[MILITARY, NAVAL, AND AIR FORCE INSTALLATIONS]

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 22
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 26, 2006
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: June 27, 1955
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
1955 ,-- 'a--7 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
Section 5 provides that if the Com-
missioners obtain a bond for a notary
public whose notarial duties are confined
solely to District of Columbia business,
then the bond obtained by the Commis-
sioners shall be in lieu of that required
by law.
The bill was ordered to be read a third
time, was read the third time, and passed,
and a motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
Mr. McMILLAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Committee
on the District of Columbia may have
until 12 o'clock tonight to file the con-
ference report on the judges' salary bill.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from South
Carolina?
There was no objection.
The conference report and statement
are as follows:
CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. No. 920)
The committee of conference on the dis-
agreeing votes of the two Houses on the
amendment of the House to the bill (S. 727)
to adjust the salaries of the judges of the
Municipal Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia, the Municipal Court for the
District of Columbia, the Juvenile Court of
the District of Columbia, and the District
3f Columbia Tax Court, having met, after
lull and free conference, have agreed to rec-
,ommend and do recommend to their respec-
tive Houses as follows:
That the Senate recede from its disagree-
ment to the amendment of the House to
the text of the bill and agree to the same
with an amendment as follows:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be in-
serted by the House amendment insert the
following: "That the fourth sentence of the
sixth paragraph of section 6 of the Act en-
titled 'An Act to consolidate the Police Court
of the District of Columbia and the Munici.
pal Court of the District of Columbia, to be
known as "The Municipal Court for the Dis-
trict of Columbia", to create "The Municipal
Court of Appeals for the District of Colum-
bia", and for other purposes', approved April
1, 1942, as amended (D. C. Code, sec. 11-711),
is amended by striking out '$14,500' and in-
serting in lieu thereof '$19,000', and by strik-
ing out '$14,000' and inserting in lieu thereof
$18,500'.
"SEC. 2. The fourth sentence of section 2
of such Act of April 1, 1942, as amended
(D. C. Code, sec. 11-753). Is amended by
striking out '$13,500' and inserting in lieu
thereof '$18,000', and by striking out '$13,-
000' and inserting in lieu thereof '$17,500'.
"SEC.3. The first sentence of the second
paragraph of section 2 of title IX of the
District of Columbia Revenue Act of 1937,
as amended (D. C. Code, sec. 47-2402), is
amended by striking out '$13,000' and in-
serting in lieu thereof '$17,500'.
"SEC.4. The last sentence of section 19 of
the Juvenile Court Act of the District of Co-
lumbia. (D. C. Code, sec. 11-920) is amended
to read as follows: 'The salary of the judge
shall be $17,600 per annum.' "
And the House agree to the same.
That the Senate recede from its disagree.
ment to the amendment of the House to the
title of the bill and agree to the same.
JOHN L. MCMILLAN,
OREN HARRIS,
BID SIMPSON,
Jos. P. O'HARA,
Managers on the Part of the House.
WAYNE MORSE,
'ALAN BIBLE, =
ROMAN L. HRVSICA,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
STATEMENT
The managers on the part of the House
at the conference on the disagreeing votes
of the two Houses on the amendments of
the House to the bill (S. 727) to adjust the
salaries of the judges of the Municipal Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia,
the Municipal Court for the District of
Columbia, the Juvenile Court of the District
of Columbia, and the District of Columbia
Tax Court, submit the following statement
in explanation of the effect of the action
agreed upon by the conferees and recom-
mended in the accompanying conference
report:
The first section of the Senate bill in-
creased the salary of the chief judge of the
Municipal Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia from $14,500 to $20,000 per an-
num, and the salaries of the judges of such
court from $14,000 per annum to $19,500 per
annum. The corresponding section of the
House amendment provided an increase to
$17,500 for the chief judge and to $17,000
for the judges of such court. The confer-
ence agreement fixes the salary of the chief
judge to be $19,000 and the salaries of the
judges to be $18,500.
Section 2 of the Senate bill increased the
salary of the chief judge of the Municipal
Court for the District of Columbia from
$13,500 per annum to $19,000 per annum, and
the salaries of the judges of the Municipal
Court from $13,000 per annum to $18,500 per
annum. The corresponding section of the
House amendment provided an increase to
$16,500 for the chief judge and to $16,000 for
the judges of such, court. The conference
agreement fixes the salary of?the chief judge
of such court to be $18,000 per annum and
the salaries of the judges to be $17,500.
Section 3 of the Senate bill (which corre-
sponds to section 4 of the House amendment
and the conference substitute) established
the salary of the judge of the Juvenile Court
of the District of Columbia at $18,500 per
annum. Under existing law the salary of
such judge is fixed under the Classification
Act of 1949, and is at present $11,800 per
annum. The House amendment provided
that the salary of the judge of the Juvenile
Court should be $14,800. The conference
agreement fixes the salary of such judge to be
$17,500.
Section 4 of the Senate bill (Which, corre-
sponds to section 3 of the House amendment
and the conference substitute) increased the
salary of the judge of the District of Colum-
bia Tax Court from $13,000 per annum to
$18,500 per annum. The House amendment
increased the salary of such judge to $16,000.
The conference agreement fixes the salary of
such judge to be $17,500.
JOHN L. MCMILLAN,
OREN HARRIS,
SID SIMPSON.
Jos. P. O'HARA,
Managers on the Part of the House.
7921
and for other purposes. After general debate,
which shall be confined to the bill, and shall
continue not to exceed 3 hours, to be equally
divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee
on Armed Services, the bill shall be read for
amendment under the 5-minute rule. At the
conclusion of the consideration of the bill
for amendment, the Committee shall rise and
report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted, and
the previous question shall be considered as
ordered on the bill and amendments thereto
to final passage without intervening motion
except one motion to recommit.
Mr. COLMER. I yield 30 minutes to
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. ALLEN]
and pending that I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this is an open rule as
the reading would indicate providing for
3 hours of general debate and then the
reading of the bill in Committee of the
Whole under the 5-minute rule for
amendment.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important
piece of legislation. It is very extensive
in its scope. I wonder at times whether
we really appreciate the full significance
of these tremendous authorizations and
appropriations. This one bill authorizes
the expenditure of more money than pos-
sibly the cost of running this entire Gov-
ernment during the first 25 years of its
existence.
The bill is divided into five titles and
it proposes to provide construction and
other related authority for the military
departments within and outside the
United States and for the Central Intel-
ligence Agency.
Mr. Speaker, the total authorization in
this bill is for the sum of $2,368,998,900.
Breaking this figure down, Mr.
Speaker, the Army would be given a to-
tal authorization of $551,105,000. This
would be further broken down so that
$238,778,000 would be allotted for use
inside continental United States. The
sum of $78,334,000 would be authorized
for outside the United States, while
$223,993,000 would be authorized for-
classified use by the Army and $10 mil-
lion would be authorized for emergencies.
The authorization for the Navy in this
bill would be $596,140,900, of which
$331,607,200 is proposed to be spent in
continental United States while $107,-
191,300 is to be spent outside the coun-
try. The classified allocation for the
Navy is $151,342,400 while the sum of
$6 million is proposed to be authorized
for emergency use by the Navy.
The Air Force has received the largest
MILITARY, NAVAL, AND AIR FORCE authorization, for its total in H. R. 6829
Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, by direc-
tion of the Committee on Rules, I call up
the resolution (H. Res. 286) providing for
the consideration of H. R. 6829, a bill to
authorize certain construction at mili-
tary, naval, and Air Force installations,
and for other purposes, and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as fol-
lows:
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this
resolution it shall be in order to move that
the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the
Union for the consideration of the bill (H. R.
6829) to authorize certain construction at
military, naval, and Air Force installations,
proposed that $709,480,000 be allocated
for expenditure within continental
United States while $450,973,000 would
be spent outside of continental United
States, and finally $5 million would be
set aside for emergency use.
Title IV of the bill would provide the
sum of $300,000 to be allocated, if au-
thorized, for the use of the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, while title V
proposes to authorize the sum of $56
million for the Central Intelligence
Agency. This all makes the grand total
of $2,368,998,900.
I think it is interesting to note, Mr.
Speaker, that the report indicates that
the Army authorization this year, if
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
7922 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
June 27
passed, would be more than twice the been done for the Chairman, Joint this House, a bill that would authorize
authorization of $236,060,000 which was Chiefs of Staff. a joint committee on the budget, made
granted for fiscal year 1955. Mr. Speaker, authority is granted in up of members of,the Committee on Ap-
There are several Interesting points this bill for the acquisition of large areas propriations of the House and the Sen-
which the membership of the House may of lands which I think should be called ate, with provision for an adequate staff,
wish to be especially cognizant of in title to the attention of the House member- a staff that is responsible to that joint
II; that is, the section dealing with the ship. Under the authorization contained committee and to the separate Commit-
Navy authorization. First of all the bill in this bill, if passed the Army could ac- tees on Appropriation in the two Houses,
proposes to authorize the development of quire some 55,814 acres of land within and responsible to them alone. The
two new installations, which, according the United States at a cost of $7,773,000, Senate has passed such a bill in the
to the report, are needed in order to pro- while in Okinawa some 52,088 acres may last three Congresses, the McClellan bill.
vide advanced training for Naval and be acquired at a cost of $30,500,000. We have tried to pass a similar bill in
Marine Corps aircraft pilots. One of the The Navy would be authorized to ac- the House, H. R. 34, a bill which I have
new installations would be in southern quire some 54,000 acres-fee-and some the honor of sponsoring. We failed to
Louisiana and the other would be in 138,000 acres-easement-at a total cost consider that bill in a previous Congress
southern Texas. of $33,444,000. by 16 votes, because of the opposition
H. R. 6829 proposes to authorize the The Air Force under the provisions of that was urged upon the floor of this
relocation of the aviation training facili- the bill, as reported from the Commit- House. The chief opposition that was
ties at the Naval Academy to another tee on Armed Services, would authorize made to that bill in the House was that
site near Annapolis since the present site the acquisition of some 16,800 acres- there was some apprehension that if we
is considered inadequate. fee- and 23,000 acres-easement-at a passed that bill, then the other body
Mr. Speaker, the report indicates that cost of $9,900,000 while mineral rights would control the appropriations. Un-
a program of aviation flight clearance is would be acquired on 72,000 acres at der the provisions of the House bill which
proposed in this bill, which is necessi- an estimated cost of $332,000, and finally I am sponsoring, the House is given ad-
tated by the development of heavier and mineral rights will be extinguished on ditional proportionate representation on
faster jet planes. These planes need an about 2??z million acres in Alaska at a that committee. In fact, it Is given 9
extremely wide turning area in order to cost of $50,000. Members from the House compared with
simulate the conditions under which Mr. Speaker, the rescissions in this 7 from the other body.
they must land on carriers at sea. bill amount to $1,300 million and if the Under the provisions of the House bill
The Air Force authorization would in- bill Is enacted into law some $2,368,998,- the chairmanship of that joint commit-
clude moneys to be spent on the con- 900 of Federal money will be spent. tee rests solely and permanently in the
structon of facilities of 255 Important Mr. Speaker, this is a most important House and does not even alternate.
bases, of which 151 would be in the area bill; we are talking here today about Therefore, asone Member of the House,
of continental United States and 104 vast sums of money, which, if authorized just a humble Member of the House
outside of continental United States. and appropriated, must be raised some- I am not willing to concede such infe-
According to the report on the bill, Mr. how. I am not In a position to say, riority complex; with 7 Members of thi.
Speaker, the authorization for the Air Mr. Speaker, that we do not need these other body and 9 Members of this bode'
Force is In line with the effort of the expenditures, and neither am I in a and the chairmanship In this body that
Air Force to build a 137-wing Air Force. position to say we do need to make these the other body would run away with
The bill includes the authorization for expenditures. Therein lies the whole the committee. Some people say they
two new Air Defense Command bases, trouble, that we, the Members of the have such an apprehension. I cannot
one of which would be at Fort Myers, Congress, the representatives of the tax- see it.
Fla., and the other to be some place near payers, the people who must put up Frankly, Mr. Speaker, I do not know
Milwaukee, Wis. The bill also proposes the money in the final analysis, are de- whether this is the answer, but I do know
facilities for five new locations in the pendent upon our military authorities, that we need some independent agency
United States Air Force in Europe. upon our Armed Services, and Appro- that is responsible to the Congress and
Mr. Speaker, H_ R. 6829 proposes the priations Committees of the House and the Congress alone. What happens in
addition of a new Installation for the Senate, and we are Incapable of going these matters? And again I disclaim
Army at the West Coast Ammunition into these matters in detail, and deter- any idea of reflecting upon any agency,
Terminal in California; the addition of mining whether they are justifiable or group, or any Member of Congress, but
3 new installations for the Navy and 2 not. Frankly, I think this is one of the here is what happens. The so-called big
new installations for the Air Force. The weaknesses of our system of operating brass-and I merely refer to them that
two new installations for the Air Force in the Congress. I wish there were some way as a designation that is generally
I have mentioned above, but the new way we could have a breakdown of these accepted-figure these things out; they
Navy installations would be at Port things and a justification for them with- send them to the President, and the
Isabel, Tex., New Iberia, La., and at out relying entirely upon the people who President's Budget Bureau goes over
Annapolis. Md. propose them and who say they are them: then the President following the
The Committee on Armed Services necessary. recommendation of his Budget Bureau
added three new authorizations which In that connection-and I want to say sends them down to the Congress. Bear
were not included in the original pro- this is no reflection upon the distin- you in mind that the Pentagon, the so-
posal from the Department of Defense guished gentleman from Georgia [Mr. called big brass, has millions and mil-
and these are first, $8 million for an VnNsoN ] the very able chairman of this lions and millions of dollars, and hun-
Army hospital at Camp Jackson, S. C.; committee, or upon the individual men- dreds and hundreds of experts, with their
$16,900,000 for the Naval Air Facility bers of that committee. As a matter of point of view, to justify their recom-
near Annapolis; and $7,500,000 for an fact, I think they have done a splendid mendations. Their requests come up
addition to Bancroft Hall at the Naval job in housekeeping, In spelling out, so here to the appropriate committee of the
Academy and for fill to provide land that those who are sufficiently interested Congress, and that committee is largely
area an authorization of $3,785,000 is can look at their hearings, their reports at the mercy of the so-called big brass in
given. and the bill and see just what is author- the final analysis; and then when the
Title IV, Mr. Speaker, specifically ized. There should be some other ma- matter gets on the floor we are all at
would authorize the construction or re- chinery, not only in this type of legisla- the mercy of these experts that have been
habilitation of five units of housing, a tion but In all legislation that is brought selected by the people who are inter-
communication facility, and some other to this floor whereby some agency of the ested-just as I am today.
items for the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Congress, set up by the Congress and I am going to vote for this bill, because
Staff, and certain commissioned officers responsible to the Congress alone, could in the dark I know not what else to do.
and enlisted personnel attached to his give us the justification for these tre- But If this Congress were armed with a
staff. mendous expenditures; could give us groups of experts-and you can get
The report points out that each of the both sides of the picture. them-who came in here and said to the
Chiefs of Staff is provided with appro- Such a bill has passed the Senate. Congress as employees of the Congress:
priate quarters but that this has never Such a bill Is pending In committee In "This item should be approved;" or "This
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63TOO245R000100120005-2
1955 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
item should go out," I would feel a lot
better about it.
I come back to my oft repeated theory:
The Kremlin wants neither war nor
peace; it wants to call all the signals.
When Mr. Molotov smiles, the free world
si-aile:s; when Mr. Molotov frowns, we get
scared. They call the signals; we run
the defensive plays. They want neither
war nor peace; but they want to require
us to spend ourselves into bankruptcy,
and we are doing a pretty good job. I
again call your attention to Lenin's for-
raula, "The way to defeat the United
States is to make it spend itself into
bankruptcy." We just got through a mo-
ment ago extending the debt limit, again
increasing the borrowing power, again
increasing the national debt that our
grandchildren and great-grandchildren
will be called upon to pay if this glorious
Republic of ours lasts that long.
I have no pride of authorship in H. R.
34. I just want to call it again to the
attention of the leadership of the House
on both sides of the aisle, I want to call it
to the attention of the Appropriations
Committee, so vitally concerned. I hope
that we can give further consideration to
at least attempting through this method
or some other method, if somebody will
come up with a better one, to give this
Congress the tools with which to work.
That House bill is nesting up there in
the Committee on Rules, my committee.
I have not made an attempt to have it
reported because I have not found any
evidence of a change of sentiment among
those who defeated it on the previous oc-
casion, but I give it to you at this time
for your careful consideration, for your
prayerful consideration, if you please,
because if this Republic is to survive It
is first going to have to have a stable
economy and a stable fiscal policy.
Mr. VURSELL. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. COLMER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Illinois.
Mr. VURSELL. I want to commend
and congratulate the gentleman for the
splendid remarks he has just made.
Like him, I believe we should have ex-
perts protecting the interests of the Gov-
ernment. when the justifiers come before
the Appropriations Committee to testify.
I think it is high time that all of the-
Members of this Congress realize that
we have been fed the doctrine of fear,
that we are being promoted into a bank-
rupt country by listening too much to
the Communist propaganda.
The important thing the gentleman
has said, in my judgment, is that we
ought to have experts to bring light to
the problems that confront us and we
ought to realize that we are loading the
coming generations with an insufferable
debt they will have to pay if, as the gen-
tleman wisely said, this glorious Republic
is not thrown into bankruptcy by the
executive departments of Government
and largely by the Congress itself.
Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, I ap-
preciate the gentleman's remarks and
reserve the balance of my time.
(Mr. COLMER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. ALLEN "of Illinois. Mr. Speaker,
my good friend from Mississippi [Mr.
COLMERI has explained this rule thor-
oughly and also the bill it makes in order.
Therefore, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, I move
the previous question.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Speaker, I move
that the House resolve itself into the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union for the consideration
of the bill (H. R. 6829) to authorize cer-
tain construction at military, naval, and
Air Force installations, and for other
purposes.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman
from Georgia.
The motion was agreed to..
Accordingly the House resolved itself
into the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the con-
sideration of the bill, H. R. 6829, with
.Mr. METCALF in the chair. "
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
By unanimous consent, the first read-
ing of the bill was dispensed with.
Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Mr.
Chairman, I make the point of order that
a quorum is not present.
The CHAIRMAN. . Obviously a quo-
rum is not present.
The Clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to
Adair
Gathings
Mack, III.
Alexander
Granahan
Mailliard
Allen, Calif.
Gray
Mason
Barrett
Green, Pa.
Meader
Becker
Gubser
Merrow
Bentley
Hagen
Miller, N. Y.
Butch
Hale
Mollohan
Boland
Halleck
Morgan
Bolton,
Harrison, Nebr. Morrison
Oliver P.
Heselton
Moulder
Bonner
Hinshaw
Mumma
Bosch
Hoeven
Nelson
Boykin
Hoffman, Ill.
O'Brien, N. N.Y.
Buckley
Holt
O'Konski
Byrne, Pa.
Holtzman
Polk
Canfield
Horan
Powell
Celler
Jackson
Prouty
Chatham
James
Quigley
Cole
Jensen
Reece, Tenn.
Coudert
Johnson, Wis.
Reed, N. Y.
Davidson
Jonas
Riehiman
Davis, Tenn.
Jones, Mo.
Rivers
Denton
Kean
Roosevelt
Diggs
Kearney
St. George
Dingell
Kearns
Scherer
Dodd
Kee
Sisk
Dollinger
King, Pa.
Taylor
Donovan
Klein
Teague, Tex.
Dowdy
Knox
Thompson, La.
Doyle
Knutson
Thompson, Tex.
Eberharter
Krueger
Vanik
Edmondson
Laird
Van Pelt
Ellsworth
Lesinski
Velde
Fino
Lovre
Vursell
Frelinghuysen
McConnell
Wigglesworth
Fulton
McGregor
Williams, N. J.
Gamble
McIntire
Withrow
Garmatz
Machrowicz
Zelenko
Accordingly the Committee rose; and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. BOLLING, Chairman of the Commit-
tee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union, reported that that Committee
having had under consideration the bill
(H. R. 6829) to authorize certain con-
structian at military, naval, and Air
Force installation, and for other pur-
poses, and finding Itself without a
quorum he caused the roll to be called
when 319 Members responded to their
names, disclosing that a quorum was
present, and he handed in the names of
the absentees for printing in the
Journal.
The Committee resumed its sitting.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the
gentleman from Georgia [Mr. VINSON],
is recognized for 1 hour and 30 minutes,
and the gentleman from Missouri [Mr.
SHORT] will be recognized for 1 hour
and 30 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentle-
man from Georgia [Mr. VINSON].
(Mr. VINSON asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself 30 minutes. -
Mr. Chairman, this Is what is termed
a public works bill. It provides in this
authorization $551 million for the Army,
$596 million for the Navy, $1,165,000,000
for the Air Force. That, along with
titles IV and V, makes `a total of
$2,368,998,900.
This bill was considered for 6 con-
secutive weeks by the Committee on
Armed Services, sitting on an average of
from 4 to 5 hours .a day constantly.
There are over 400 named military
installations in the bill, and in addition
there are a great number of classified
.installations inside and outside the
United States.
