Canada Crash damage VIA. Bell Helicopter Corp...
Fort Worth, Tex. Gear box tail. Aerodex, Inc.
Engine repair Canadian Pratt & Whitney. Montreal, Quebec,
ratory, Inc. Haag Tractor Co.
El Paso, Tex..
Tractors.. C. O. Johnson..
Trucks, snowplows, graders,
and cranes. Gregory Poole Equipment Co.. Raleigh, N.C.
Tractors, graders, and engines. Thompson Tractor Co...
Birmingham, Ala. Tractors and engines..
Trucks, snowplows, and con
crete mixers. Seiler Instrument & Manufactur- St. Louis, Mo.
Precision instruments. ing Co. Western Machinery Co...
Trucks and tractors. Berry Bros. Machine Co..
Tractors, sweer ers, and trucks.
Tractors, trailers, trucks, com
pressors, and cranes. J. A. Riggs Tractor Co.
Little Rock, Ark. Tractors, sweepers, and trucks. Tri State Equipment Co., Inc.- Memphis, Tenn. Tractors, compressors,
graders. Waukesha Sales & Service.. San Antonio, Tex. Trucks, tractors, generators,
and rollers. Atlantic Tug & Equipment Co... Syracuse, N.Y
Tractors Detroit Supply Co., Inc.-. Albany, N.Y.
42, 566. 02
10, 779. 84
65, 896. 99
5, 524. 80 33, 400. 48 44, 747.50 162, 457. 69
107, 143. 43
8, 218. 53
37, 981. 53
AIRCRAFT AND COMPONENTS
Closed circuit repair.
$13, 709. 23 1,061, 684. 86
42, 612. 76 169, 341.00 171, 887. 80
4, 176. 37 489, 600.00
Mineral Wells, Tex.
119, 612. 45
29, 700.00 123, 462.53 635, 034. 86 190, 450.00 105, 475.00 162, 334. 56 472, 597. 62 43, 580.00
3. 817. 62 119.856. 19 153, 425.04
Santa Monica, Calif..
83, 059. 16 118, 105.00
11, 503.00 263, 473.04 19, 292. 04 75, 094. 15 4, 385. 22
Contracts for depot maintenance, fiscal year 1960—Engineer construction
Service contracted for
Amount of contract
$999, 498. 29 1, 308, 874.00
435, 997. 47 125, 047.47 261, 528. 61
65, 263. 61 508, 114. 15 16, 724. 17
5, 519.95 29, 560. 44 3, 165. 82
6, 177. 43
717.83 92, 596. 60 81, 862. 12 34, 821.83
108, 667.68 237, 247. 53
196, 000.00 65, 016.00 56, 991. 95
5,000.00 187, 828. 39
United Aircraft, Sikorsky Divi. Stratford, Conn..-- Main rotor assembly-sion.
Main gear box...
Traverse City, Mich. Rotor blade assembly.
Shreveport, La. Propeller repair. Beach Aircraft Corp.
Burbank, Calif. Component repair.
Mineral Wells, Tex. - Shinimy damper assembly American Armature Corp.
Auxiliary servo unit assembly. Aerodex, Inc...
Central transmission. Janrick Aircraft Co...
Arlington, Wash. Transmission assembly, for
ward or aft. Bell Helicopter Corp..
Fort Worth, Tex. Main rotor blade. Lawrence Aviation Industries, Long Island City, Main rotor assemblyInc.
N.Y. Aerodex, Inc.
Rotor hub forward and aft American Armature.
Cylinder and piston assembly.
Stratford, Conn. Engine repair. Spartan Aircraft Corp.
do Bell Helicopter Corp
Fort Worth, Tex.. Scamp and crash damage. Parsons Corp..
Stockton, Calif. Rotor blade, main. Continental Motors Co.
Muskegon, Mich. Engine repair Spartan Aircraft Corp
Tulsa, Okla. Universal Aircraft Industries. Denver, Colo.
533, 032. 77 196, 800.00
31, 228. 29 131, 622.24 113, 852. 70 369, 698. 85 15, 702.00 98, 091.00 2, 211.00 1,050.00 3,066.00
Crash damage VIA. Hayes Aircraft Corp.
Scamp L-19. Universal Aircraft Industries. Denver, Colo.
Crash damage Accessories Unlimited.
Oklahoma City, Okla. Carburetor..
Bala-Cynwyd, Pa. Clocks.
Pump, carburetors, and piston
assemblies. Curtiss-Wright Corp..
Wood-Ridge, N.J. Engine repair. Central Air Repair
Fuel. Central Aviation & Marine Corp..
Accumulatory assembly H-23. Nasco Service Corp--
Voltage regulator. American Aeromotive Corp.
Burbank, Calif.. Pump assembly.
Valves Bell Helicopter Corp
Fort Worth, Tex. Crash damage. American Airmotive Corp.
Flight control servo unit. Standard Aircraft Equipment.---| Farmingdale, Long Carburetors.
Island, N.Y. A. Biederman, Inc...
Glendale, Calif. Component repair. Brady Industries, Inc.
Crash damage. Sperry Gyroscope Co.
Amplifiers Hayes Aircraft Corp.
Birmingham, Ala. L-23 repair. Air Overhaul, Inc.
Torrance, Calif. Strut and starter assembly.. Big State Industries, Inc.
Mineral Wells, Tex... Main transmission.. Airepair of Stockton, Inc.,
Strut assembly, H-19 and H-21. Curtiss-Wright Corp...
Wood-Ridge, N.J. Engine repair..
2, 873.00 32, 822.00
2, 324.00 2,052.00
8,881.00 129, 500.00 2, 997.00
100.00 4,055.00 5, 715.00 61, 855.00
4, 335.00 26, 298.00
3,975.00 19, 226.00
3, 040.00 29, 258.00
7,654.00 23, 925.00 94, 460.00 52, 350.00