It is obvious from this that the presen-
tation of details with respect to the bill
could go on here on the floor of the
House for a long time; but in this mag-
nificent report that we have filed we
.think you will find -material to aid you
in seeing what - the committee had in
mind and thescope of their inquiries.
Now, let us take up the Army. In the
Army title, 30 percent of the program
of $160 million is for antiaircraft facili-
ties. This includes what is known as
Nike sites. They, as you know, are
established all over the United States in
various places, and in the hearings a
great many are identified and a great
many are being built all the time.
Some 12 percent, or $64 million is for
troop housing and troop support facil-
ties; 17 percent, or $88 million, is for
family housing, and this presents, 5,765
badly needed family quarters.
Thirty-eight million dollars, or 7 per-
cent of the program, is for land acqui-
sition. In this connection I wish to draw
your attention to page 22 of the report,
which sets out the land proposed for
acquisition by all of the military de-
partments. In the case of the Army,
most of the money and about 50 percent
of the acreage is in Okinawa. Most of
the land required in the United States
will be for 2 installations: The ex-
pansion of Fort Sill, Okla., which will
involve some 20,000 acres of privately
owned land, and the West Coast Ammu-
nition Terminal, in California, which
will Involve some 22,000- acres. NIKE
installations will require some 2,500
acres. -
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 7924
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE June 27
Four percent of the program, or $26
million, is for further permanent con-
struction in Alaska and Okinawa-2 of
our most important strategic areas
today.
This is a total of $372 million, or 70
percent of the Army portion of the bill.
The remaining 30 percent will pro-
vide for additional construction in Ice-
land, construction for research and de-
velopment, here in this country.
Now, on page 3 the Army's program
is broken out in detailed categories. It
indicates whether the construction is
in the United States or overseas. Un-
derneath that table you will note that
each of the technical services and each
of the continental armies Is dealt with
individually by the type of facility to
be constructed and the portion of the
program it represents. This descrip-
tion continues on page 4, where the
Military Academy, the special weapons
project, and some of the other Items
are described, as are the overseas areas.
Section 102 of the bill contains an
authorization of $224 million for classi-
fied military construction, and section
103 is an authority granted in most
of the public works bills to cover emer-
gency construction, that is, where facil-
ities are destroyed by fire, hurricane,
or other catastrophes.
The remainder of the Army tile, that
is sections 104 and 105, merely author-
izes the transfer of authorizations pre-
viously granted at Fort Knox, Ky., and
Woodbridge, Va.
Now let us turn to the Navy.
The Navy title, which totals $596
million, is another increment in the
program to keep the Navy's shore estab-
lishment up to the ships, aircraft, and
weapons which it must service.
The Navy would get authority under
this program to construct almost 3,100
units of family housing; bachelor of-
ficers' quarters for 5,600 officers; and
about 11,000 barracks spaces for en-
listed personnel.
One of the important new elements in
the Navy's program is a large-scale ac-
quisition of property for 40 of the naval
air stations throughout the United
States. Nineteen of these are used for
carrier landing practice, and appropriate
easements will be purchased from the
surrounding landowners to permit pilots
to develop the kind of technique that is
necessary for landing on carriers-and
to do this in a safe manner.
The effect on the surrounding land-
owners is not as great as might be ex-
pected, since in virtually every case
farming and other normal activities can
be carried on as before. The major re-
quirement at these bases is that there
be no structures or trees above 50 feet.
Here is the reason we are forced to do
this: These pilots who will learn to land
on an airplane carrier must first be
trained to land on what is called a
ground pattern. A ground pattern must
be such that they can go around this
field, and there will be no obstructions on
either side and land as they do on an
airplane carrier. It will be necessary to
purchase and acquire by easement the
rights of removal of any objects higher
than 50 feet off the ground.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. VINSON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.
Mr. GROSS. Does the gentleman say
where this land is being acquired?
Mr. VINSON. Oh, yes. It Is being
acquired at these 19 stations that are
already established. All we are doing
is getting the easement rights to fly
closer to the ground as we circle these
19 bases so that these pilots will learn
how to land on a carrier deck.
Mr. GROSS. May I say to the gen-
tleman from Georgia that we have an in-
activated station at Ottumwa, Iowa,
where there is a considerable amount of
land already.
Mr. VINSON. We are not building a
single new station in this part of the
program. We are merely clearing out
the timber or trees that interfere with
this type of training.
Mr. GROSS. You already have that
at Ottumwa.
Mr. VINSON. May I say to my very
able friend, I do not see why they have
not utilized that magnificent field out
there. I am satisfied that with his per-
sistent efforts and the cooperation of
the Armed Services Committee it will
probably be put in use.
This is a program which the commit-
tee viewed with great favor as one which
will not only provide proper and safe
training, but will prevent the expenditure
of great sums of money in the future.
At the bottom of page 5 of the report
you will note a table which breaks down
by category the Navy's program. The
table sets out everyday operational facili-
ties totaling 58 percent, or $345 million:
troop housing about 12 percent, or $71
million: and family housing about 9 per-
cent, or $56 million. Research and de-
velopment. training facilities, the avi-
gation-easement program that I just
mentioned, are also indicated in the
table, along with a small amount for
morale, welfare. and recreational facili-
ties, pollution-abatement programs, and
land acquisition.
The Navy's land acquisition, both fee
and easements, Is spread over a large
number of installations. The only sub-
stantial acquisitions at particular areas
are those involving the training bases at
New Iberia, La.; Port Isabel, Tex.; and
the air facility for the Naval Academy.
Following the table, on pages 6 and 7,
the whole Navy program Is broken down
into 11 classes. Shipyard facilities would
total $51 ! a million, fleet base facilities
$44!~ million, aviation facilities $314
million, and you will note that this last
category is again broken down into 5 dif-
ferent kinds of air stations, each of which
is described In detail.
Page 7 sets out the amounts authorized
for supply facilities, $9,254,000; Marine
Corps facilities. $61.6 million: ordnance
facilities. $21 million; and service school
facilities for $30 million. The only two
other relatvely large amounts are $26
million for communications facilities and
$34 million for yards and docks.
AIR FORCE
The Air Force again this year would
get an authorization about equal to the
other two services combined. This con-
struction would be spread over 255 prin-
cipal bases; 151 of which are in the
United States and 104 overseas.
All of this program for the Air Force is,
of course, aimed at 137 wings.
When the 137-wing Air Force is at-
tained, in 1957, there will be 346 princi-
pal installations. One hundred and
eighty-six of these will be in the United
States, and 160 overseas. These, of
course, do not include some 2,000 minor
installations, such as communication
sites, radar stations, and so forth.
On pages 9 to 13, the Air Force pro-
gram is broken down in detail by the
various commands. As would be expect-
ed, the Strategic Air Command gets the
largest share of the authorization, with
about $2241/2 million in the United States.
The aircraft control and warning system
gets $100 million in the United States
and almost the same amount overseas. I
do not need to emphasize the importance
of this part of the program.
The Air Defense Command is next in
amount of authorization, with the other
commands getting varying amounts ac-
cording to the status of their programs
today.
The land acquisition program of the
Air Force is quite small compared with
the other two services, with a total of
less than 17,000 acres to be acquired in
fee and 23,000 in easements.
The only two large acquisitions are
those for the Buckingham Weapons Cen-
ter, In Florida, and the air defense base
in the Milwaukee, Wis., area. These ac-
quisitions are respectively 6,000 acres, of
which 4,000 will be donated to the Gov-
ernment, and 4,000 in the case of the
Milwaukee base.
As I mentioned before. In the case of
all of the three services an effort has
been made in the report to break down
the program in several different ways, in
order that whatever the particular inter-
est of the Member may be he can find
the information he wants easily and
without undue study.
You can find what each of the com-
mands is getting in outhorization, while
on page 13 of the report the table there
shows the program broken down by cate-
gories. For example, airfield pavements
is the largest part of the program, with
operational facilities next, family hous-
ing, and so on down the line.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to draw
your attention, and the attention of the
Committee, to the new installations in
the program. These are always of par-
ticular interest, and they appear on page
15 of the report.
The Army had only one, the West
Coast Ammunition Terminal in Califor-
nia. The Navy has three, all of them air
facilities, The first one is at Port Isabel,
Tex.; the second at New Iberia, La.; and
the third, which was inserted by the
committee, is an air facility for the Naval
Academy.
The Air Force has two new installa-
tions: Buckingham Weapons Center,
Fort Myers, Fla., which will be the
East Coast facility for training our fight-
er pilots in gunnery-the West Coast one
being at Yuma, Ariz. The other new
Air Force base is also an Air Defense
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
1955 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 7925
Command installation and it will be In You will note at the bottom of page to say this. I am proud of what the
the greater Milwaukee area, Wis.. 15 and on page 16 of the report that committee did with this bill. We worked
Although, the,, Department of Defense the committee gave special consideration 6 long weeks and read every item, line
submitted a good program, the commit- to several of the: controversial items by line, in order to approve this pro-
tee added certain items which are set which naturally arise in every public- posed authorization of $2,369,000,000.
out on page 15. No new item was added works bill. One of these is the land ac- It takes a long time to find out how to
for the Air Force, but a hospital at Camp quisition in Okinawa, another was the spend that much money, and we took
Jackson, S. C., was added for the Army, expansion of Fort Sill; two of the Navy the time.
and the Naval Air Facility at the Naval proposals involving New. Iberia and Port We amended the bill in 125 different
Academy was added for the Navy. This Chicago were also in the same category. places and reduced the authorization re-
is the same-facility I just mentioned. - A number of the members of the Mary- quested. But when we added these au-
emy, as were the other two items at Ann-
apolis-an addition to Bancroft Hall and
some of the fill necessary to provide ad-
ditional land area.
Another important construction item
added by the committee appears in title
IV of the bill. This would authorize the
construction or rehabilitation of five
units of housing, a communications fa-
cility and other related items for the
chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff and four
of his assistants. At the present time all
of the Chiefs of Staff are provided with
adequate housing. For example, the
Commandant of the Marine Corps has
some 15,000 square feet in his house,
while Admiral Radford's house is some-
thing a little over 3,000 square feet.
These buildings are to be erected on
land adjacent to the Naval Observatory.
Now, in addition to that, it is recom-
with respect to the proposed move of Carolina, it increased the total. As I
the headquarters of the Research and say, there were about 125 amendments
Development Command from Baltimore to the original bill, the total of which
to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, when it was submitted was $2,354,000,-
Ohio. 000. The bill before you now calls for
A matter of particular interest, as evi- a total of $2,369,000,000, an increase of..
dented by the mail which the commit- about $14,500,000.
tee has received, relates to the effect of In the process of its consideration, the
the Government's construction of family committee eliminated items in the
housing on Wherry projects, amount of $33 million and added items
I want to draw your attention to the in the amount of $48 million.
table set out on page 21 of the report, Had it not been for the fact that we
which contains every installation at felt the circumstances warranted it, such
which there is a Wherry project and as the hospital at Camp Jackson and
at which housing would be constructed the activities at the Naval Academy, as
under this bill. If you will look at the a result of our screening and careful
last column you will see that in every scrutiny of the bill, which we passed on
instance, even after taking into consid- in a line by line consideration, there
eration every conceivable kind of hous- would have been a reduction of $33
ing, there still is a large deficit at those million.
installations. I want to say this further. This is a
Of course, the second last column in- department measure. It is recommend-
d
to be icates only about 4,500 housing units ed by the Director of the Budget. It is
whole constructed
bill contains ta at these bases. The recommended by Mr. Floete's office,
wabout 17,000 units, which was created for the purpose of con- but these e other houses are to be
structed at bases where there is no o scrutinizing and coordinating these pub-
Wherry housing. lit works.
Last year Congress authorized 11,600 I ask that the bill be enacted because
family housing units. This bill, as i say, the facts and circumstances warrant it.
will authorize about 17,000 units. They It is absolutely essential to carry on this
will vary in cost, with the overall aver- public works construction to keep our
age in the United States being $13,480. military forces in the shape in which
Of these 17,000 houses, 3,500 represent they should be kept.
replacements of quarters that can no Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr, Chair-
longer be lived in. Five thousand two man, will the gentleman yield?
i ac ivities. There are a
great-number of people employed by 'the
Central Intelligence Agency here in the
District of Columbia, and they are being
housed. in some 33 or more buildings.
Mr. Dulles, the head of the Central In-
telligence Agency, feels that being housed
in many units, as they are, jeopardizes
the security that is required. Now, you
know what the Central Intelligence
Agency is. So, we provide here an au-
thorization of $56 million for land and
a building.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. VINSON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.
Mr. GROSS. Are these buildings for
the Central Intelligence Agency, esti-
mated to cost $50 million, to be con-
structed within 30 or 35 miles of the
District of Columbia? Can the gentle-
man tell me?
Mr. VINSON. During the hearings
hundred and seventy-one are for officers, Mr. VINSON. With pleasure.
and 11,700 are for enlisted men. Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. I notice on
All of this housing will be of perma- page 17 of the report mention is made
nent construction and located for the of a suggestion of moving the Fifth
most part at permanent installations. Army headquarters from Chicago to
Section 609 of the bill, appearing on Des Moines. Would the gentleman ex-
page 70, would permit a military de- plain that?
partment to acquire, upon the applica- Mr. VINSON. A great many sugges-
tion of the project owner, any Wherry tions come before the Committee on
housing project at an installation at Armed Services. Oftentimes it seems
which' housing would be constructed di- they are sowed in fertile soil and bear
rectly by the Government under this fruit. Sometimes they fall among
bill. I want to draw your particular
thorns and thistles. I am afraid that
Mr. Dulles designated certain places. attention to the fact that the project ogtin has among taSome were outside the District of Co- owner has to want to get rid of his suggestion I
and
n
lumbia. But, he did feel that it was project and make application that it be thistles. ggd not think the thorns orngentleman
absolutely essential, in view of the char- purchased by a military department be- need disturb himself about it, because
se
acter of the work he does, to be within fore this can be done. Secretary Stevens id
reasonable distance of the District of To my mind a project owner would ing and to examine it,
that the did facts exexamine thiit,
s
Columbia. I would say 35 to 40 miles probably want to have the department time concluded
not warrant that proposal.
from the District or probably more, but acquire his project only if it has proved
that was the line of testimony. to be an unprofitable business venture. Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. I thank the
There were about 125 amendments to In any event, I want to stress that it gentleman. The gentleman will recall
the original bill, which totaled, at the is entirely a voluntary act on the part that some weeks ago I telephoned him
time it was submitted, about $2,354,000,- of the private owner. when there was such a report in Chicago,
000. The bill that you have before you Mr. Chairman, I believe this is a good and asked him about it.
totals almost $2,369,000,000. This is an bill and that it represents a sound pro- Mr. VINSON. I want to compliment
increase of about $141/2 million. In the gram. It was unanimously reported by the gentleman who represents the city
process of. its consideration, the com- the House Armed Services Committee. of Chicago for being so alert. I have
mittee eliminated items in the amount I respectfully urge its passage. always known that he was right here on
of over $33 million and added items in Mr. Chairman, to show you how care- the job and his inquiry substantiates
the amount of about $48 million. fully we considered this bill, I should like my conclusion.'
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 7926
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE June 2i
Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. I thank the
gentleman.
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, if there
are no further questions, I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. SHORT. Mr Chairman, I yield
myself such time as I may require.
Mr. Chairman, the chairman of the
committee, in his usual forceful and
comprehensive fashion, has covered
every major element of the bill and there
is little that I can add to his statement.
I would like to join him, however, in
directing the attention of every Member
of the House to the report on the bill,
for in it, as Chairman VINSON has said,
one can find about every Important as-
pect of the bill dealt with in detail suf-
ficient for a quick understanding of the
program.
The Air Force portion of the bill is just
about equal to the Army and Navy por-
tions combined. This is understandable
since it is a new service and one which is
in the process of building up. The other
services have had their bases of opera-
tion and their physical facilities for many
years.
I would like, therefore, to devote a little
time to a discussion of the Air Force por-
tion of the bill, and specifically to the
Air Defense Command mission of the
Air Force.
During the past 4 years the Com-
munists have built up a military strength
without parallel In history. They have
created a whole new air force in Red
China and have made It the fourth most
powerful in the world. They have made
achievements in nuclear development al-
most equal to our own. They have pa-
raded numbers of new medium jet bomb-
ers and a new long-range jet bomber
comparable to the best in our Air Force.
They have kept the world's largest stand-
ing army at peak strength, and never re-
laxed their vigilance In the training of
their units.
In Korea they showed us that their
pilots could fight, and that they had a
first-rate plane to fight with. There is
evidence that they are putting vast re-
sources into guided missile production
and into the development of an inter-
continental ballistic missile with suf-
ficient range to destroy targets in the
United States. In countless ways they
have indicated that they are preparing
for war, and are not adverse to engag-
ing in it. They constantly create irri-
tants on the international political scene
that try our patience, and test our for-
bearance. They show no volition to live
at peace with the world, but consistently
follow a philosophy that recognizes war
as a natural state.
In a world now divided between those
nations who support us in our efforts for
peace, and those nations that look to the
Soviets for guidance in national as well
as international policy, we have no
alternative but to prepare against ag-
gression they may commit against us.
We know what happened In 1917, what
happened in 1941, and we know how
peace was violated in 1950. We know
also that at none of these times were we
truly prepared for the war we were
compelled to wage.
From our knowledge of the past, how-
ever, we have learned a lesson we must
henceforth remember. That lesson is
that the best way to avoid war Is to have
available those forces and weapons which
will insure complete and final defeat of
any aggressor who attacks us. By our
own preparedness we can make aggres-
sion an enterprise of disaster for any
potential enemy. The Air Force pro-
gram for the defense of the United States
is based solidly on that premise.
The missions of the Air Force com-
mands, established by Act of Congress,
are well known. The mission of the Air
Defense Command is to provide Air
Forces for the air defense of the United
States and to coordinate all operations
pertaining thereto. Such operations are
conducted by the Continental Air De-
fense Command, a joint command, in-
cluding elements of the Army, Navy, and
Air Force under single control; by the
Alaskan Air Command and the North-
east Air Command In the Western Hem-
isphere, and by such theater commands
as the Far East Air Forces and the United
States Air Forces in Europe.
It Is not surprising that in appropria-
tions for military construction, the
largest amount called for, next to the
request for the Strategic Air Command.
are for the Air Defense Command and Its
related activities, the Aircraft Control
and Warning System, in the United
States, in Canada, and elsewhere,
The share for the Air Defense Com-
mand of the continental United States
program amounts to almost 17 percent.
The money appropriated will permit
Initiation of construction on two new
bases-one in Florida and one in Wis-
consin-and provide a second increment
at the six new interceptor bases initially
authorized last year.
In addition to base construction, these
funds will permit the construction of
rocket assembly and storage buildings
for strange new types of weapons that
are rapidly becoming familiar in the
modern arsenal-rockets and guided
missiles. These weapons must be stored
on the flight line in order to be available
when needed. In addition, we must have
storage with certain temperature and
humidity controls and special facilities
for processing missiles from dead to live
storage. The development of new weap-
ons is an expensive thing. The providing
of facilities for their employment is also
expensive. But the national security
does not permit us to cavil at the ex-
pense. America must be defended.
As with the Strategic Air Command,
facilities for personnel are important to
the success of the mission of the com-
mand. Buildings for the readiness crews
are as important to the success of the
Air Defense Command's mission as are
the planes the crews must fly. Time re-
quired to place an interceptor mission
in the air must be held to a minimum.
Crews on ready status must remain in
the immediate vicinity of their aircraft
for extended periods of time. The build-
ings provided for them must have a diet
kitchen, and sleeping quarters, and re-
creational quarters of a modest sort.
These buildings are their homes, for a
good part of their service lives.
Family housing must also be provided
In an emergency, immediate and maxi.
mum readiness Is jeopardized by crews
having to travel long distances from
home to duty posts. The family housing
which the Air Defense Command seeks
funds to build is essential, not only from
the personnel or welfare point of view,
but also because it will allow crews to be
close to their planes and stations, even
when they are not on duty in the readi-
ness buildings. The modern airman
must live close to his plane.
Part of the authority requested is for
construction of taxiways and airfield
pavements necessary to increase the op-
erational effectiveness of each base.
Part is for airfield lighting, to provide
the necessary illumination to accommo-
date sustained bad weather and night
operations at each fighter interceptor
base. Part is for additional maintenance
facilities. All funds are requested to
permit the Air Force to take full advan-
tage of the latest developments in all
the fields of research, and, as quickly as
new methods or procedures are perfected,
to integrate them into the overall defense
system.
But the first step In the air defense of
the United States is to provide the com-
bat elements with sufficient warning of
an impending attack to enable them to
intercept and destroy hostile forces be-
fore such forces reach the line for their
bomb release. To accomplish this, a se-
ries of radar warning systems are either
In being or under construction. The
most northern of those scheduled is com-
monly referred to as the DEW line-or
"Distant early warning line"-which
runs across the Arctic. There is also the
Mid-Canada System, operated to a large
extent by the Dominion of Canada.
Within the United States proper, an ex-
tensive radar system is being constructed.
Two other radar systems operated by the
Air Force further extend the zone of cov-
erage and provide additional protection.
The first of these is an airborne opera-
tion hundreds of miles off our ocean
coastlines; the second consists of fixed
radar stations on "Texas towers" being
constructed on shoals approximately 75
miles off the eastern coast of the United
States. But all these systems, though
separate in nature, are coordinated by
the Continental Air Defense Command
and are part of Air Defense Command
operations.
So in the request for funds for mili-
tary construction for this command there
are two sizable items-$100 million for
aircraft control and warning system in
the continental United States and $98
million for continental defense located
outside the continental United States.
With this money the Air Force can
complete facilities at 31 permanent sites.
It will be able to place equipment on 74
unattended sites in the United States
and additional ones in Canada. It will
be able to build a fifth "Texas tower" to
provide seaward extension of contiguous
coverage off the northeast Atlantic Coast,
and it will be able to do necessary con-
struction work on the DEW line to insure
implementation of this line to meet the
established operational date.
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
1955 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 7927
The ramparts we watch are no longer Terminal to the United States Government ble for the construction of the base. The
within our sight, but they must be was authorized by the city of Kansas city . results of the resurvey were made known
watched with a vigilance that keeps them at the November 1952 election. to the House Military Appropriations
under our control and out of the hands . Headquarters, Continental Air. Command,
was never moved to Grandview Subcommittee and a copy of the com-
of the enemy. The Air Defense Com- because of
a decision by the Air Force that Mitchel Air munication was submitted to the com-
mand defends our homes by not permit- Force Base was not economically expandible mittee on Armed Services. The com-
ting the enemy to make our cities and for conversion to a modern tactical air base. munication from Secretary Talbott to
our homes the targets for their bomb consequently, to obtain maximum utiliza- the House Military Appropriations Sub-
drops. There are no more important tion of our large pre-World War II invest- committee stated that he had eliminated
items in the military-construction pro- ment at Mitchel, it has been retained as an the proposed Benzie site, known as the
gram than the items for construction of administrative base and utilized by the Con-
tinental Air Command. Homestead site, because of its nearness
the required facilities of the Air Defense
command. America must be defended, At the present time, Grandview Air Force to the Interlochen Music Camp, and
but the defense, if it is not also to involve Base is the headquarters of the Central Air further stated "the remaining two sites
Defense Force. This defense force is respon- are both satisfactory in operational as-
lestruction of our cities, must be kept sible for the air defense of that portion of pects." Talbott reported that although
is remote as possible from the bound- the United States located between the Mis- the initial construction cost at Kalkaska
tries of the United States. sissippi River and the Rocky Mountains. In site is estimated at about 9 percent less
. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the addition, a fighter-interceptor wing, large than Cadillac, he felt that the location
gentleman yield? communications center, Air Reserve activity of Cadillac City, only Mr. SHORT. I yield gladly, and a segment of the A. C. and W. Radar a few miles from
Mr. GROSS. The gentleman knows of Network are located on Grandview Air the base site, provided readily available
Force Base, community support that would outweigh
my continuing interest in the Grandview The total amount of construction author- this differential in original cost, basing
Airport near Kansas City, Mo. ized for this installation through fiscal year his opinion on the fact that the city of
Mr. SHORT. That is right. 1955 is $19.3 million. Total amount of funds Cadillac can take care of additional Air
Mr. GROSS. I see there is an appro- applied to this authorization through fiscal Force dependents with existing schools
priation here for the Grandview Airbase. year 1955 is $15.6 minion, and recreational facilities. Talbott fur-
Can the gentleman tell me whether the The fiscal year 1956 military construction
Continental Air Command has ever been program contains line items in the amount they stated "This is not the case at Kal-
moved to that base? of $3,402,000 for future construction. kaska."
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, there I believe the Secretary was well aware
that
a intent that
gentleman yield? are no further requests for time on this there never was any
Mr. village of Kalkaska was able to a-
Mr. SHORT. I yield. side. sorb any great influx of children in their
Mr. VINSON. It has not been moved. Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I ask public schools, but he has not given
Mr. GROSS. I hope the gentleman unanimous consent that the gentleman credit to the availability of the fine
will, insist that it. be done since that was from Michigan [Mr. KNOX] may insert schools, churches,. and recreational fa-
the basis of arguments in favor of spend- his own remarks at this point in the cilities offered at Traverse City. The
ing millions for the construction of this RECORD.
base. The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection Secretary stated that it is approximately
erse 18 iles from the Kalkaska site siv
MI?. VINSON. I doubt very seriously to the request of the gentleman from erCity. This, of course, is excessive,
If it will be done this session or next Missouri?
session. There was no objection. and the actual mileage would be 14
Mr. GROSS. Or the next session? . Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, I do not miles.
Mr. VINSON. But with the learned speak in opposition to H. R. 6829, whichwoNgre I call go the the Secretary's of the
c s own
gentleman's constant observation and carries authorization for $12,148,000 for words in n, using to
persistence i am satisfied something will the proposed jet base set forth in the bill sional Fords this statement
that h the admits that
be accomplished. Anticipating that the as Traverse City area. I do favor the the Kalkaska site aska site, and that Cadillac hsasit tare
are
gentleman was going to inquire about selection by the Air Base Command. of a both as.
Grandview I have had a little brief pre- site in northern Michigan. The selec- both Secretary further th r points he
pared on Grandview, and I will be glad tion of this site has become a very con- The Secretary fuon points out, and ht
to read it or to insert it in the RECORD. troversial issue, as many of the Members has served notice on the Congress that
the Mr. GROSS. I appreciate the gentle- of Congress are aware that the first site site er hat more t ab ld lac war
man's personal comment but I am also selected by the Secretary of -the Air cost 9 percent more to build than at
K
interested in the spending of the tax- Force, Mr. Talbott, was in Grand Now le.
payers' money. Traverse County. Now let us take nvo and see is 9
Mr. VINSON. I knew the gentleman There were objections raised by the how much money is inSecretary's e this 9
was going to bring up Grandview so I Interlochen Music Camp, operated percent which is the own
had this statement prepared. percentage figure. With the approval
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I ask jointly by the University of Michigan of the bill now pending befare'the House,
unanimous cthat ant ask and the State of Michigan, under the the amount of money involved would be
from Georgia consent
may be allowed n insert directorship of Dr. Maddy. The second $12,148,000, so at 9 percent of this figure
fro statement at this point allowed Rinser. site was selected in Benzie County, the Congress could save the Government
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection which was objected to by the Committee $1,093,320, by constructing the base at
on Armed Services because of interfer- the Kalkaska site. I do not believe that
to the request of the gentleman from ence with the Interlochen Music Camp, the Congress is ready to appropriate
Missouri? There were several other sites offered by
There was no objection.
communities for the construction of the on 0 ocali more tot would cost ohe base in
The statement referred to follows: one locality than i t would csin another
GRANDe statement
Ain . r FORCE BASE, Mw proposed jet base. locality as long as the Secretary Is in
Secretary Talbott then selected Cadil- complete agreement that the base at the
port K you ks now, Grandview sMuni ipal wise lac as the location of the base. I believe lower figure is satisfactory for opera-City, Mo of its central location in the United states it be to a well-known fact that consid- Lions.
for the headquarters of the Central Air De- erable opposition generated throughout We are .cognizant of the fact that the
fense Force, and because of the necessity the Congress and in the communities be- Air Force has a base at Kinross, Mich.,
of establishing a base for fighter-interceptor cause of this selection. which is 18 miles south of Sault Ste. Ma-
squadrons for protection of the huge Wichi- The Committee on Appropriations rie, Mich.; Sault Ste. Marie being the
ta-Kansas industrial area. In addition, the then directed Secretary Talbott to sub- supporting town for educational, relig-
Air Force proposed to move the head- mit justifications for the selection of the ious, and recreational facilities. Last
quarters of the Continental Air Command
from Mitchel Air Force Base, N. Y., to Grand- Cadillac site which resulted in a resur- summer, Maj. Gen. Joe W. Kelly re-
view. On January 1, 1952, Grandview Mu- vey of the Cadillac site, and a site known quested that I contact the people and the
nicipal Airport was leased by the Air Force as Kalkaska site, 14 miles from down- organizations of 'the Sault Ste. Marie
for a period of 25 years for the sum of $1. town Traverse City, and any other sites area to determine their willingness to
The donation In fee of the Grandview 'Air that the Secretary believed to be desira- cooperate. This I did and met with 100
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
7928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE June 27
percent approval for establishing a per- Members well know, while it may be au- Mr. CEDERBERO. I thank the gen-
manent base at Kinross along with the thorized In this bill, and money may be tleman.
expansion program. If there is justifl- appropriated. yet before the Government Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair-
cation for the Air Force to expand an purchases the land It must again be man, will the gentleman yield?
airbase 18 miles from the supporting scrutinized by the Armed Services Com- Mr. CEDERBERG. I yield to the gen-
city, then I can see no justification for mittee of the House and the Armed Serv- tleman from Wisconsin.
the Air Force to object to constructing a ices Committee of the Senate. So when Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. I am re-
base 14 miles from the supporting city, the subcommittee goes out to look at the minded of a question that might be
which in this case would be Traverse City situation in regard both to Port Chicago asked at this time of the chairman of
supporting the Kalkaska site with a di- and the West Coast Ammunition Ter- the committee. I overheard the gentle-
rect saving of $1,093,320 to the Govern- minas they will take those two subject man from Missouri mention that in-
ment. matters into consideration and advise the eluded in this bill is additional author-
In conclusion I repeat that the Air committee, before 1 foot of land is ac- ization for einstrments on tsix new
Force Secretary, Mr. Talbott, has served quired. fighter au-
due and sufficient notice upon the Con- Mr. BALDWIN. I thank the gentle- thorized originally last year. Of course,
gress that the site at Kalkaska is satis- man for that statement and that under- included in the original six is a very
factory and comparable to Cadillac as standing. controversial one In the State of the
far as operations are concerned, and fur- Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield gentleman now adressing the House. I
ther serves notice upon the Congress that 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michi- wonder whether the committee did not
the project will cost $1,093,320 more to gan (Mr. CEDERBERG). have some hesitancy about granting ad-
build at Cadillac than it would at Kai- Mr. CEDER-BERG. Mr. Chairman. I ditional authorization to the Michigan
kaska. have requested this time to make an ob- base where this controversy is very warn
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I am serving servation regarding the family housing at the present time with reference to
notice on the Congress that I am opposed situation at some of our military instal- whether or not a site has been agreed
to the reckless spending of public funds lations in England and in the European upon where these additional authorized
when such spending In my opinion can- theater. I realize that the members of structures are to be placed.
not be justified or produce greater ac- this committee have gone into the situa- Mr. VINSON. I will say to the gen-
complishments in behalf of the Air Force, tion very thoroughly, but, having been a tleman that as far as the Armed Services
but merely to satisfy the Secretary of the member of a subcommittee of the Com- Committee is concerned, we have been
Air Force who has produced no sane jus- mittee on Appropriations handling mili- advised that the Secretary is definitely
tification to make such a request of the tary construction features, we visited reaffirming his views in selecting Cadil-
Congress. some of these installations last year. lac as an area referred to in connection
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield The housing situation at these bases, with the Traverse City area. I have my
5 minutes to the gentleman from Cali- for instance Dreux and Evreux in France, personal views, but nevertheless those
fornia [Mr. BALDWIN]. were deplorable. While I realize we have are the facts of the case.
Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman, I just a guaranteed housing program In that Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. The chair-
wanted to take this opportunity to thank theater, especially in France, my observa- man then has more faith in the repeated
the members of the committee, the chair- tion was that it is not working. It seems confirmation of this site than he had in
man of the committee, and the ranking impossible to get guaranties for housing the repeated confirmation of the sites
minority member for the very kind and in any areas except such as Paris or that were given last year.
sympathetic consideration they gave to some of the large metropolitan areas. Mr. VINSON. All I can say Is that the
problems which came up in this bill When we go into some of these smaller Secretary advised the committee in writ-
which affect the people of the district in communities where we have these bases Ing that he had reaffirmed after further
California which I represent. nearby we find, as far as our airmen are examination his previous choice, and
There was one proposal which came concerned, it is impossible for them to reached the conclusion that Cadillac was
before the committee, which, had it been bring their families there and give them the place where he was going to place
approved by the committee, would have the kind of housing they are entitled to. it. Of course, if I had been making the
surrounded and isolated a town of 3,000 As I said before, I realize this is a selection. somebody might not agree with
people, the town of Port Chicago, Calif. problem that has complexities, not the It, but that is how it stands.
The committee was kind enough to give least of which are agreements between Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. It was on
consideration to many resolutions of the the foreign countries in which they are that basis, then, that the further au-
county organizations and to the people located and ourselves, but it seems to me thorization for this site was included in
of the town Involved and to strike the that we ought to give serious considera- this bill?
particular proposal from the record. Let tion to the building of these family units Mr. VINSON. That Is with reference
me say I think it was a very considerate on the airbase at a given location. it to the Traverse City area arrangement.
position that the committee took to rec- seems to me impossible for these people They laid it out in broad language, and
ognize the problems of local common!- to live under the conditions that we ex- then the Department goes before the
ties such as Port Chicago. pect them to. Committee on Appropriations and says
There is another proposal in the bill, I wonder, Mr. Chairman, has the com- that he has selected Cadillac as the
In county, also in my district, the West mittee given any consideration to the place. We do not pinpoint it.
Coast Ammunition Terminal. It is my locating of family housing at some of Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I will
understanding after talking with the these out-of-the-way airbases, for in. reluctantly vote for this bill which calls
chairman and the ranking minority stance, on the particular base itself? for the appropriation of nearly $2/2
member that, although this proposal is Mr. VINSON. I may say to the dis- billion.
included in this bill, before final action tinguished gentleman that that has been I have the feeling that there is alto-
is taken to acquire the property involved a subject matter that is constantly be- gether too much fat in this military
for the West Coast Ammunition Ter- fore the committee. We are constantly construction bill but it is wellnigh im-
minal, a subcommittee of this commit- giving close scrutiny to it. As a matter possible for a Member of Congress who
tee will be going to California this fall of fact, subcommittees have been over is not a member of the Armed Services
and the subcommittee will inspect this there at least once or twice during the Committee, to know where reductions
property proposed to be acquired by the recess trying to ascertain what is the can properly be made.
West Coast Ammunition Terminal, the proper thing to do. You must recognize I cannot understand why, for instance,
Real Estate Subcommittee of the Armed the fact that in dealing with that goes- funds shou be building of a new authorized aviation fotrathn
Services Committee. I think that is the tion there is, for instance, one phase of bun
situation, and I ask the chairman If I the Commodity Credit Corporation in- Ing facility in Texas when the perma-
have made an accurate statement of my volved and another phase the rental nently constructed facility for this-pur-
understanding. guaranty program. The gentleman pose stands unused near Ottumwa, Iowa.
Mr. VINSON. The gentleman from may rest assured that the committee Since becoming a Member of Con-
California has made an accurate state- Is conscious of it and is giving the mat- gress, I have voted for practically all
ment. I may say that in the matter of ter all the consideration we possibly appropriations that have been requested
acquisition of land, as no doubt the can. for the building of this Nation's defenses,
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
but I want it understood now that these
costs have got to decrease In terms of
new installations. If there Is the proper
construction and housekeeping, these
bills can be drastically reduced and that
is exactly what must occur if this Nation
is to remain solvent.
The CHAIRMAN. There being no
further requests for time, the Clerk will
read the bill for amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Be it enacted, etc.-
TITLE I
SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army is
authorized to establish or develop military
installations and facilities by the acquisi-
tion, construction, coversion, rehabilitation,
or installation of permanent or temporary
public works in respect of the following.
projects, which include site preparation, ap-
purtenances, and related utilities and equip-
ment :
CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES
Technical services facilities
(Ordnance Corps)
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.: Troop
housing, community facilities, utilities, and
family housing, $1,736,000.
Black Hills Ordnance Depot, S. Dak.: Fam-
ily housing, $78,000.
Blue Grass Ordnance Depot, Ky.: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, $509,000.
Erie Ordnance Depot, Ohio: Operational
and maintenance facilities and utilities,
$1,933,000.
Frankford Arsenal, Pa.: Utilities, $855,000.
Lordstown Ordnance Depot, Ohio: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, $875,000.
Pueblo Ordnance Depot, Colo.: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, $1,843,000.
Red River Arsenal, Tex.: Operational and
maintenance facilities, $140,000.
Redstone Arsenal, Ala.: Research and de-
velopment facilities and community facili-
tis, $2,865,000.
Rock Island Arsenal, Ill.: Operational and
mantenance facilities, $347,000.
Rossford Ordnance Depot, Ohio: Utilities,
$400,000.
Savanna Ordnance Depot, Ill.: Operational
and maintenance facilities, $342,000.
Seneca Ordnance Depot, N. Y.: Commun-
ity facilities, $129,000.
Sierra Ordnance Depot, Calif.: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, $1,075,000.
White Sands Proving Ground, N. Max.:
Troop supporting facility, and research and
development facilities, $1,247,000.
Wingate Ordnance Depot, N. Mex.: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, $632,000.
(Quartermaster Corps)
Atlanta General Depot, Ga.: Storage fa-
cilities, $84,000.
Belle Meade General Depot, N. J.: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, $174,000.
Fort Lee, Va.: Troop housing, community
facilities, medical facility, storage facilities,
training facilities, operational and mainte-
nance facilities, and family housing, $8,-
589,000.
Memphis General Depot, Tenn.: Family
housing, $99,000.
New Cumberland General Depot, Pa.:
Family housing. $568,000.
Sharpe General Depot, Calif.: Utilities and
family housing. $337,000.
(Chemical Corps)
Army Chemical Center, Md,: Troop hous-
ing, storage facilities, operational and main-
tenance facilities, and utilities, $1,248,000.
Deseret Chemical Depot, Utah: Mainte-
nance facilities, $92,000.
Camp Detrick, Md.: Utilities, $452,000.
Dugway Proving Ground, Utah: Troop
housing, hospital and medical facilities, op
erational and maintenance facilities and
family housing, $1,129,000.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 7929
Pine Bluff Arsenal (Including Midwest
Chemical Depot)., Ark.: Land acquisition,
$3,000.
Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Colo.: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities and utili-
ties, $773,000.
(Signal Corps)
Decatur Signal Depot, Ill.: Operational
and maintenance facilities, $303,000. '
Fort Huachuca, Ariz.: Airfield pavements,
community facilities, storage facilities, op-
erational and maintenance facilities, utili-
ties, and family housing, $4,648,000.
Lexington Signal Depot, Ky.: Maintenance
facility, and family housing, $538,000.
Fort Monmouth, N. J.: Community facili-
ties, $615,000.
Sacramento Signal Depot, Calif.: Troop
housing, maintenance facility, and family
housing, $716,000.
Tobyhanna Signal Depot, Pa.: Troop hous-
ing, $649,000.
Two Rock Ranch Station, Calif.: Com-
munity facilities, and family housing, $1,-
298,000.
Vint Hill Farms Station, Va.: Community
facilities, storage facility, and operational
and maintenance facility, $695,000.
(Corps of Engineers)
Army Map Service, Md.: Operational and
maintenance facility, $62,000.
Fort Belvoir,- Va.: Troop housing, com-
munity facilities, research and development
facilities, operational and maintenance fa-
cilities, utilities, and family housing, $4,-
608,000.
Grants City Engineer Depot, Ill.: Opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, and
family housing, $1,822,000.
Marion Engineer Depot, Ohio: Storage
facilities and utilities, $1,146,000.
(Transportation Corps)
Brooklyn Army Base, N. Y.: Utilities, $1,-
055,000.
Charleston Transportation Depot, S. C.:
Storage facilities and utilities, $329,000.
Fort Eustis,Va.: Troop housing, commu-
nity facilities, training facilities, medical
facility, and operational and maintenance
facilities, $6,597,000.
New Orleans Army Base, La.: Storage fa-
cility, $117,000.
Oakland Army Base, Calif.: Community
facilities, storage facilities, and operational
and maintenance facilities, $1,923,000.
Fort Story, Va.: Utilities, $41,000.
West Coast Ammunition Terminal, Calif.:
Dredging and land acquisition, $12,860,000.
(Medical Corps)
William Beaumont Army Hospital, Tex.:
Hospital and medical facilities, $686,000.
Brooke Army Medical Center, Tex.: Hos-
pital and medical facilities, $549,000.
Madigan Army Hospital, Wash,: Hospital
and medical facilities, $333,000.
Walter Reed Army Medical Center, D. C.:
Hospital facilities, research and development
facilities, and training facilities, $7,632,000.
FIELD FORCES FACILITIES
(First Army Area)
Fort Devens, Mass.: Troop housing, ad-
ministrative facilities, and family housing,
$7,275,000.
Fort 11x, N. J.: Community facilities, med-
ical facilities, administrative facilities, and
family housing, $6,698,000.
Fort Jay, N. Y.: Waterfront facilities, $731,-
000.
Fort Niagara, N. Y.: Storage facilities,
$209,000.
Fort Totten, N. Y.: Utilities, $170,000.
(Second Army Area)
Fort Holabird, Md.: Troop housing, $612,-
000.
Fort Knox, Ky.: Troop housing, training
and administrative facilities, community fa-
cilities, medical facilities, operational and
maintenance facilities, and family housing,
$8,990,000.
Fort George G. Meade, Md.: Community
facilities, training and medical facilities, and
operational and maintenance facilities,. $923,-
000.
(Third Army Area)
Fort Benning, Ga..: Troop housing, com-
munity facilities, training and administrative
facilities, medical facilities, storage facilities,
operational and maintenance facilities, and
family housing, $10,392,000.
Fort Bragg, N. C.: Troop housing, com-
munity facilities, training and administrative
facilities, medical facilities, airfield pave-
ments, operational and maintenance facili-
ties, and family housing, $15,659,000.
Fort Campbell, Ky.: Troop housing, com-
munity facilities, training and administrative
facilities, medical facilities, operational and
maintenance facilities, and family housing,
$12,377,000. .
Camp Gordon, Ga.: Community facilities,
$281,000.
Camp Jackson, S. C.: Medical facilities,
$8 million.
Fort McClellan, Ala.: Community facilities,
storage facilities, operational and mainte-
nance facilities, and family housing, $2,-
611,000.
Camp Rucker, Ala.: Airfield pavements,
and operational and maintenance facilities,
$2,070,000.
Camp Stewart, Ga.: Troop housing, storage
facilities, and operational and maintenance
facilities, $967,000.
(Fourth Army Area)
Fort Bliss, Tex.: Troop housing, commu-
nity facilities, training and administrative
facilities, and operational and maintenance
facilities, $4,645,000.
Fort Hood, Tex.: Troop housing, commu-
nity facilities, training and administrative
facilities, medical facilities, operational and
maintenance facilities, and family housing,
$12,922,000.
Fort Sam Houston, Tex.: Troop housing
and operational facilities, $805,000..
Fort Sill, Okla.: Community facilities,
medical facilities, operational and mainte-
nance facilities, and land acquisition, $3,-
053,000.
(Fifth Army Area)
Fort Carson, Colo.: Troop housing, com-
munity facilities, training and administra-
tive facilities, medical facilities, airfield
pavements, storage facilities, and operation-
al and maintenance facilities, $7,487,000.
Fort Leavenworth, - Kans.: Hospital and
medical facilities, training facilities, and
operational facilities, $8,615,000.
Camp Lucas, Mich.: Community facili-
ties, $145,000.
Fort Riley, Kans.: Troop housing, com-
munity facilities, training and administra-
tive facilities, medical facilities, storage fa-
cilities, operational and maintenance facili-
ties, and family housing, $8,657,000.
Fort Sheridan, Ill.: Family housing,
$1,268,000.
(Sixth Army Area)
Camp Hanford, Wash.: Waterfront facili-
ties, $167,000.
Fort Lewis, Wash.: Troop housing com-
munity facilities, training facilities, medical
facilities, storage facilities, operational and
maintenance facilities, and family housing,
$15,275,000.
Presidio of Monterey, Calif.: Troop hous-
ing and training facilities, $1,878,000.
Fort Ord, Calif.: Community facilities,
medical facilities, and utilities, $1,407,000.
Presidio of San Francisco, Calif.: Liquid
fuel dispensing facilities, $144,000.
United States Disciplinary Barracks, Calif.:
Community facilities, $184,000.
Yuma Test Station, Ariz.: Family housing,
$709,000.
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
7930
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE June 27
(Military Academy)
United States Military Academy, N. T.:
Community facilities and utilities. $756,000.
(Armed Forces Special Weapons Project)
Sandia Base, N. Mex.: Family housing,
$1.231.000.
Various installations: Maintenance facili-
ties, community facilities, and utilities, $3.-
014,000.
(Tactical Installations)
Various locations: Family housing, $8,135,-
000.
(Rehabilitation)
Various locations: Rehabilitation of fa-
cilities for family housing. $2,661,000.
Outside continental United States
(Alaskan Area)
Big Delta: Troop housing and community
facilities, and family housing, $3,838,000.
Eielson Air Force Base: Maintenance and
storage facility, $1,047,000.
Ladd Air Force Base: Storage facilities
and liquid fuel dispensing facilities, $288,-
000.
Fort Richardson: Troop housing, com-
munity facilities, storage facillties, opera-
tional and maintenance facilities, and utili-
tes. $9,079,000.
Whittier: Community facilities, and oper-
atonal and maintenance facilities, $1,183,-
000.
Wildwood Station (Kenai) : Troop bous-
ing and community facilities, $469,000.
Various locations: Rehabilitation of fa-
cilities for family housing, $1,656,000.
(Far East Command Area)
Okinawa: Community, troop supporting,
and medical facilities, operational, mainte-
nance, and administrative facillties, utili-
ties, family housing, and land acquisition
and resettlement, $43,983,000, of which sum
the total amount available for resettlement
may be paid in advance to the Government
of the Ryukyu Islands.
(Pacific Command Area)
Helemano, Hawaii: Family housing, $714,-
000.
Camp O'Donnel, Philippine Islands: Utli-
ltles, $832,000.
Schofield Barracks. Hawaii: Storage and
community facilities, $3,162,000.
Waiawa (Waipio) Radio Transmitting Sta-
tion: Hawaii: Community facilities and fam-
fly housing, $363,000.
(Caribbean Command Area)
Fort Clayton, Canal Zone: Family housing,
$2,350,000.
(Icelandic CommandArea)
Keflavik Airport: Operational and training
facilities, and family housing, $3,793,000.
Classified Installations: Family housing,
$5,799,000.
SEc. 102. The Secretary of the Army is au-
thorized to establish or develop classified
military installations and facilities by the
acquisition of land and the construction, re-
habilitation, or installation of permanent or
temporary public works, Including site prep-
aration, appurtenances, and related utili-
ties and equipment, in a total amount of
$223,993,000.
Sac. 103. The Secretary of the Army Is au-
thorized through the construction, rehabili-
tation, or Installation of permanent or tem-
porary public works, Including site prepara-
tion, appurtenances, and related utilities and
equipment, to restore or replace facilities
damaged or destroyed in a toal amount of
$10 million.
SEc. 104. Public Law 534, 82d Congress is
hereby amended as follows:
(a) Strike so much thereof under the
heading "Continental United States" and
subheading "Field Forces Facilities" (Second
Army Area) In section 101 as follows:
"Fort Knox, Ky.: Training buildings and
facilities, research and development facilities,
maintenance facilities, land acquisition, and
utilities, $11,411,000."
and Insert in lieu thereof the following:
"Fort Knox, Ky.: Training buildings and
facilities, maintenance facilities, land ac-
quisition, and utilities. $9.411,000."
(b) Strike so much thereof under the
heading "Continental United States" and
subheading "Technical Service Facilities"
(Army Medical Service) in section 101 as
follows:
"Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Wash-
ington, D. C.: Operational facilities and re-
search and development facilities. $731,000."
and In=sert in lieu thereof the following:
"Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Wash-
ington, D. C., and Forest Glen, Md.: Opera-
tional facilities, and research and develop-
ment facilities, $2,731,000."
Sec. 105. Public Law 534, 83d Congress, is
hereby amended by striking so much there-
of under the heading "Continental United
States" and subheading "(Signal Corps)" n
section 101 as follows:
"Department of the Army transmitting
station, vicinity of Woodbridge. Va,:"
and Inserting in lieu thereof the following:
"Department of the Army transmitting
station, vicinity of Camp Detrick, Md.:"
TITLE II
Sec. 201. The Secretary of Navy is author-
ized to establish or develop naval Installa-
tions and facilities by the acquisition, con-
struction, conversion, rehabilitation, or in-
stallation of permanent or temporary public
works In respect of the following projects,
which include site preparation, appurte-
nances, and related utilities and equipment:
CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES
Shipyard facilities
Naval shipyard, Boston, Mass.: Utilities
and replacement of piers. $8,441,000.
Naval shipyard. Puget Sound, Bremerton,
Wash.: Drydock facilities, $200,000.
David Taylor Model Basin, Carderock, Md.:
Research and development facilities, $14,-
302,000.
Naval Industrial reserve shipyard, Charles-
ton. S. C.: Land acquisition. $427,000.
Naval minecraft base, Charleston, S. C.:
Site preparation, waterfront facilities, ad-
ministrative facilities, training facilities,
utilities, and land acquisition, $5,800,000.
Naval shipyard, Mare Island, Vallejo, Calif.:
Waterfront facilities and sandblasting feeil-
iUes, $4.553,000.
Naval shipyard. Norfolk, Va.: Replacement
of wharf, $308,000.
Naval underwater sound laboratory, New
London. Conn.: Family housing. $88.600.
Naval mine countermeasures station, Pana-
ma City, Fla.: Administrative facilities, com-
munity facilities, training facilities, heli-
copter facilities, ammunition storage facili-
ties, waterfront facilities, research and de-
velopment facilities, and land acquisition,
$3,379,000.
Naval shipyard, Portsmouth, N. H.: Utili-
ties and drydock facilities. $946.000.
Naval electronics laboratory, San Diego,
Calif.: Land acquisition, $143,000.
Naval repair facility, San Diego, Calif.:
Utilities, $829.000.
Naval Shipyard. San Francisco. Calif.: Wa-
terfront facilities, steam test facilities, and
land acquisition. $4,399,000.
Fleet base facilities
Navy Department, District of Columbia:
Family housing, $81,000.
Naval station, Green Cove Springs, Fla.:
Utilities. $72,000.
Naval station. Newport, R. I.: Personnel
facilities, $1.583.000.
Naval base, Norfolk, Va.: Waterfront facili-
ties, pavement, utilities, and land aequisl--
tion, $9,972,000.
Naval station, Orange, Tex.: Personnel fa-
cilities, $999,000.
Naval station, San Diego. Calif.: Utilities,
$57,000.
Naval station, Treasure Island, San Fran-
cisco, Calif.: Personnel facilities and utilities,
$3,147,000.
Naval station, Tacoma, Wash.: Waterfront
facilities, $3,024,000.
Naval station, Tongue Point, Astoria, Oreg.:
Personnel facilities, $92,000.
Aviation facilities
(Naval Air Training Station)
Naval auxiliary landing field, Alice-Orange
Grove area, Tex.: Airfield pavements and land
acquisition, $1,487,000.
Naval auxiliary air station, Barin Field,
Foley. Ala.: Airfield lighting facilities, $151,-
000.
Naval auxiliary air station, Chase Field,
Tex.: Storage facilities, fuel dispensing fa-
cilities, operational facilities, personnel fa-
cilities, community facilities, land acquisi-
tion, and family housing, $1,953,500.
Naval air station, Corpus Christi, Tex.:
Navigational aids, training facilities, and
land acquisition, $864,000.
Naval air station. Glynco, Ga.: Aircraft,
station and equipment maintenance facili-
ties, administrative facilities, and utilities,
$1,888.000.
Naval air station, Hutchinson, Kans.: Utili-
ties. $81,000.
Naval auxiliary air station, Kingsville, Tex.:
Aircraft maintenance facilities, operational
facilities, navigational aids, storage facilities,
maintenance facilities, personnel facilities,
community facilities, and land acquisition,
$3,686,000.
Naval air station, Memphis, Tenn.: Utili-
ties. $759,000.
Naval air station, Pensacola, Fla.: Airfield
pavements, navigational aids, personnel fa-
cilities, fuel dispensing facilities, operational
facilities, research and development facilities,
ammunition storage facilities, land acquisi-
tion, and plans and specifications for air-
craft overhaul and repair facilities, $3,453,-
000.
Naval auxiliary air station: Port Isabel,
Tex,: Airfield pavements, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, operational facilities, admin-
istrative facilities, community facilities,
fuel storage facilities, ammunition storage
and ordnance faclities, security facilities,
utilities, and land acquisition, $5,544,000.
Naval auxiliary air station, New Iberia,
La.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, airfield
pavements, operational facilities, naviga-
tional aids, maintenance facilities, communi-
cation facilities, training facilities, admin-
istrative facilities, fuel storage and dispens-
Ing facillties, covered and cold storage facili-
ties, ammunition storage facilities, personnel
facilities, medical facilities, community fa-
cilities, utilities, and land acquisition, $24,-
361,000.
Naval auxiliary air station, Whiting Field,
Fla.: Family housing, $385,000.
(Fleet Support Air Stations)
Naval air station, Alameda, Calif.: Air-
craft maintenance facilities, seadrome light-
ing facilities, seawall, dredging, and land
acquisition, $3,729,000.
Naval air station, Atlantic City, N. J.: Stor-
age facilities, and utilities, $233,000.
Naval auxiliary sir station, Brown Field,
Calif.: Family housing. $214,600.
Naval air station, Brunswick, Maine: Air-
field pavements, airfield lighting facilities,
communication facilities, storage facilities,
ammunition storage facilities, personnel fa-
cilities. community facilities, utilities, and
land acquisition. $3,200,000.
Naval air station, Cecil Field. Fla.: Aircraft
maintenance facilities, airfield pavements,
operational facilities, covered storage facili-
ties, ammunition storage and ordnance fa-
cilities, fuel dispensing facilities, security
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
1955 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
I Uti
Facilities, personnel facilities, community tional facilities, administrative facilities, Naval ammunition depot, Pallbrook, Calif.:
facilities, and utilities, $7,400,000. personnel facilities, airfield lighting facili- Ordnance and ammunition storage facili-
Naval auxiliary air station, El Centro, ties, airfield pavements, aircraft and station ties, $514,000.
Calif.: Ordnance facilities, and land acqul- maintenance facilities, communication fa- Naval ammunition depot, Hawthorne,
sition, $366,000. cilities, cold storage facilities, training facili- Nev.: Barricaded sidings, and utilities,
Naval auxiliary air station, Fallon, Nev.: ties, storage facilities, utilities, medical facili- $1,424,000.
Operational facilities, community facilities, ties, petroleum storage facilities, site prepa- Naval powder factory, Indian Head, Md.:
family housing, and personnel facilities, ration, and land acquisition, $16,900,000. Research and development facilities, and
$1,172,700. Naval auxiliary air station, Chincoteague, utilities, $1,107,000.
Naval air station, Jacksonville, Fla.: Air- Va.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, medical Naval ordnance test station, Inyokern,
field pavements, communication facilities, facilities, and operational facilities, $2,858,- Calif.: Community facilities, $375,000.
operational facilities, and land acquisition, 000. Naval torpedo station, Keyport, Wash.:
$2,224,000. Naval ordnance test station, Inyokern, Ordnance facilities, $376,000.
Naval air station, Key West, Fla.: Fuel Calif.: Research and development facilities, Naval ordnance plant, Louisville, Ky.:
storage facilities, and boathouse, $211,000. $2,815,000. Ordnance drawings storage facilities,
Naval auxiliary landing field, Mayport, Naval air station, Lakehurst, N. J.: Re- $927,000.
Fla.: Waterfront facilities, communication search and development facilities, storage Naval ordnance plant, Macon, Ga.: Ord-
facilities, family housing, and security fa- facilities, navigational aids, and aircraft nance manufacturing facilities, $3,800,000.
cilities, $812,000. maintenance facilities, $16,311,000. Naval underwater ordnance station, New-
Naval air station, Miramar, Calif.: Storage Naval air test center, Patuxent River, Md.: port, R. I.: Testing facilities, $370,000.
facilities, training facilities, personnel fa- Airfield pavements, aircraft maintenance fa- Naval magazine, Port Chicago, Calif.:
cilities, fuel dispensing facilities, community cilities, oil storage facilities, and utilities, Ordnance facilities, $241,000.
facilities, and utilities, $4,370,000. $8,677,000. Naval ammunition depot, St. Juliens Creek,
Naval ar station, Moffet Field, Calif.: Fuel Naval air missile test center, Point Mugu, Va.: Utilities, $420,000.
pipeline facilities, airfield pavements, and Calif.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, com- Naval ammunition and net depot, Seal
operational facilities, $2,581,000. munication facilities, and research and de- Beach, Calif.: Waterfront facilities,
Naval air station, Norfolk, Va.: Aircraft velopment facilities, $926,000. $1,029,000.
maintenance facilities,, training facilities, Naval air station, South Weymouth, Mass.: Naval ammunition depot, Shumaker,
communication facilities, operational facili- Testing facilities, $270,000. Ark.: Barricaded transfer depot facilities,
ties and land acquisition, $5,260,000. Naval photographic interpretation center, $765,000.
Naval air station, Oceana, Va.: Airfield Suitland, Md.: Operational and photographic Naval ordnance laboratory, White Oak,
pavement, storage facilities, personnel facil- preservation facilities, $2,345,000. Md.: Research and development facilities,
sties, maintenance facilities, community fa- Various locations: Land acquisition, and $1,978,000.
cilities, and fuel dispensing facilities, $5,281,- obstruction removal, for flight clearance, Naval mine depot, Yorktown, Va.: Ammu-
000. $23 million. nition storage and testing facilities, $113,000.
Naval air station, Quonset Point, R. L: Air- Supply facilities Service school facilities
field lighting facilities, operational facilities, Naval fuel depot, Jacksonville, Fla.: Family Naval Academy, Annapolis, Md.: Utilities,
and utilities, $1,062,000. housing, $15,200. cadet housing, and fill in Dewey and Santee
Naval air station, San Diego, Calif.: Train- Naval supply depot, Newport, R. I.: Water- Basins in Severn River, $11,467,000.
ing facilities, operational facilities, aircraft front facilities, administrative facilities, and Naval station, Annapolis, Md.: Personnel
maintenance facilities, fuel dispensing fa- utilities, $1,041,000. facilities, $307,000.
cilities, and utilities, $2,748,000. Naval supply center, Norfolk, Va.: Cold- Naval receiving station, Charleston, S. C.:
Naval auxiliary air station, Sanford, Fla.: storage facilities, warehouse freight elevators, Community facilities, $553,000.
Family housing, $188,900. and (at Cheatham Annex) highway crossing Naval amphibious base, Coronado, Calif.:
Naval air facility, Weeksville, N. C.: Cold and land acquisition, $777,000. Personnel facilities, $1,402,000.
storage facilities, and maintenance facilities, Naval supply center, Oakland, Calif.: Utili- Fleet air defense training center, Dam
$342,000. ties, and easement, $62,000.
Naval air station, Whidbey Island, Wash.: Neck, Va.: Training facilities, and personnel
Airfield pavements, airfield lighting facili- Naval training arine Corps facilities facilities, rinin00c
ties, training facilities, and land acquisition, Marine Corps supply center, Albany, Ga.: Naval center, Great Lakes, Ill.
$1,958,000. Storage facilities, community facilities, cold- Training facilities, family housing, and per-
Outlying field, Whitehouse Field, Duval storage facilities, personnel facilities, and sonnet facilities, $8,038,800.
County,. Fla.: Airfield pavements, and land utilities, $3,157,000. Naval powder factory, Indian Head, Md.: acquisition, $1,087,000. Marine Corps supply center, Barstow Personnel facilities, $780,000.
, Naval postgraduate school, Montere
(Marine Corps Air Stations) Calif.: Storage facilities, community facili- Y.
ties, cold-storage facilities, personnel facili- Calif,: Personnel facilities, $119,000.
Marine Corps auxiliary air station, Beau- ties, security facilities, and land acquisition, Naval receiving station, Philadelphia, Pa.:
fort, S. C.: Airfield pavements, communicy $501,000. Personnel facilities, $1,428,000.
tions facilities, navigational aids, fuel dis- Marine Corps base, Camp Lejeune, N. C.: Naval retraining command, Portsmouth,
pensing facilities, operational facilities, stor- Personnel facilities, security facilities,* a N. H.: Security facilities, $42,000.
age facilities, personnel facilities, community utilities, $1,059,000. Fleet sonar school, San Diego, Calif.:
facilities, and land acquisition, $4,649,000. Training facilities, $2,753,000.
Marine Corps, recruit depot, Parris Island,
Marine Corps air station, Cherry Point, S. C.: Training facilities, maintenance facili- Medical facilities
N. C.: Airfield pavements, aircraft mainte- ties, and utilities, $1,654,000. National naval medical center, Bethesda,
nance facilities, waterfront facilities, navi- Marine Corps base, Camp Pendleton, Md.: Plans and specifications for the Armed
gational aids, airfield lighting facilities, am- Calif.: Utilities, $648,000. Forces Medical Library, $350,000.
munition storage and ordnance facilities, Marine Corps clothing depot, Annex No. 3, Naval hospital, Chelsea, Mass.: Family
operational facilities, and land acquisition, Philadelphia, Pa.: Utilities, $30,000. housing, $192,800.
$1,762,000. Marine Corps schools, Quantico, Va.: Cov- Naval hospital, Corona, Calif.: Family
Marine Corps air station, El Toro, Calif.: ered and ammunition-storage facilities, mod- housing, and conversion of existing struc-
Airfield pavements, training facilities, com- seal facilities, training and personnel facili- tures to family housing, $256,800.
munication facilities, storage facilities, per- ties, utilities, and land acquisition, Naval hospital, Corpus Christi, Tex.: Fam-
sonnel facilities, community facilities, and $9,357,000. fly housing, $162,100.
land acquisition, $2,492,000. Marine Corps recruit depot, San Diego, Naval hospital, Great Lakes, Ill.: Plans
Marine Corps auxiliary air station, Eden- Calif.: Pavements, and personnel facilities, and specifications for certain medical fa-
ton, N. C.: Family housing, $1,421,500. $120,000. cilities, $750,000.
Marine Corps air station, Miami, Fla?
Land acquisition, $1,223,000. Marine Corps training center, Twenty-nine Naval hospital, Jacksonville, Fla.: Retain-
Marine Corps auxiliary air station, Mojave, Palms, Calif.: Family housing, $47,300. ing wall, $46,000.
Calif.: Maintenance facilities. lana arm,t,i- Ordnance facilities _ Naval submarine base, New London, Conn.:
Marine Corps air facility, New River, X. C.: S. C.: Ordnance facilities, $193,000.u11Ga"-" Naval hospital, Philadelphia, Pa.: Utilities,
Airfield pavements, medical? facilities, ad- Naval aviation ordnance test station, Chin- $60,000.
ministrative facilities, storage facilities, per- coteague, Va.: Research and development Communications facilities
sonnel facilities, community facilites, opera- facilities, $644,000. Naval radio station, Northwest, Va.: Com-
tional facilities, training facilities, and Naval ordnance' aerophysics laboratory, munication facilities, $436,000.
utilities, $2,762,000. Daingerfleld, Tex.: Research and develop- Office ce of naval research
(Special purpose air stations) p- f facilities
ment facilities, $1,111,000. Naval research laboratory, Washington, on, D.
Naval air facility, to be known as John H. Naval ammunition depot, Earle, N. J.: C.: Research facilities, and utilities, $163,-
Towers Field, Annapolis area, Md.: Opera- Refrigerated storage facilities, $59,000. 000.
No. 108-10
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-R DP63T00245R000100120005-2
 'Z932
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE June _117
Naval research laboratory, Chesapeake Bay ordnance facilities Glasgow sie, on facilities, Airfield pavements,
aids
Annex, Randle Cliffs. Md.: Research facili- Naval ammunition depot, Oahu, T. H.: fu dispensing navigational
operational
ties, and land acquisition, $52,000. Testing facilities, and railroad facilities and and airfield lighting tnte facilities, operational
Yards and docks facilities barricades. $1,132.000. ffacaisaciningilities, aircraft utilities mane facilities,
-
Naval construction battalion center. Davis- Naval ordnance facility. Sasebo, Japan: storage facilities, personnel facilities, adminville, R. I.: Waterfront facilities, and storage Personnel facilities, $88,000. istrative and community facilities, shop fa-
facilities, $5,397,000. Service school facilities cliltles, and family housing, $4,706,000.
Public works center, Norfolk. Va.: Utilities, Fleet training center. Pearl Harbor, T. H.: Grand Forks site, North Dakota: Airfield
$2.510,000. Training facilities, $44,000. pavements, fuel dispensing facilities. com-
Naval construction battalion center, Port Medical facilities muntcations, navigational aids and airfield
Hueneme, Calif.: Maintenance facilities, Naval hospital, Guam. Mariana Islands: lighting facilities, operational facilities, atr-
$1.B25,000. Community facilities, $209,000. craft maintenance facilities, training facili-
ties, troop housing, utilities, land acquisi-
of water pollution, including the acquisition Communication facitities tion, medical facilities, storage facilities, per-
of land, $15,149,000. Naval communication station, Adak. sonnel facilities, administrative and com-
OVTSIDE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES Alaska: Communication facilities, $439,000, munity facilities, shop facilities, and family
Shipyard facilities Naval radio facility, Kami-Seya. Japan; housing, $5,822,000.
Communication facilities, and family hoes- Grandview Air Force Base, Kansas City,
Fleet activities. Sasebo, Japan: Personnel Ing, $2,504.700. Mo.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing fa-
facilities. $57.000. Naval communication station, Kodiak, cillties. airfield lighting facilities, aircraft
Fleet base facilities Alaska: Site preparation, communication maintenance facilities, training facilities,
Naval station, Adak, Alaska: Family hous- facilities, maintenance facilities, personnel utilities, land acquisition, storage facilities,
ing, $2,485.000. facilities, and utilities. $6,991,000. personnel facilities, and family housing.
Naval base. Guam, Mariana Islands: Ad- Naval communication facility. Philippine $3.402.000.
ministrative facilities, $1,835,000. Islands: Communication facilities, com- Greater Milwaukee area, Wisconsin: Airfield
Naval base, Guantanamo Bay. Cuba: Utii- munity facilities, utilities, and family hour- pavements, fuel dispensing facilities, com-
ties, $56,000. ing, $8,061,500. muntcations and navigational aids, opera-
Naval base. Subic Bay. Philippine Islands: Naval communication facility. Port tionai facilities, aircraft maintenance facil-
Personnel facilities, medical facilities, util- Lyautey, French Morocco: Storage facilities, !ties, troop housing and messing facilities,
,ties, and family housing, $16,253,700. personnel facilities, community facilities, utilities, land acquisition, medical facilities.
Fleet activities: Yokosuka, Japan: Family utilities, and family housing, $2,848,600. storage facilities, personnel facilities, admin-
housing, $6,540,800. Yards and docks facilities istrative and community facilities, shop fa-
Fifteenth Naval District, Canal Zone: cilities, and family housing, $16,608,000.
Aviation facilities Utilities, and acquisition of family housing, Greater Pittsburgh Airport, Coraopolis,
$3,069,000. Pa.: Training facilities, utilities, medical fa-
Naval air station. Agana, Guam, Mariana
Islands: Airfield pavements, operational is- Guam. Mariana Islands: Utilities. $940,000. cilities. and personnel facilities, $404,000.
clllties, personnel facilities, aircraft main- Sec 202. The Secretary of the Navy Is Hamilton Air Force Base, San Rafael.
tenance facilities, and utilities, $8,525,000. authorized to establish or develop classified Calif.: Airfield pavements, operational facil-
Naval station. Argentia. Newfoundland: naval installations and facilities by the ac- itfes, troop housing, land acquisition, and
Operational facilities, and family housing, uisitlon of land, and the construction. con- personnel facilities. $1,501,000,
$8,569.800. q Kinross Air Force Base, Sault Sainte
Naval air station. Atsugf, Japan: Personnel version, rehabilitation, or public lic roman w Installation feences, , of pensing Mich.: Airfield pavements, fuel dis-
facilities. and family housing. $1,978,800, eluding gent perm site e preparation, poraappurtenances, facilities, airfield lighting facilities,
n
Naval station. Bermuda, British West In- utilities, equipment and family housing, in aircraft maintenance facilities, training la-
dies: Aircraft maintenance facilities, $91,- the total amount of $161,342,400. ctlttles, utilities, storage facilities, personnel
000. Src. 203. The Secretary of the Navy to facilities, and family housing, $2,029,000.
Naval air facility, Cubi Point, Philippine authorized through the construction, re- K. I. Sawyer Municipal Airport, Marquette,
Islands: Airfield pavements, aircraft main- habilitation or installation of permanent or Mich.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing
tenance facilities, earthwork, personnel fa- temporary public works, including site prep- facilities, airfield lighting facilities, opera-
cilities, communication facilities, ordnance aration, appurtenances. and related utilities tional facilities, utilities, personnel facilities,
facilities, fuel-dispensing facilities, and utili- and equipment, to restore or replace facili- administrative facilities, relocation of facili-
ties, $8,280,000. ties damaged or destroyed in a total amount ties, and family housing, $3,943,000.
Naval air station. Guantanamo Bay, Cuba: of $8 million. Klamath Falls Municipal Airport, Kla-
Fuel pipeline facllities, community faclli- TITLE III math Falls, Oreg.: Airfield pavements, relo-
ties, utilities, and family housing, $2,977,300. cation of facilities, utilities, land acquisition,
Naval air facility, Iwakuni, Japan: Per- Sac. 301. The Secretary of the Air Force is medical facilities, personnel facllities, ad-
hereby authorized to establish or develop ministrative facilities, and family housing,
sonnet a Corps, air station, Kaneohe Bay, Force Installations and facilities by the
s air . $2,042,000.
Marine Corp
T. H.: Airfield pavements. , fuel-ddapenstng acquisition, construction, conversion. re- McChord Air Force Base, Tacoma, Wash.:
facilities, and family housing, $3,227,600. habilitation, or Installation of permanent or Airfield pavements, training facilities, stor-
Naval station. Kodiak. Alaska: Family temporary public works in respect of the age facilities, personnel facilities, commun-
housing. $2,813,100. following projects, which Include site prep- ity facilities, and family housing, $2,959,000.
Naval station. Kwajalein, Marshall aration. appurtenances and related utilities, McGhee-Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tenn.:
Islands: Communication facilities. ammu- equipment and facllities: Airfield pavements, utilities, storage facili-
nition storage facilities, and personnel fa- CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES ties, personnel facilities, and shop facili-
cilittes, $4,411,000. Air Defense Command ties, $682,000.
Naval station, Midway Island, T. H.: Com- Buckingham Weapons Center, Fort My- Minneapolis-St. Paul International Air-
munication facilities and operational fa- ers, Fla.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing port. Minneapolis, Minn.: Airfield pave-
cilities, $1,518,000. facilities, communications and navigational ments. aircraft maintenance facilities, troop
Naples. Italy: Operational facilities and aids, operational facilities, aircraft main- housing, storage facilities, personnel facili-
storage facilities, $155,000. tenance facilities, troop housing and messing ties, and community facilities, $1,423,000.
Naval air facility, Port Lyautey, French facilities, utilities, land acquisition, medical Minot site, North Dakota: Airfield pave-
Morocco: Cold-storage facilities, and family facilities, storage facilities, personnel facili- ments, fuel dispensing facilities, communi-
housing, $1,958,500. ties, administrative facilities, shop facilities, cations. navigational aids and airfield light-
Naval station, Roosevelt Roads. Puerto and family housing, $11,577,000. ing facilities, operational facilities, aircraft
Rico: Operational facilities and airfield pave- Duluth Municipal Airport. Duluth, Minn.: maintenance facilities, training facilities,
ments, $3,721,000. Airfield pavements, aircraft maintenance fa- troop housing, utilities, medical facilities,
Naval station. Sangley Point, Philippine cilities, utilities, medical facilities, storage storage facilities, personnel facilities, admin-
facilities. personnel facilities, and shop fa- istrative and community facilities, and shop
Islands: Family housing. $522,900. ctlttles, $1,200,000. facilities, $5,339,000.
Supply facilities Ent Air Force Base, Colorado Springs, New Castle County Municipal Airport,
Naval supply depot Guam. Mariana Coto,: Utilities. personnel facilities, and lam- Wilmington, Del.: Airfield pavements, air-
Islands: Waterfront facilities and storage fly housing, $1.808,000. field lighting facilities, land acquisition, and
facilities, $5,427,000. Ethan Allan Air Force Base. Winooski, Vt.: storage facilities, $504,000.
Naval supply depot, Guantanamo Bay, Fuel dispensing facitities, airfield lighting, Niagara Falls Municipal Airport, Niagara
Cuba: Cold-storage facilities, $1,318,000. and utilities, $213,000. Falls. N. Y.: Airfield pavements, fuel dia-
Naval supply center, Pearl Harbor, T. H.: Geiger Field, Spokane. Wash.: Airfield pave- pensing facilities, airfield lighting facilities,
Operational facilities, utilities, and land ac- ments. troop housing, storage facilities, and operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
quisitlon, $270,000. family housing, $1,718.000, facilities, utilities, land acquisition, medical
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
1955 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 7933
facilities, storage facilities, and personnel fa-
cilities, $1,748,000.
Otis Air Force Base, Falmouth, Mass.: Air-
field pavements, airfield lighting facilities,
operational facilities, training facilities,
messing facilities, medical facilities, storage
facilities, personnel facilities, administrative
facilities, shop facilities, and family housing,
$6,076,000.
Oxnard Air Force Base, Oxnard, Calif.:
Airfield pavements, fuel 'dispensing facili.
ties, airfield lighting facilities, aircraft main-
tenance facilities, training facilities, troop
housing, utilities, storage facilities, person-
nel facilities, and administrative facilities,
$2,445,000.
Paine Air Force Base, Everett, Wash.: Air-
field pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
airfield lighting facilities, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, land acquisition, storage
facilities, and personnel facilities, $1,039,000.
Presque Isle Air Force Base, Presque Isle,
Maine: Airfield pavements, airfield lighting
facilities, troop housing and messing facili-
ties, land acquisition, storage facilities, and
family housing, $2,056,000.
Selfridge Air Force Base, Mount Clemens,
Mich.: Airfield pavements, communications
and airfield lighting facilities, troop housing
and messing facilities, utilities, land acquisi-
tion, medical facilities, and personnel facili-
ties, $5,526,000.
Sioux City Municipal Airport, Sioux City,
Iowa: Airfield pavements, airfield lighting
facilities, and messing facilities, $343,000.
Stewart Air Force Base, Newburgh, N. Y.:
Navigational aids and airfield lighting fa-
cilities, storage facilities, and community fa-
cilities, $112,000.
Suffolk County Air Force Base, Westhamp-
ton, N. Y.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispens-
ing facilities, airfield lighting facilities, troop
housing, utilities, land acquisition, storage
facilities, personnel facilities, and family
housing, $2,207,000.
Traverse City area, Michigan: Airfield
pavements, fuel dispensing facilities, opera-
tional facilities, training facilities, storage
facilities, personnel facilities,, administra-
tive and community facilities, and shop
facilities, $1,881,000.
Truax Field, Madison, Wis.: Airfield pave-
ments, fuel dispensing facilities, airfield
lighting facilities, troop housing, land acqui-
sition, storage facilities, personnel facilities,
and shop facilities, $1,263,000.
Wurtsmith Air Force Base, Oscoda, Mich.:
Airfield pavements, airfield lighting facili-
ties, aircraft maintenance facilities, troop
housing, utilities, storage facilities, adminis-
trative facilities, shop facilities, and family
housing, $2,511,000.
Youngstown Municipal Airport, Youngs-
town, Ohio: Airfield pavements, airfield
lighting facilities, utilities, storage facilities,
and personnel facilities, $742,000.
Yuma County Airport, Yuma, Ariz.: Air-
field lighting facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities, training facilities, troop housing,
personnel facilities, and administrative facil-
ities, $2,107,000.
Brookley Air Force Base, Mobile, Ala.:
Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
aircraft maintenance facilities, troop hous-
ing and messing facilities, utilities, and stor-
age facilities, $4,170,000.
Griffiss Air Force Base, Rome, N, Y.: Air
field pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
airfield lighting facilities, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, troop housing, land acqui=
sition, storage facilities, personnel facilities,
administrative facilities, and family housing,
$15,803,000.
Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah: Airfield
pavements, and airfield lighting facilities,
$2,386,000.
Kelly Air Force Base, San Antonio, Tex.
Airfield pavements, airfield lighting facil-
ities, -aircaft maintenance facilities, and land
acquisition, $1,945,000.
McClellan Air Force Base, Sacramento,
Calif.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing
facilities, operational facilities, aircraft
maintenance facilities, training facilities,
troop housing, utilities, land acquisition, and,
administrative facilities, $9,522,000. .
Norton Air Force Base, San Bernardino,
Calif.: Airfield pavements, airfield lighting
facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities,
troop housing and messing facilities, land
acquisition, and storage facilities, $3,205,000.
Olmstead Air Force Base, Middletown, Pa.:
Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
aircraft maintenance facilities, utilities, land
acquisition, and storage facilities, $21,264,000.
Robins Air Force Base, Macon, Ga.: Air-
field pavements, communications and air-
field lighting facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities, troop housing, and land acquisi-
tion, $3,375,000.
Searsport Air Force Tank Farm, Searsport,
Maine: Fuel storage facilities, $133,000.
Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma City,
Okla.: Storage facilities, $205,000.
Wilkins Air Force Station, Shelby, Ohio:
Utilities, $305,000.
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton,
Ohio: Airfield pavements,\training facilities,
troop housing and messing facilities, util-
ities, land acquisition, research and develop-
ment facilities, and administrative facilities,
$18,001,000.
Various locations: Storage facilities, $170,-
000.
Air Proving Ground Command
Rglin Air Force Base, Valparaiso, Fla.:
Airfield pavements, - communications, and
navigational aids, troop housing and messing
facilities, land acquisition, research, devel-
opment and test facilities, and storage facil-
ities, $7,966,000.
Air Training Command
Amarillo Air Force Base, Amarillo, Tex.:
Training facilities, $98,000.
Bryan Air Force Base, Bryan, Tex.: Troop
housing and messing facilities, and util-
ities, $914,000.
Chanute Air Force Base, Rantoul, Ill.:
Land acquisition, $3,000.
Craig Air Force Base, Selma, Ala.: Airfield
pavements, troop housing, and land acqui-
sition, $1,650;000.
Ellington Air Force Base, Houston, Tex.:
Troop housing and messing facilities, land
acquisition, and medical facilities, $2,816,000.
Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, Chey-
enne, Wyo.: Troop housing and messing
facilities, $1,40$,000.
Goodfellow Air Force Base, San Angelo,
Tex.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing
facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities,
troop housing and messing facilities, and
land acquisition, $4,081,000.
Greenville Air Force Base, Greenville, Miss.:
Aircraft maintenance facilities, land acqui-
sition, and personnel facilities, $349,000.
Headquarters technical training, Air Force,
Gulfport, Miss.: Acquisition of land and
facilities, $313,000.
Harlingen Air Force Base, Harlingen, Tex.:
Communications and navigational aids and
troop housing, $446,000.
James Connally Air Force Base, Waco,
Tex.: Troop housing and messing facilities,
$883,000.
Laredo Air Force Base, Laredo, Tex.: Air-
craft maintenance facilities, and family
housing, $1,525,500.
Laughlin Air Force Base, Del Rio, Tex.:
Airfield pavements, operational facilities,
training facilities, land acquisition, and fam-
ily housing, $3,695,000.
Lowry Air Force Base, Denver, Colo.: Troop
housing and messing facilities, $1,217,000.
Luke Air Force Base, Phoenix, Ariz.:
Training facilities, troop housing and mess-
ing facilities, and land acquisition, $1,557,-
000.
Mather Air Force Base, Sacramento, Calif.:
Communications and navigational aids,
troop housing and messing facilities, and
personnel facilities, $1,516,000.
McConnell Air Force Base, Wichita, Kans.:
Operational facilities, and land acquisition,
$104,000.
Moody Air Force Base, Valdosta, Ga.: Air-
field pavements, aircraft maintenance facil-
ities, troop housing and messing, facilities,
land acquisition, and family housing, $4,-
322,000.
Nellis Air Force Base, Las Vegas, Nev.:
Airfield pavements, aircraft maintenance fa-
cilities, and troop housing and messing fa-
cilities, $1,153,000.
Perrin Air Force Base, Sherman, Tex.:
Troop housing and messing facilities, and
land acquisition, $956,000.
Randolph Air Force Base, San Antonio,
Tex.: Troop housing, $549,000.
Reese Air -Force Base, Lubbock, Tex.:
Troop housing and messing facilities; land
acquisition, and personnel facilities, $1,076,-
000.
Scott Air Force Base, Belleville, Ill.: Troop
housing and messing facilities, $1,247,000.
Sheppard Air Force Base, Wichita Falls,
Tex.: Messing facilities, $80,000.
Stead Air Force Base, Reno, Nev.: Aircraft
maintenance facilities, training facilities,
troop housing, personnel facilities, and fam-
ily housing, $4,187,000.
Tyndall Air Force Base, Panama City, Fla.:
Airfield lighting facilities, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, and land acquisition, $478,-
000.
Vance Air Force Base, Enid, Okla.: Troop
housing and messing facilities, and land
acquisition, $871,000.
Webb Air Force Base, Big Spring, Tex.:
Shop facilities, and family housing, $2,410,-
000.
Williams Air Force Base, Chandler, Ariz.:
Operational facilities, and troop housing and
messing facilities, $1,045,000.
Air University
Gunter Air Force Base, Montgomery, Ala.:
Troop housing, $275,000.
Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Ala.:
Troop housing and messing facilities, util-
ities, and medical facilities, $2,661,000.
Continental Air Command
Beale Air Force Base, Marysville, Calif.:
Land acquisition, personnel facilities, and
family housing, $2,125,500.
Brooks Air Force Base, San Antonio, Tex.:
Troop housing, $590,000.
Dobbins Air Force Base, Marietta, Ga.:
Airfield' pavements, and personnel facilities,
$768,000.
Mitchell Air Force Base, Hempstead, N. Y.:
Airfield pavements, $1,891,000. -
Wolters Air Force Base, Mineral Wells,
Tex.: Operational facilities, storage facil-
ities, and personnel facilities, $331,000.
Headquarters Command
Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, D. C.:
Personnel facilities, $520,000.
Military Air Transport Service
Andrews Air Force Base, Camp Springs,
Md.: Medical facilities, and personnal fa-
cilities, $1,098,000.
Charleston Air Force Base, Charleston,
S. C.: Airfield pavements, operational fa-
cilities, personnel facilities, administrative
and community facilities, and land acquisi-
tion, $4,032,000.
Dover Air Force Base, Dover, Del.: Airfield
pavements, fuel dispensing facilities, airfield
lighting facilities, aircraft maintenance fa-
cilities, land acquisition, personnel facilities,
administrative facilities, and family housing,
$7,073,000.
McGuire Air Force Base, Wrightstown,
N. J.: Airfield pavements, airfield lighting
facilities, operational facilities, utilities, stor-
age facilities, personnel facilities, and family
housing, $5,564,000.
Palm Beach Air Force Base, Palm Beach,
Fla.: Operational facilities, aircraft main-
tenance facilities, troop housing and messing
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63Tb0245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE June 2 i
facilities, utilities, and personnel facilities,
3818.000.
St. Louis Aeronautical Chart Information
Center, St. Louis, Mo.: Administrative facili-
ties. $861,000.
Research and Development Command
Carabelle Test Site, Carabelle. Fla.: Land
acquisition, $1,000.
Edwards Air Force Base, Muroc, Calif.:
Airfield lighting facilities, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, utilities, research, develop-
ment and test facilities, personnel facilities,
and community facilities, 312,429.000.
Hartford Research Facility, Hartford,
Conn.: Research and development facilities,
$22.375,000.
Holloman Air Force Base, Alamogordo, N.
1t,x.: Airfield pavements, airfield lighting
facilities, utilities, research and development
f2cilities, medical facilities, storage facilities,
personnel facilities, and community facili-
ties, $4,965,000.
Indian Springs Air Force Base (Kirtland
Auxiliary No. 1), Clark, Nev.: Operational
facilities, shop facilities, and family housing,
$355,500.
Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque, N.
Mex.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, utili-
ties, and shop facilities, $905,000.
Laurence G. Hanscom Field, Bedford,
Mass.: Airfield pavements, Communications
and airfield lighting facilities, aircraft main-
tenance facilities, troop housing, utilities,
land acquisition, research and development
facilities, storage facilities, personnel fa-
cilities, shop facilities, and family housing,
$3,705,000.
Mount Washington Climatic Projects
Laboratory, Mount Washington, N. H.: Re-
search and development facilities. $588,000.
Patrick Air Force Base, Cocoa, Fla.: Air-
field pavements, aircraft maintenance fa-
cilities, utilities, land acquisition, research
and development facilities, and shop facili-
ties, 37,600,000.
Various locations: Research, development,
and operational facilities, $20 million.
Strategic Air Command
Abilene Air Force Base, Abilene, Tex.:
Airfield pavements, fuel-dispensing facilities,
training facilities, troop housing, utilities,
land acquisition, medical facilities, storage
facilities, personnel facilities, and adminis-
trative and community facilities, $4,214,000.
Altus Air Force Base, Altus, Okla.: Fuel
dispensing facilities, airfield lighting facili-
ties, operational facilities, training facilities,
utlities, storage facilities, personnel facilities.
administrative facilities, and family housing,
$2,920,000.
Barksdale Air Force Base, Shreveport.
La.: Airfield pavements, fuel-dispensing fa-
cilities, communications and airfield lighting
facilities, training facilities, medical a-
cilities, storage facilities, and personnel
facilities, 37,379,000.
Bergstrom Air Force Base, Austin, Tex.:
Airfield pavements, operational facilities,
utilities, land acquisition, personnel facilt-
tles, administrative facilities, and shop fa-
cilities, $1,770,000.
Biggs Air Force Base. El Paso, Tex.: Fuel
dispensing facilities, operational facilities,
troop housing, storage facilities, and per-
sonnel facilities, $2,427,000.
Campbell Air Force Base, Hopkinsvllle, Ky.:
Airfield pavements, communications, troop
housing and messing facilities, utilities,
land acquisition, and shop facilities, $1,-
975,000.
Carswell Air Force Base, Fort Worth, Tea.:
Airfield lighting facilities, troop housing,
utilities, medical facilities, and personnel fa-
cilities, $2,322,000.
Castle Air Force Base. Merced. Calif.: Air-
field pavements, operational facilities, air-
craft maintenance facilities, utilities, land
acquisition, storage facilities, and adminis-
trative facilities, $4,453,000.
Clinton-Sherman Air Force Base, Clinton,
Okla.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing
facilities, operational facilities, aircraft
maintenance facilities, training facilities.
utilities, land acquisition, storage facilities,
personnel faciities, administrative and com-
munity facilities, shop facilities, and family
housing, $10,208.500.
Columbus Air Force Base, Columbus, Miss.:
Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities. training facilities, troop housing
and messing facilities, utilities, land acqui-
sition, medical facilities, storage facilities,
administrative facilities, shop facilities, and
family housing, $6.629,000.
Davis-Monttan Air Force Base, Tucson,
Ariz.: Airfield pavements, training facilities,
troop housing, medical faciliti?s, storage fa-
cilities, and personnel facilities, $7,803,000.
Dow Air Force Base, Bangor, Maine: Air-
field pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities. training facilities, troop housing,
rehabilitation, land acqusltlon, personnel fa-
cilities. community facilities, and shop fa-
cilities. $11,155,000.
Ellsworth Air Force Base. Rapid City,
8. Dak.: Airfield pavements, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, troop housing, land acqui-
sition. storage facilities. personnel facilities,
and shop facilities, $11,168,000.
Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane. Wash.:
Airfield pavements, fuel-dispensing facilities,
aircraft maintenance facilities, training fa-
cllities, land acquisition, storage facilities,
and personnel facilities. $1,707,000.
Forbes Air Force Base. Topeka. Kans.: Air-
field pavements, fuel-dispensing facilities,
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities. utilities, land acquisition, medical
facilities, storage facilities, personnel fact-
itfes. and shop facilities. 94,753,000.
Gray Air Force Base. Killeen, Tex.: Troop
housing, medical facilities, storage facilities,
personnel facilities, and community facilities,
4482,000.
Great Falls Air Force Bane. Great Falls,
Mont.: Airfield pavements, communications,
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities. training facilities, storage facilities,
personnel facilities, administrative and com-
munity facilities, and shop facilities,
95,435,000.
Homestead Air Force Base. Homestead,
Fla.: Airfield pavements, fuel-dispensing fa-
cllities, airfield lighting facilities, operational
facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities,
training facilities, utilities, medical facilities,
storage facilities, personnel facilities, and
family housing, $4,428,000.
Hunter Air Force Base Savannah, Ga.: Air-
field pavements, airfield lighting facilities,
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities, training facilities, utilities, medi-
cal facilities, and personnel facilities, $4,-
115,000.
Lake Charles Air Force Base, Lake Charles,
La.: Airfield pavements, fuel-dispensing fa-
cilities. airfield lighting facilities, aircraft
maintenance facilities, training facilities,
troop housing. utilities, and personnel facil-
ities, 92.396.000.
Lincoln Air Force Base. Lincoln, Nebr.: Air-
field pavements, fuel-dispensing facilities,
aircraft maintenance facilities, training fa-
cilities. land acquisition, medical facilities,
storage facilities, personnel facilities, and ad-
minlstrfative facilities, $8,595,000..
Little Rock Air Force Base, Little Rock,
Ark.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing fa-
cilities, navigational aids and airfield light-
ing facilities, operational facilities, aircraft
maintenance facilities, training facilities,
utilities, land acquisition. medical facilities,
storage facilities, personnel facilities, admin-
istrative and community facilities, and fam-
ily housing, $5,317,000.
Lockbourne Air Force Base. Columbus,
facilities, troop housing, utilities, land ac-
quisitlon, medical facilities, storage facilities
personnel facilities, and shop facilities, $8,-
571,000.
Loring Air Force Base, Limestone, Maine:
Fuel dispensing facilities, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, troop housing, utilities, land
acquisition, personnel facilities, administra-
tive and community facilities, and shop fa-
cilities, $2,930,000.
MacDill Air Force Base, Tampa, Fla.: Air-
field pavements, airfield lighting facilities,
aircraft maintenance facilities, troop hous-
ing, land acquisition, and personnel facilities,
$5,251,000.
March Air Force Base, Riverside, Calif.:
Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
airfield lighting facilities, aircraft mainte-
nance facilities, troop housing, land acquisi-
tion, and personnel facilities, $3,741,000.
Mountain Home Air Force Base, Mountain
Home, Idaho: Airfield pavements, opera-
tional facilities, aircraft maintenance fa-
cilities, utilities, land acquisition, medical
facilities, storage facilities, personnel facil-
ities. community facilities, and family hous-
ing, 35.961.000.
OEutt Air Force Base, Omaha, Nebr.: Utili-
ties, and land acquisition, $128,000.
Pinecastle Air Force Base, Orlando, Fla.:
Airfield pavements, communications and air-
field lighting facilities, operational facilities,
aircraft maintenance facilities, utilities, land
acquisition, storage faciities, personnel facil-
ities, and community facilities, $4,118,000.
Piattsburg Air Force Base, Plattsburg.
N. Y.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing
facilities, airfield lighting facilities, opera-
tional facilities, aircraft maintenance facil-
ities. training facilities, utilities, land ac-
quisition, medical facilities, storage facilities,
personnel facilities, administrative and com-
munity facilities, and family housing, $21;
988,000.
Portsmouth Air Force Base, Portsmouth,
N. H.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing
facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities,
training facilities, utilities, land acquisition,
storage facilities, personnel facilities, ad-
ministrative and community facilities, and
family housing, $24,850,000.
Sedalia Air Force Base, Knobnoster, Mo.:
Airfield pavements, airfield lighting facil-
ities, aircraft maintenance facilities, utilities,
land acquisition, storage facilities, personnel
facilities, community facilities, shop facil-
ities, and family housing, 39,646,000.
Smoky Hill Air Force Base, Salina, Kane.:
Airfield pavements, operational facilities, air-
craft maintenance facilities, troop housing,
utilities, land acquisition, medical facilities,
storage facilities, personnel facilities, ad-
ministrative facilities, shop facilities, and
family housing, $8,773,500.
Travis Air Force Base, Fairfield, Calif.:
Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities.
troop housing, utilities, land acquisition.
storage facilities, personnel facilities, ad-
ministrative and community facilities, and
shop facilities, 32,125.000.
Turner Air Force Base, Albany, Ga.: Air-
field pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
airfield lighting facilities, operational facil-
ities, aircraft maintenance facilities, troop
housing, utilities, and land acquisition,
$3,744,000.
Walker Air Force Base, Roswell, N. Mex.:
Airfield pavements, troop housing, utilities,
land acquisition, medical facilities, storage
facilities, and personnel facilities, $5,259,000.
Westover Air Force Base, Chicopee Falls,
Mass.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing
facilities, communications and navigational
aids, aircraft maintenance facilities, train-
ing facilities, troop housing, land acquisition,
storage facilities, personnel facilities, and
community facilities, $7,716,000.
Tactical Air Command
Ohio: Airfield pavements, operational facia- Alexandria Air Force Base, Alexandria, La.:
sties, aircraft maintenance facilities, training Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28:.CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
' 955 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
acilities, training facilities, utilities, and
personnel facilities, $2,684,000.
Ardmore Air Force Base, Ardmore, Okla..,
Airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities,
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities, personnel facilities, and family
housing, $6,800,000.
Blytheville Air Force Base, Blytheville,
Ark.: Airfield lighting facilities, training
facilities, utilities, storage facilities, and com-
munity facilities, $208,000.
Bunker Hill Air Force Base, Peru, Ind.:
Airfield lighting facilities, operational fa-
cilities, training facilities, and administra-
tive facilities, $559,000.
Clovis Air Force Base, Clovis, N. Mex.-
Training facilities, and family housing,
$2,570,500.
Donaldson Air Force Base, Greenville, S. C.:
Airfield pavements, aircraft maintenance
facilities, troop housing and messing facili-
ties, and medical facilities, $2,403,000.
Foster Air Force Base, Victoria, Tex.: Air-
field pavements, training facilities, troop
housing, and family housing, $4,624,000.
George Air Force Base, Victorville, Calif.:
Airfield pavements, navigational aids and
airfield lighting facilities, training facilities,
troop housing and messing facilities, land
acquisition, and storage facilities, $1,698,000.
Langley Air Force Base, Hampton, Va.:
Airfield pavements, training facilities, util-
ities; storage facilities, personnel facilities,
and administrative facilities, $3,384,000.
Larson Air Force Base, Moses Lake, Wash.:
Airfield pavements, utilities, medical facili-
ties, and personnel facilities, $3,574,000.
Myrtle Beach Municipal Airport, Myrtle
Beach, S. C.: Airfield pavements, fuel dis-
pensing facilities, communications and navi-
gational aids, aircraft maintenance facilities,
training facilities, messing facilities, utilities,
land acquisition, medical facilities, storage
facilities, personnel facilities, administrative
and community facilities, and shop facilities,
$6,303,000.
Pope Air Force Base, Fort Bragg, N. C.:
Airfield pavements, communications and
navigational aids, troop housing and messing
facilities, land acquisition, medical facilities,
and storage facilities, $2,548,000. -
Stewart Air Force Base, Smyrna, Tenn.:
Airfield pavements, communications and
navigational aids, operational facilities, air-
craft maintenance facilities, troop housing
and messing facilities, land acquisition, per-
sonnel facilities, and administrative facil-
ities, $3,589,000.
Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, Golds-
boro, N. C.: Airfield pavements, fuel dispen-
sing facilities, communications and naviga-
tional aids, operational facilities, aircraft
maintenance facilities, training facilities,
troop housing utilities, land acquisition,
medical facilities, storage facilities, person-
nel-facilities, administrative and community
facilities, and shop facilities, $7,429,000.
Shaw Air Force Base, Sumter, S. C.: Airfield
pavements, operational facilities, aircraft
maintenance facilities, troop housing and
messing facilities, utilities, storage facilities,
personnel facilities, and family housing,
$7,035,000.
Special facilities
Various locations: Operational facilities,
and utilities, $387,000. .
Aircraft control and warning system
Various locations: Fuel dispensing facili-
ties, communications and navigational aids,
operational facilities, training facilities,
troop housing and messing facilities, utili-
ties, land acquisition, medical facilities, stor-
age facilities, personnel facilities, adminis-
trative and community facilities, and shop
facilities, $100,382,000.
OUTSIDE CONTINENTAL 'UNITED STATES
Alaskan Air Command
Bielson Air Force Base: Medical facilities,
storage facilities, and community facilities,
$1,307,000.
Elmendogf Air Force Base: Airfield pave-
ments, fuel -dispensing facilities, airfield
lighting facilities, aircraft maintenance fa-
cilities, troop housing and messing facilities,
utilities, land acquisition, medical facilities,
storage facilities, personnel facilities,- and
shop facilities, $23,275,000.
Galena Airfield: Airfield lighting facilities,
and storage facilities, $518,000.
Kenai Airfield: Airfield pavements, $356,-
000.
Ladd Air Force Base: Training facilities,
land acquisition, and storage facilities,
$1,510,000.
Naknek Airfield: Airfield pavements, air-
field lighting facilities, operational facilities,
utilities, and storage facilities, $1,863,000.
Caribbean Air Command
Albrook Air Force Base, Canal Zone : Com-
munication facilities, $163,000.
Far East Air Forces
Various locations: Airfield pavements, fuel
dispensing facilities, navigational aids and
airfield lighting facilities, operational facil-
ities, aircraft maintenance facilities, utili-
ties, storage facilities, personnel facilities,
and community facilities, $42,017,000.
Military Air Transport Service
Hickam Air Force Base, Honolulu, Hawaii:
Airfield pavements, airfield lighting facili-
ties, land acquisition, storage facilities, and
harbor facilities, $4,978,000.
Johnston Island Air Force Base: Johnston
Island: Communication facilities, $182,000.
Midway Island: Airfield pavements, fuel
dispensing facilities, and airfield lighting fa-
cilities, $303,000.
Wake Island: Airfield pavements, fuel dis-
pensing- facilities, and navigational aids,
$2,991,000.
Various locations: Airfield pavements, fuel
dispensing facilities, navigational aids and
airfield lighting facilities, aircraft main-
tenance facilities, troop housing, utilities,
personnel facilities, and family housing,
$11,393,000.
Northeast Air Command
Various locations: Airfield pavements, fuel
dispensing facilities, operational facilities,
aircraft maintenance facilities, training fa-
cilities, troop housing, utilities, storage facil-
ities, and shop facilities, $23,601,000.
Strategic Air Command
Ramey Air Force Base, Puerto Rico: Fuel
dispensing facilities, operational facilities,
utilities, storage facilities, personnel facil-
ities, and harbor facilities, $2,149,000.
United States Air Forces in Europe
Various locations: Airfield pavements, fuel
dispensing facilities, communications, navi-
gational aids and airfield. lighting facilities,
operational facilities, aircraft maintenance
facilities, training facilities, troop housing
and messing facilities, utilities, medical fa-
cilities, storage facilities, personnel facilities,
administrative and community facilities, and
shop facilities, $234,996,000.
Area control navigational aids
Various locations: Communications and
navigational aids, $526,000.
Special facilities
Various locations: Operational facilities,
and utilities, $293,000.
Aircraft control and warning system
Various locations: Airfield pavements, fuel
dispensing facilities, communications, nav-
igational aids and airfield lighting facili-
ties, operational facilities, troop housing and
messing facilities, utilities, medical facili.
ties, storage facilities, personnel facilities,
administrative and -community facilities,
shop facilities, aircraft maintenance facili-
ties, harbor facilities, and land acquisition,
$98,552,000.
SEC. 302, The Secretary of the Air Force Is
authorized through the construction, reha-
bilitation, or installation of permanent or
temporary public works, including site prep-
aration, apppurtenances, and related utili-
ties and equipment, to restore or replace
facilities damaged or destroyed in a total
amount of $6 million.
SEC. 303. Public Law 534, Eighty-third
Congress, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) With respect to - Carswell Air Force
Base, Fort Worth, Tex., under the heading
"Continental United States" and subheading
"Strategic Air Command" in. section 301
strike "$2,248,000" and insert in lieu thereof
"$2,750,000."
(b) With respect to Matagorda Island Air
Force Range, Tex., under the heading "Con-
tinental -United States" and subheading
"Strategic Air Command" in section 301
strike "$607,000" and insert in lieu thereof
"$847,000."
(c) With respect to Bismarck-Minot area,
North Dakota, under the heading "Continen-
tal United States" and subheading "Air De-
fense Command" in section 301 strike "Bis-
marck-Minot area, North Dakota" and "$6,-
494,000" and insert in lieu thereof "Minot
Site, North Dakota" and "$12,124,000", re-
spectively.
(d) With respect to Fargo area, North
Dakota, under the heading "Continental
United States" and subheading "Air Defense
Command" In section 301 strike "Fargo area,
North Dakota" and "$7,055,000" and insert
in lieu thereof "Grand Forks Site, North
Dakota" and "$10,903,000"; respectively.
(e) With respect to Glasgow-Miles City
area, Mont., under the heading "Continental
United States" and subheading "Air De-
fense Command" in section 301 strike "Glas-
gow-Miles City, area, Montana" and "$8,-
391,000" and insert in lieu thereof "Glas-
gow Site, Montana" and "$10,660,000", re-
spectively.
(f) With respect to K. I. Sawyer Airport,
Marquette, Mich., under the heading
"Continental United States" and subhead-
ing "Air Defense Command" in section 301
strike "$8,556,000" and insert in lieu thereof
"$9,949,000".
(g) With respect to Traverse City area,
Michigan, under the heading "Continental
United States" and subheading "Air Defense
Command" in section 301 strike "$8,635,000"
and insert in lieu thereof "$10,287,000."
(h) With respect to Ellington Air Force
Base, Houston, Tex., under the heading
"Continental United States" and subhead-
ing "Air Training Command" in section 301
strike."$1,073,000" and insert in lieu thereof
"$2,478,000."
(i) With respect to Webb Air Force Base,
Big Springs, Tex., under the heading "Con-
tinental United States" and subheading "Air
Training Command" in section 301 strike
"$100,000" and insert in lieu thereof "$135,-
000."
(j) With respect to Norton Air Force Base,
San Bernardino, Calif., under the heading
"Continental United States" and subheading
"Air Materiel. Command" in section 301
strike "$4,303,000" and "$2,183,000" and in-
sert in lieu thereof "$4,735,000" and "$2,-
615,000", respectively.
(k) With respect to Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, under the heading
"Continental United States" and subheading
"Air Materiel Command" in section 301
strike "$5,847,000" and insert in lieu thereof
"$6,849,000."
(1) With respect to Atlantic City Consolan
Station, Atlantic City. N. J., under the head-
ing "Continental United States" and sub-
heading "Air Defense Command" in section
301 strike "$72,000" and insert in lieu thereof
"$285,000."
(m) With respect to Nantucket Consolan
Station, Nantucket, Mass., under the head-
ing "Continental United States" and sub-
heading "Air Defense Command" in section
301 strike "$107,000 and insert in lieu there-
of -1$224,000.1-
(n) With respect to Pescadero Consolan
Station, Pescadero, Calif., under the head-
ing "Continental United States" and sub-
heading "Air Defense Command" in section
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
7936 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
301 strike "$107,000" and insert in lieu there-
of "$224,000."
(o) With respect to Point Conception Con-
solan Station, Point Conception, Calif..
under the heading "Continental United
States" and subheading "Air Defense Com-
mand" in section 301 strike "$72,000" and
insert In lieu thereof "$232,000."
(p) In clause (3) of section 502 thereof
delete the amounts "$389,125,000" and
"$398.954,000" and Insert in lieu thereof the
amounts "$405,176,000" and "$415,005,000,"
respectively.
SEe. 304. Classified location: The authority
granted by section 302, of the act of July
14, 1952, may be utilized to the extent of
$8,127,400 for the direct construction of
family housing.
TITLE IV
SEc. 401. The Secretary of Defense, act-
ing through the Secretary of a military de-
partment, is authorized to provide family
housing for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff and certain commissioned officers
and enlisted personnel attached to his staff
by the construction or rehabilitation of 5
units of family housing, and protected com-
munication facilities, including site prepara-
tion, appurtenances, utilities, equipment,
administration, overhead, planning, and
supervision.
SEC. 402. Appropriations available to the
military departments are hereby made avail-
able for the purposes of this title In an
amount not to exceed $300,000,
Trrtg V
SEc. 501. The Director of Central Intelli-
gence is authorized to provide for a head-
quarters installation for the Central Intel-
ligence Agency by the acquisition of land at
a cost of not to exceed $6 million, and con-
struction of buildings, facilities, appurte-
nances, utilities, and access roads at a cost
of not to exceed $50 million.
Trrr.E VI
GENERAL PROVISIONS -
SEc. 601. The Secretaries of the Army,
Navy, and Air Force are respectively author-
ized to proceed with the establishment or
development of military and naval Installa-
tions and facilities as authorized by titles
I, II. III. and IV of this act, and the Director
of Central Intelligence is authorized to pro-
ceed with the establishment of a Central
Intelligence Agency Headquarters Installa-
tion as authorized by title V of this act,
without regard to the provisions of sections
1136, 3648, and 3734, as respectively amended,
of the Revised Statutes, and prior to ap-
proval of title to underlying land, as pro-
vided by section 355, as amended, of the Re-
vised Statutes. The authority under this
act of the Secretary of a military depart-
rnent to provide family housing includes au-
thority to acquire such land as the Secretary
concerned determines, with the approval of
the Secretary of Defense, to be necessary in
connection therewith. The authority to es-
tablish or develop such installations and
facilities shall include, in respect of those
installations and facilities as to which family
housing or the acquisition of land is speci-
fied in titles I, II, III, IV, and V of this act,
authority to make surveys and to acquire
lands and rights and interests thereto or
therein, including the temporary use there-
of, by donation, purchase, exchange of Gov-
ernment-owned lands, or otherwise, and to
place permanent or temporary improve-
ments thereon whether such lands are held
in fee or under lease or under other tem-
porary tenure.
SEc. 602. There are hereby authorized to
be appropriated such sums of money as may
be necessary to accomplish the purposes of
this act, but not to exceed-
(1) for public works authorized by title r:
Inside continental United States, $238.778,-
000; outside continental United States, $78,-
334,000; section 102. $223,993,000: section
103. $10 million; or a total of $551,105,000;
(2) for public works authorized by title
11: Inside continental United States. $331,-
607.200; outside continental United States,
$107,191.300; section 202, $151,342,400; sec-
tion 203. $6 million; or a total of $598,140.-
900: -
(3) for public works authorized by title
III: Inside continental United States. $709,-
480.000; outside continental United States,
$450,973,000; section 302, $5 million; or a
total of $1,165.453,000: and
(4) for public works authorized by title
IV: $300,000.
(5) for public works authorized by title
V: $50 million.
Sac. 603. Any of the approximate costs
enumerated in titles I. 11, and III of this act
may. In the discretion of the Secretary con-
cerned, be varied upward by 5 percent in
the case of projects within the continental
United States, and 10 percent in the case of
projects outside the continental United
States. but the total cost of all projects so
enumerated under each of such titles shall
not exceed the total of all amounts specified
in respect of projects in such title.
Sac. 604. Appropriations made to carry out
the purposes of this act shall be available
for expenses incident to construction, in-
cluding surveys, administration, overhead,
planning, and supervision.
Sac. 605. Whenever-
(a) the President determines that compli-
ance with the requirements of Public Law
245, 82d Congress, In the case of contracts
made pursuant to this act with respect to
the establishment or development of mili-
tary Installations and facilities in foreign
countries would interfere with the carrying
out of the provisions of this act; and
(b) the Secretary of Defense and the
Comptroller General have agreed upon al-
ternative methods for conducting an ade-
quate audit of such contracts, the President
is authorized to exempt such contracts from
the requirements of Public Law 245, 82d
Congress.
Sac. 606. All contracts entered Into by the
United States pursuant to the authorization
contained in this act shall be awarded, so
far as practicable, if the interest of the na-
tional security shall not be impaired thereby
and it such award is consistent with the
provision of the Armed Services Procurement
Act of 1947, on a competitive basis to the
lowest responsible bidder.
SEC.607. Section 407 of the Public Law
765. 83d Congress, is amended to read as
follows:
"Sac.407. The Secretary of Defense is au-
thorized. subject to the approval of the Di-
rector of the Bureau of the Budget, to con-
struct, or acquire by lease of otherwise,
family housing, in addition to family hous-
ing otherwise authorized to be constructed
or acquired by the Department of Defense
in foreign countries, by the expenditure of
the $100 million through the use of foreign
currencies In accordance with the provisions
of the Agricultural Trade Development and
Assistance Act of 1954 (Public Law 480, 83d
Cong.) or through other commodity trans-
actions of the Commodity Credit Corporation.
"The Department of Defense shall reim-
burse the Commodity Credit Corporation for
such family housing in a dollar amount
equivalent to the value to the foreign cur-
rencies used pursuant to the authority con-
tained In this section. For the purpose of
such reimbursement, the Department of De-
fense may utilize appropriations otherwise
available for the construction of military
public works.
"The Secretary of Defense shall furnish
to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives
quarterly reports, the first of which shall be
submitted 3 months subsequent to the date
of enactment of this net, setting forth the
June 2,
cost, number, and locaion of housing unit:
constructed or acquired pursuant to the au.
thority contained in this section during the
3-month period preceding the date of such
report. and setting forth the cost, number,
and location of the housing units intended
to be constructed or acquired pursuant to
such authority during the next succeeding
quarter."
Sac. 608. All housing units constructed
under the authority of this act shall be
subject to the net floor area permanent lim-
itations prescribed In the second, third, and
fourth provisos of section 3 of the act of
June 12, 1948 (62 Stat. 375), or in section 3
of the act of June 16, 1948 (62 Stat. 459),
other than the first, second, and third pro-
visos thereof: Provided, That such limita-
tions shall not apply to the unit of family
housing authorized by title IV of this act for
the use of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, nor shall the limitations on the cost
of family housing that are prescribed by
section 808 of the Department of Defense
Appropriation Act, 1956 (H. R. 6042) apply
with respect to such units of family housing.
Sac.609. When housing units are con-
structed under the authority of this act at
Installations at which housing units shall
have been constructed and a mortgage there-
on insured by the Federal Housing Com-
missioner pursuant to title VIII of the Na-
tional Housing Act, as amended, the Sec-
retaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force,
respectively, may, upon application by the
mortgagor, accept on behalf of the Govern-
ment the mortgagor's title to or leasehold
interest in the housing units and underlying
land, subject to the outstanding mortgage
thereon, and assume the payments there-
after becoming due under any such out-
standing mortgage and the cost of mainte-
nance and operation thereafter accruing
with respect to such housing units. Such
housing units shall thereafter be under the
jurisdiction of the military department con-
cerned. The Secretary of the military de-
partment concerned may utilize appropria-
tions otherwise available for construction of
military public works for the liquidation of
any outstanding mortgage assumed by the
Government.
Sac. 610. As of July 1. 1956, all authori-
zations for military public works projects to
be accomplished by the Secretary of a mili-
tary department in connection with the
establishment or development of military,
naval, or Air Force installations and facili-
ties. and all authorizations for appropria-
tions therefor, that are contained in acts
approved prior to October 1, 1951, and not
superseded or otherwise modified by a later
authorization are repealed, except (1) au-
thorizations for public works and for ap-
propriations therefor that are set forth in
such acts In the titles that contain the gen-
eral provisions, (2) authorizations for mili-
tary public works projects as to which
appropriated funds shall have been obli-
gated In whole or in part prior to July 1.
1956. and authorizations for appropriations
therefor, and (3) the authorizations with
respect to military public works and the ap-
propriation of funds that are contained in
the National Defense Facilities Act of 1950
(64 Stat. 829).
Sac. 611. Section 504 of Public Law 155,
82d Congress, Is amended to read as follows:
"Sac.504. There are hereby authorized to
be appropriated, without fiscal year limita-
tion, funds for advance planning, construc-
tion design, and architectural services in
connection with public work projects which
are not otherwise authorized by law."
Mr. VINSON (interrupting the read-
Ing of the bill). Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the bill be con-
sidered as read and open'to amendment,
and that the bill be printed in the REc-
ORD In its entirety at this point.
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
1955 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD-HOUSE
The CHAIRMAN. To there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Georgia?
There was no objection.
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I was very much in-
terested in the statistics which have re-
cently been published by the Pentagon
concerning contract awards to the 100
largest prime contractors. You 'will re-
member than on January 11, 1954, the
Department of Defense issued a report,
cumulative in nature, showing data on
contracts made during the period July
1950 through June 1953.
The report showed that a total of $98,
723,000,000 had been awarded in prime
contracts during the period. It showed
that 64 percent or $63,165,000,000 had
been awarded to 100 companies and cor-
porate groups.
It showed that the General Motors
Corp., through 32 of its divisions, had
contracts amounting to $7,095,800,000,
or 7.2 percent of the $98.7 billion total.
The next nine, in order of rank, were:
Millions
of
dollars
Percent
of
total
Boeing Airplane Co .................
$4, 402.9
General Electric Co.................
3, 459.2
Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc
2, 867.8
United Aircraft Corp----------------
2,816.4
Chrysler Corp______________________
2,199.9
Lockheed Aircraft Corp_____________
2,162.1
Consolidated Vultee Aircraft........
2,072.1
North American Aviation, Inc------
1,031.6
Republic Aviation Corp ---_--------
1,877.7
Significantly, this report carried a
blocked-in space which reads:
This is the final issue in this series of re-
ports, which has covered 3 fiscal years of
expanded procurement activity following the
start of the Korean conflict. The report is
being discontinued for economy reasons.
During the remainder of 1954, despite
many requests for current information
on the large prime contractors, the Pen-
tagon failed to make this information
available to the public.
On May 16, 1955, the Office of the As-
sistant Secretary of Defense-Supply
and Logistics-issued an "Analysis of
large military prime contractors in the
period from July 1, 1953 to December 31,
1954." The transmittal letter explained
that this report is for the 18-month pe-
riod only and is not cumulative as the
former reports had been. About $16
billion in contracts had been awarded
and the 10 largest contractors with their
percentages of the total, $16 billion,
follow :
Millions
of
dollars
Percent
of
total
United Aircraft'Corp ----------------
$1, 061.4
Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc___________
1,041.8
American Aviation, Inc.-----
910. 2
Boeing Airplane Cc_________________
764. 9
Lockheed Aircraft Corp-------------
740.8
General Dynamics Corp ------------
697.9
14 rumman Aircraft Engineering...-_
377.1
Curtiss-Wright Corp________________
340. 1
Republic Aviation Corp............
329. 5
Hughes Tool Cc--------------------
313.3
Now, I do not know why the format
of the report was changed. General
Motors, for example, lost its preeminence
and was dropped from the No. 1 rank-
ing on the January 11, 1954 report to
almost obscurity on the May 16, 1955
report. Actually, I would think that the
former chairman of the General Motors
Corp. would have been hurt at this drop
in rank and prestige with his well-known
economic-political philosophy on "what
is good for what." When I read that
report my heart really went out in sym-
pathy for General Motors. I could not
understand why Charles Wilson as Sec-
retary Wilson should discriminate
against this company. But as we view
the real statistics the picture is different.
So that the statistics might be consist-
ent, I have added the last report to the
former and have again made the rank-
ings on a cumulative basis. For the
period from July 1, 1950 through Decem-
ber 31, 1954, the total awards were
$115,060,200,000. The order of ranking
of the 10 largest is as follows:
Millions
of dollars
General Motors Corp ...............
7,036.0
6.8
Boeing Airplane Co -----------------
5, 107. 8
4.49
Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc...........
3,909.6
3.4
United Aircraft Corp ----------------
3,877.8
3.3
General Electric Cc-----------------
3,672.5
3.10
Lockheed Aircraft Corp -------------
2,802.9
2.5
North American Aviation, Inc--..-.
2,841.9
2.4
Curtiss-Wright Corp_______________
2,086.3
1.8
American Telephone & Telegraph
Co................................
1, 755.3
Pord Motor Co .....................
1, 663.2
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McCORMACK. I yield.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. It is my un-
derstanding, and it was brought out in
general debate during the $311/2 billion
appropriation bill for the Department of
Defense, that 85 percent of these con-
tracts are let by negotiation and not by
competitive bids; is that right?
Mr. McCORMACK. That is my un-
derstanding.
Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last two words. I do
this simply to ask the majority leader-
so what? General Motors today has
more than 10 percent of all the machin-
ery of these industries producing war
goods. If we want to get our war goods
produced and produced on time, shall we
ignore the largest, most efficient indus-
trial producing company in the world
and say, "Because you are so large we
cannot give you anything at all; we will
go out and organize new companies to
produce these goods with consequent de-
lay, and so forth?"
In my opinion that is all nonsense. I
am sure you will find that the contracts
let for war production will be let in pro-
portion to the size of these industries
that will be named. This one, being the
largest, we will say will have 7 percent;
this one, being the next largest, we will
say will have 5 percent; and so on down
the line.
What is wrong with that? That is the
reason this administration has men who
know how to get things done when we
need them done.
7937,
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MASON. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. First of all,
I want to raise the question as to the
appropriateness of the remarks made by
the gentleman from Massachusetts JMr.
McCoRmcx] during this military con-
struction bill. I am sure those com-
panies he mentioned are not involved,
and are not going to be involved in the
construction that this bill contemplates.
Secondly, I want to correct the state-
ment of the gentleman from Tennessee
[Mr. BASS] which statement he has made
on this floor a number of times and com-
pounded his error by the repetition, that
85 percent of the defense contracts are
let on a basis of negotiation.
One particular phase of the aircraft
program was mentioned on this floor as
being done upon that basis. If the gen-
tleman from Tennessee wants to take
the responsibility of opening up the
many complicated phases of aircraft re-
search and development and materiel
development in the field of aircraft pro-
curement to anyone who desires to bid,
whether they be foreign, whether they be
American, whether they be responsible
or otherwise, that will be his responsi-
bility.
I have not heard anything on the floor
to indicate that he is so much interested
in competitive free enterprise in this
country to be sure he would want to do
that. In fact, some of the things he had
to say in connection with the appropria-
tion bill affecting the Tennessee Valley
Authority and the contracts relating to
it here a couple of weeks ago led me to
question seriously whether he really is
interested in free competitive enterprise
in this country.
Mr. MASON. I thank the gentleman
for his remarks, and I end up by saying,
So what?
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Mr. Chair-
man, I rise in opposition to the pro forma
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I had no intention of
drawing this into a personal debate.
However, since the gentleman has seen
fit to question my authority and my mo-
tives regarding certain statements I have
made on the floor I feel that I should
rise to defend myself.
It always seems to be a point of per-
sonal defense against any subject being
discussed to attack anyone who seems to
be interested in TVA. I am proud to be
recognized among the TVA adherents. I
would like to invite the gentleman from
Wisconsin to come down and inspect
that great development sometime, and
perhaps he would learn a few things that
he does not know about this great coun-
try of ours.
As far as the 85-percent figure is con-
cerned that I gave on the floor here
under direct questioning of the gentle-
man from Texas [Mr. MAHON), the
chairman of the Subcommittee on De-
fense Appropriations, he made the state-
ment that 85 percent of the money spent
under that bill for material procure-
ment was through negotiation. As far
as competitive bidding is concerned to
the aircraft companies, and so forth re-
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
7938
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE June 27
lating to security I picked up a news-
paper the other day and saw where the
Russians already had all of the engineer-
ing plans and the scale drawing of an
airplane that was classified as absolutely
secret by our Defense Department, and
they had had it for some 4 months and
it had been published In a newspaper in
Russia.
I believe we have but a very small
percentage of our defense appropriation
spent on secret materiel. Under those
conditions, I believe it should be nego-
tiated. I agree with the majority leader.
I do not know particularly that Gen-
eral Motors should be awarded 7 per-
cent of our defense contracts simply be-
cause, as I have heard said, they have
a negotiator on each side of the table.
At any rate, I firmly believe we could
save at least 10 to 15 percent of the
money we spend on defense every year
if our contracts were awarded on a com-
petitive basis.
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. I yield to
the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. McCORMACK. It amuses me to
see how sensitive some Members are
when you mention the name of General
Motors, when you simply state the facts
to show that they still are the largest
prime contractor on defense contracts
by far, by at least 331/3 percent above
the next company.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Dealing In
the same type of enterprise.
Mr. McCORMACK. They ask, "So
what?" What about the small Inde-
pendent businessmen of this country?
What about them? How much are they
being awarded? What consideration are
they receiving as a result of these large
contracts? How much are they cut down
in their contracts?
What about the mergers going on,
more mergers by 300 percent during any
one of the last 3 years than took place
in the largest year during the two de-
cades prior to that? Those are some
of the questions the gentleman from
Illinois, my friend Mr. MASON, should
also consider. So when we take the
floor to tell the facts in cumulative form
showing that General Motors has not
been discriminated against, my good
friend gets very sensitive; and the more
he gets sensitive the better I like it.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. We do not
want General Motors to be discrim-
inated against, certainly not, but at the
same time we do not want other com-
panies to be discriminated against.
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair-
man, I move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I am not at all sensi-
tive about the remarks that have been
made. I am sure the gentleman was not
referring to me when he used those
terms. But I do not like to see errors
compounded on the floor of this House
by people who are not acquainted with
the facts. I am just as sure, as I am of
the fact that I am standing here, and I
happen to serve on the same subcommit-
tee and heard the same information
which the gentleman from Texas did,
and the statement made by the gentle-
man from Texas was entirely correct
about the 85 percent because it related
to the aircraft procurement of the De-
partment of Defense. Shortly there-
after, under circumstances that did not
permit correction at that particular mo-
ment, the gentleman from Tennessee who
just addressed the House referred to
five-sixths of the entire $32112 billion ap-
propriation in the Defense Department
appropriation bill, something that was
ridiculous on Its face. There is too much
in that amount which is not contracted
for at all, which cannot be a matter of
negotiation.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. I am happy
to yield to the gentleman so that the gen-
tleman can correct himself.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. I referred to
that part of it which is used for mate-
rial and procurement.
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Then, if
you had not made a statement about the
five-sixths of $31!2 billion, you would
have been correct. I am glad to see that
you are correcting the impression that
you created in the statement made on
the floor of the House In relation to It.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. If the gen-
tleman will permit me to say, of course,
we realize that part of the $31?,2 billion
Is for salaries of personnel and many
other things. I am talking about that
part of the $311'2 billion which Is spent
for material and procurement.
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. I am glad
to give the gentleman an opportunity to
correct himself.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair-
man. I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
On page 34, line 18, strike out the colon
and insert In lieu thereof a comma and the
following: "Air base to be known as `Richard
Bong Air Force Base'."
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. I yield.
Mr. VINSON, Mr. Chairman, we have
accepted that amendment, and I would
suggest to the distinguished. gentleman
from Wisconsin that at this point he
insert a statement in regard to the out-
standing achievements of this great
aviator.
Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. I thank the
gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, it is a real privilege
and an honor for me to suggest that the
Greater Milwaukee area air base pro-
posed for Kansasville, Wis.. which is in
my congressional district, should be des-
ignated as the Richard Bong Air Force
Base in honor of this Wisconsin boy who
was an ace of aces in World War II. He
achieved the greatest combat record for
destroying enemy air planes during the
war in the Pacific of any other American.
It Is fittingand proper, therefore, that
I propose an amendment to H. R. 6829,
which would authorize the establishment
of this base, and which when completed
will bear the name of this outstanding
Wisconsin hero.
I am Indebted to the distinguished
Chairman of the House Armed Services
Committee, Mr. VINsoN, for his approval
of my amendment and to the distin-
guished minority leader on the Republi-
can side [Mr. SHORT] for a similar cour-
tesy which he has extended.
Mr. Chairman, under leave to extend
my remarks I am setting down for pos-
terity a statement of the military service
of Richard Ira Bong, who was born on
the 24th day of September 1920, at Super-
ior, Wis., and whose mother and father
still reside at Poplar, Wis.
Aviation cadet, May 29, 1941; second lieu-
tenant, AC, Reserve, January 9, 1942; first
lieutenant. Army of the United States, AC,
April 6, 1943; first lieutenant, Army of the
United States, August 9, 1943; captain, Army
of the United States, AC. August 24, 1943;
captain. Army of the United States, February
24, 1944; major, Army of the United States.
AC. April 12 1944; major, Army of the United
States, August 1, 1944; first lieutenant, AC,
Reserve. January 9. 1945.
Rating: Pilot.
SERVICE
Richard Ira Bong enlisted In the Regular
Army at Wausau, Wis., on May 29, 1941, in
the grade of flying cadet. He was assigned
service number 16022192 and transferred to
Tulare, Calif., where he completed his pri-
mary pilot training on August 16, 1941.
From August 19, 1941, until October 31, 1941,
he was assigned to Gardner Field, Calif.,
receiving his basic pilot training. He re-
ceived his advance pilot training at Luke
Field, Ariz., from November 4, 1941, to
January 9, 1942. on which date he was com-
missioned a second lieutenant in the Air
Corps Reserves, and rated pilot.
After receiving his commission be was Im-
mediately called to extended active duty with
the Air Corps and given an assignment as
flying Instructor at Luke Field, Arts. On
May 2, 1942. he was transferred to Hamilton
Field, Calif., for combat training In P-38
type aircraft. Successfully completing this
transition training early In September 1942
he was alerted for foreign service and de-
parted the United States via air for duty in
the Pacific area. Upon arrival in Australia
he was assigned to the 9th Fighter Squad-
ron, 49th Fighter Group, as combat fighter
pilot. On November 14, 1942, he was re-
assigned to the 39th Fighter Squadron, 35th
Fighter Group and destroyed 5 enemy air-
craft before being returned to the 9th Fighter
Squadron on January 11, 1943. He con-
tinued as fighter pilot with this organiza-
tion flying P-as type aircraft until November
11, 1943, when he was given 60 days leave
and reassigned to Headquarters, 5th Fighter
Command in New Guinea as Assistant A-3
in charge of replacement airplanes. While
holding this assignment Major Bong con-
tinued flying combat missions and Increased
his Individual total enemy aircraft destroyed
to 28.
In April 1944. he was returned to the
United States and assigned to the Matagorda
Peninsula Bombing Range, Foster Field,
Tex., for the purpose of receiving and
checking on the latest gunnery methods and
Instructions. In September 1944, Major
Bong returned to his assignment with the
5th Fighter Command in the Pacific Area
and was placed In charge of gunnery train-
ing with that organization. In addition to
his duties as gunnery Instructor, though not
required or expected to perform combat duty,
he voluntarily flew 30 more combat missions
over Borneo and the Philippine Islands, de-
stroying 12 more enemy aircraft, bringing his
total to 40 enemy aircraft destroyed. For his
achievements during this second tour of
overseas duty. Major Bong was awarded the
Nation's highest decoration, the Medal of
Honor. After completing over 200 combat
missions for a total of over 500 combat hours,
he was released from his assignment with
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
1955 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 7939
the 5th Fighter Command In December Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair- Mr. BASS of Tennessee. I did not
1944 and returned to the United States.
Upon his return to the united States, I simply want to add my own words mention the name of the Defense Secre-
Major Bong was assigned as test pilot with , of appreciation both to the gentleman tary. You are the one who mentioned
the 4020th Army Air Force Base Unit at from Wisconsin, my colleague, in whose his name; nor did I intend to attack his
Wright Field, Ohio, making functional tests district this base Is to be located for his honesty or integrity to any degree.
and ferrying missions in single and twin amendment which would name this in- Mr. DONDERO. But no one on this
engine lighter-type aircraft. On June 23, stallation after this greatest of all Wis- floor who knows anything about the fine
1945, he was transferred to Burbank, Calif., consin military heroes in modern times, man who is at the head of our Defense
and given an assignment as Chief of Flight I want to express my appreciation to the Department could possibly get any other
operations, Office of the Army Air Force
Plant representative, in the Lockheed Air- chairman of the committee and the impression except that you were pointing
craft Plant. Since this company was en- ranking minority member for their the finger of scorn and dishonesty at Mr.
gaged in the development and manufac- agreement on this highly appropriate Wilson of the Defense Department. I
ture of the new P-80 jet-type aircraft, amendment at this time. hope the gentleman will clear that up.
Major Bong received a full training course Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. I thank Mr. BASS of Tennessee. I would also
prescribed for this type airplane at Muroc the gentleman. like to remind the gentleman there are
Lake Flight Test Base, Calif. (Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin asked and several former General Motors' em-
Major Bong was killed on August 6, 1945, was given
when the P-80 aircraft he was flying crashed permission to revise and ex- ployees in the Department of Defense, so
near Burbank, Calif., due to power failure, tend his remarks.) I am told.
reasons unknown. Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman, I Mr. DONDERO. That may be, but
He is survived by his wife, Mrs. Marjorie move to strike out the last four words, they do not control the making of con-
Ann Bong, whose last. known address is 5640 Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman, I tracts. I have never heard anything or
P'::anklin Avenue, Hollywood, Calif. He is move to strike out the last word. seen anything in the public press that
Pico survived by his parents, Mr. and Mrs. Mr. Chairman, the distinguished ma- the contracts which General Motors gets
Carl T. Bong, Poplar, Wis. jority leader, my friend the gentleman from the Federal Government were un-
AWARDS from Massachusetts [Mr. MCCORMACK], fairly obtained. I am amazed how low
Medal of Honor, War Department General said something that rather touched me the percentage is, and what it means to
Orders 90, December 8, 1944. personally where it is tender, when he the economy of this country. Let us
Distinguished Service Cross, General Or- said that we on the Republican side a keep this thing 62, Headquarters, USAFFE, October 20, get p ng above the belt and be fair
1943. little sensitive whenever the name of to a great company that has made its
Silver Star with one Oak Leaf Cluster: General Motors is mentioned. vast contribution to the welfare of our
Silver Star, General Orders 2, Headquarters, It so happens that I have four or five country, and especially in time of need,
5th Fighter Command, January 24, 1943; General Motors factories in my district, when we needed the materials of war, to
first Oak Leaf Cluster, General Orders 287, My memory Is not so short but what I defend ourselves. War material con-
Headquarters 5th. Air Force, November 19, remember well that during the last war tracts are generally urgent and must be
1943. Detroit, Mich., and that area was known made to secure prompt delivery. They
Distinguished Flying Cross with six Oak as the arsenal of democracy. We made must also be adequately contracted.
Leaf Clusters: Distinguished Flying Cross,
General Orders 110, Headquarters, 5th Air the things, the sinews of war, that were Surely you would not spend the people's
Force, June 14, 1943; first Oak Leaf Cluster, needed to defend ourselves and the free- money inefficiently or improperly.
General Orders 135, Headquarters, 5th. Air dom of this world. General Motors did Mr. CEDERBERG. Mr. Chairman,
Force, June 28, 1943; second Oak Leaf Clus- its full share, a major share in that pro- will the gentleman yield?
ter, General Orders 104, Headquarters, 5th gram of production and the people of Mr. DONDERO. I yield.
Air Force, February 22, 1944; third Oak Leaf Michigan which I represent were proud Mr. CEDERBERG. I think the gen-
Cluster, General orders 116, Headquarters, of that record.
5th Air Force, March 1, 1944; fourth Oak Leaf ought from Tennessee [Mr. He says
says
Cluster, General Orders 139, Headquarters, The statement has been made which, ought to do some explaining. He
5th Air Force, March 15, 1944; fifth and sixth in my judgment, brings into disrepute he 'did not mean the Secretary of De-
Oak Leaf Cluster, General Orders 345, Read-. and gives the Impression that there Is fense but some other employees of Gen-
quarters, FEAF, December 28, 1944. something dishonest about the contracts eral. Motors. I think we ought to get
Air Medal with 14 Oak Leaf Clusters: Air which are made with General Motors, that clear, because if there are any em-
Medal, General orders 22, Headquarters, 5th The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. ployees of General Motors who are acting
Air Force, April 23, 1943; 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, BAss], said something about General Mo- as negotiators for General Motors and
General Orders 186, Headquarters, 5th Air tors having negotiators on both sides of not the United States Government, and
Force, August 26, 1943; 2d' through 9th Oak
Leaf Cluster, General Orders 287, Headquar- the table. It so happens that I know there is collusion involved, we ought to
ters, 5th Air Force,. November 19, 1943; 10th Mr. Charles E. Wilson, and I defy any- know about it. If the gentleman has
Oak Leaf Cluster, General Orders 117, Head- body on either side of the aisle to point to any information, he ought to name those
quarters, 5th Air Force, March 2, 1944; 11th one dishonest, one unmanly thing that people. I come from Michigan, and I
Oak Leaf Cluster, General Orders 131, Head- he has ever committed in public or pri- am proud of General Motors. And I am
quarters, 5th Air Force, March 11, 1944; 12th vate life. He Is a man of integrity, high- proud of the employees who work for
Oak Leaf Cluster, General Orders 262, Head-
quarters, 6th Air Force, April 28, 1944; 4; 13th est character, great ability and is making them. and 14th ,
qua Leaf 6ths r Force, April Leaf 13th a terrific sacrifice to serve our country. Mr, BASS of Tennessee. If you will
General Orders 345, Headquarters, FEAF, De- If we are to attract men and women of let me correct you, I said "former" em-
cember 28, 1944. public spirit and ability we must treat ployees of General Motors.
Australian Distinguished Flying Cross. them fairly. It so happens that General Mr. CEDERBERG. How are they on
American Defense Service Medal. Motors has factories all over this coun- both sides of the table?
World War II Victory Medal, try, and naturally the contracts are given Mr. BASS of Tennessee. I do not have
American Campaign Medal, to them. I am surprised that the num- to explain that to the gentleman.
Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with one her and percentage is as low as it is, when Mr. CEDERBERG. Well,
Silver Service Star for participation in the you ought
Leyte, Luzon, New Guinea, northern Solo you consider that General Motors has not to make statements if you cannot
coons, and Papua campaigns. factories which can do the job all over back them up.
Distinguished Unit Citation Emblem with this country. And it must also be re- Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman, I
one Oak Leaf Cluster. membered that hundreds of small, inde- hope the gentlemen who are involved in
Philippine Liberation Ribbon with' one pendent companies contribute to the this controversy will answer in their own
Bronze Service. Star. work through subcontracts. What is time.
Philippine Republic Presidential Unit Ci- Wrong about that?
tation Emblem. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
PhiEmbl Independence Ribbon. Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Mr. Chair- gentleman from Michigan [Mr. DoN-
Aviation Badge "Pilot." man, will the gentleman yield? DERO] has expired.
Mr. DONDERO. I will let you explain Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair- to the House in your own time about for a vote on the amendment offered by
man, will the gentleman yield? having negotiators on both sides of the the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr.
Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin.. I yield. table. S
MrrH].
No. 108-11
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
.7940 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE June 27
The CHA RMAN. The question is on The CHAIRMAN. The question is on The plan is to keep all of the present
the amendment offered by the gentle- the amendment offered by the gentle- buildings on the post in a state of readi-ness
ti-
, in addition
and
, to man from m Wisconsin
was agreed reed to. from Georgia [Mr.
amendment was agreedNto. mately spendioverd$200 million on new
The amendment was haired to.
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman. there construction. This planned program, i result an amendment which is at the Clerk's care no ommitteepther amendments from the tthe lnumberiof buout, wi ildings at Camp Cason
desk.
The Clerk read as follows: Mir. DONDERO asked and was given than is necessary.
Amendment offered by Mr. VITiSax: Re- permission to revise and extend his re- '` excuseexpansionthane expendi-
number section 609 as section 600 (a) and marks just made.)
after the end thereof add the following new Mr. BRAY. Mr. Chairman, this mili- ture for Camp Carson is that it is used
section 609 (b) : tary construction bill before us at this as a support base for Camp Hale, some
'(b) The Secretaries of the Army, navy, time is on the whole a good bill. The 80 miles away in the mountains. Camp
and Air Force are respectively authorized to committee has worked long and arduous Hale is used for the winter training of
located acquire near militar install hunits which which are hours in going into detail on this meas- Army units. There are but few perma-
adequate and suitable efor housing military ure. nent buildings there, and few are con-could personnel and their d for heir dependents, and as to I want to congratulate the chairman, templated. f G
riy other locat one. Itps
which a mortgageis Insured by the Federal the Honorable CARL VINSON. for the
Housing commissioner pursuant to title VI special effort that hehas placed on this not necessary to expend $200 million on
or title IX of the National Housing Act, sub- bill. I doubt if there is a person in the a permanent fort to support a mountain
ject to the outstanding mortgage thereon, United States, In the service or out, that camp that is only used a few months a
and to assume the payments thereafter be-
coming due has a better understanding of the various year. In addition, there is a shortage
tart' of of thhe military such mortgage. The Secre- department concerned military Installations of our country of water at Colorado Springs, where
may utilize appropriations available for the than does the gentleman from Georgia. Camp Carson is located. Also, the Air
its ne
Is co
Forc
money,
Acad liquidation of military public works for the apsitoooamuch a We ha a in the past emyein the same locationw Air This will
construction
assumed of any outstanding n mortgage perh
assumed by the Government." spent enormous sums of money on our further tax the already low water sup-
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, the pur- various military installations, and at ply. There are many reasons why a
size of
the
camp
military
pse of
authority in the three Seere- been spent Inca haphazard manner- she d not be located and e panded Carson
Camp cretin ary this
taries so that, if in their judgment the without the proper planning and end in the immediate v cwhiyh of the Air a to
facts and circumstances warrant it, they view. This condition is excusable dur- Academy, reasons are may acquire houses that have been built ing a war. We are now attempting to anyone acquainted with the situation.
under title VI and title IX of the FHA work toward a definite goal, a goal that The chairman fthe committee, out Ron.
Act. It is not mandatory; it just gives will provide proper installations for our CARL VINSON, pointed
the Secretary of Defense an opportunity Armed Services at home and abroad, and tionable features to expanding this
to look over the field in the location in a sufficient capacity for our perma- campofOn page, 3742 oftihe hearings
Camp
where he needs housing and see what he nent defense forces. this authora
may be able to buy instead of build. I hope and believe that now we have Carson:
at a
see construction
expenditures $195 dmiwe are llion gtooing anaAir11Acad-
Mr. a -ROWN. Mr. Chairman, arrived
dimi ishingprogram
will r gentl
. gentle . mm I an yield. yield? . within a few years. Much of the money emy. ' ' `
Mr.
Mr. SEELYEELY-BROWN. Does this fan- in this bill is for family and troop anus- We are building it. And here comes along
gunge include the possibility of the De- ing. Proper living quarters and condi- Camp carson? right in that neighborhood. I So
should expand dd Carson one
fense Department taking over Lanham tions should go a long way toward mak- And I don't now think you we want to
Act houses that are being closed out? Ing the Armed Services more attractive Iota.
Mr. VINSON. No; It does not permit as a career and encourage reenlistments, I ha
en In that. permits the Secretary, where t the tractiveeththat the services can at in the foreseeable efuture on thevfloorkagainst the authorizations
facts and circumstances warrant it, to we can do away with the draft and de- for Camp Carson. However, I realize
bill
ed
negotiate for the purchase of these FHA- pend upon purely voluntary Armed i Is u f air t of vote ag ins itt contained
ments houses that meet the require- Forces.
menats standards of the armed services. . Mart
MAny people believe that we are spend- therein. This is merely an authoriza-tion bill, It 1s purely discretionary authority, that an time ovemmoney of our air, construction mand expansion not d l Camptrust Carson scant be
is s all.
Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. Mr. naval bases. If we are going to have fsto enpeedlenth~ernby uieth~pApp opriatiOs
wor. Chairman, I move to strike out the last wpeace which e are spending will
much money, but if Committee.
word.
Mr. Chairmen, I think this is an ex- we are faced with war in the foreseeable Some of the members of the commit
cellent amendment. I offered substan- future, and I am one who believes that tee also of successfully In p osedbillthe ex:
tially this same amendment in the Com- we are not, then the money which we
mittee on the Armed Services and there have spent on military construction is Sill is authorized to take approximately
was considerable debate in reference to well worthwhile. It is something on 30.000 acres from the Wichita Mountains
this and another amendment offered by which none of us want to gamble. wildlife and game refuge and neighbor-
one of my colleagues. In the end we It is only human that we should make ing communities. This wildlife refuge is
did not vote on the amendment; but errors on this program, but on the whole one of the finest in the country and is
this, I think, is an excellent amendment, I want to assure you that we are work- visited by many thousands daily. The cal
wer
agains and it does permit the defense depart- ing toward a definite and foreseeable loo a ammunitiest Si le b bitter ready has t this
ments to utilize housing which might be goal. I want to be fair with you, how-ati. 74,000
available to the United States Govern- ever, and state that there are items in a~ccres.w I, for once beyliev e this xptn-
ment if it meets all of the requirements. this bill which I believe are unnecessary,
I think we ought to give the Defense items to which I and some other Mem- majority of the committee thought the Department this opportunity to take bers of the committee are opposed. One otherwise. It is only pitural that a b 11 re
advantage of what is available to us, special item which I want to mention is will be some of which might otherwise be han- the authorization for Camp Carson. Colo. this magnitude.
dled at a direct loss to our taxpayers. This camp has at the present time all the I want to point out again that while
I am therefore very much in favor of facilities necessary to take care of all of there are parts of this bill that I cannot'
the amendment and see no objection to the troops there. Yet, the Army has agree with, on the whole bill is good, and believe
planne
coordinated it. I hope the other Members agree with launcheO.
mil on on this post toI ward a sane and well baand lanced defense.
over e$200program
file in this respect.
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
Mr. BROWNSON. Mr. Chairman, I
am voting "present" on the rollcall, on,
H. R. 6829, authorizing construction for
the military departments and the Cen-
tral Intelligence Agency.
To me, this is the only sound position
open because I have not been able to
find in the extensive hearings and the
report the facts I feel I need. in order
to pass on this $2.36 billion authoriza-
tion for the purchase of more real estate
by the Department of Defense, which al-
ready holds properties costing more than
$24.8 billion with some of it being carried
at ridiculously low acquisition costs.
This holding comprises 61 percent of the
acquired real property of the United
States Government. In addition, the
Department of Defense leases 190 loca-
tions including 1,983,686 acres for which
it pays an annual rental of $19,697,000.
I cannot say that the armed services
do not need every facility provided
in the bill before us today-but, after
reading the hearings, I do have some rea-
sonable doubts. Neither can I say that
the armed services do need these facili-
ties and this land in every case.
In the brief of authorizations, under
title I, the Army lists $223,993,000, or 40
percent, of its construction authoriza-
tions as "classified." The Navy, under
title II, lists $151,342,400, or about 25
percent of its construction funds as
"classified." I am pleased that the Air
Force seems more detailed and forth-
right in its justifications throughout and
does not hide behind the term "classi-
fied" for projects most of which are being
built right here in the United States,
where all our citizens can observe daily
the steam shovels, bulldozers, and steel-
workers working on the projects so care-
fully "classified" from Congress.
I have been unable to discover just
what is the construction included in title
IV for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff. Evidently this $300,000 did not
appear in the original H. R. 5700 as in-
troduced by the gentleman from
Georgia [Mr. VINSON], at least not in
title IV where it is now. Is this a house
for Admiral Radford? Is it an elite
housing project to provide for his per=
sonal staff, too? How many facilities
can you provide for an admiral for $300,-
000. I am not saying that this is neces-
sarily either an unwise or an unjustified
expenditure; I would just like to know
what it is for and what we get for the
money. Such items as "Chairman, JCS,
$300,000," do not explain to me what use
is to be made of the taxpayers' money
any more than I can be completely satis-
fied with general phrases such as "Op-
erational and maintenance facilities,"
"Community facilities," and "Storage
facilities," as justifications for the ex-
penditure of billions of dollars.
I do not know whether the CIA needs a
$6 million building site and a $50 million
building, or not. I do not know or have
any idea of how many employees CIA
now has. I do not know what they do
or to whom they are really accountable.
Perhaps if I knew these things I would
want to increase the CIA construction
authorization, but I guess I will never
know. Perhaps those of us in Congress
will, someday, create a Joint Committee
on Intelligence to provide congressional
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
guidance to CIA modeled on that which
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
has developed in its field. Certainly we
exercise no controls over this super se-
cret agency through a check on the purse
strings.
The Committee on Armed Services de-
serves due credit for their application
and diligent work on this piece of legis-
lation. The hearings total 4,091 pages,
accumulated in approximately 50 hours
and 25 minutes of on-the-record hear-
ings spread over 21 days. Rapidly cal-
culating, I estimate that the committee
considered this authorization at about
the rate of $789,666 per minute of open
hearing time, an evidence of unusual
efficiency especially when you consider
that their considerations ranged from
Alaska to the Midway Islands including
the British West Indies, the Canal Zone,
Cuba, French Morocco, Hawaii, Iceland,
Italy, Japan, Johnson Island, Mariana
Islands, and the Marshall Islands in be-
tween. Without being able to tell what
went on in the off-the-record hearings,
one can wish the Army and Navy .had
justified their requests as forthrightly as
the Air Force.
The Army will be authorized $551,-
105,000 in this bill as contrasted with
$236 million granted in fiscal 1955-an
increase of over 100 percent. The Navy
will be authorized $596,140,900 in this bill
to accomplish public works as compared
with about $202 million for fiscal 1955,
an increase of well over 100 percent.
The Air Force will be authorized $1,165,-
456,000 in this bill, an increase of more
than 300 percent over last year's author-
ization of $398,954,000.
Is this too much, or is it too little?
Can we use this real estate instead of
weapons against an enemy? I just do
not know. On the basis of the informa-
tion furnished me I have no way of
reaching a sensible conclusion. So, I
voted "Present."
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule the
Committee rises.
Accordingly the Committee rose, and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. METCALF, Chairman of the Commit-
tee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union, reported that that Committee
having had under consideration the bill
(H. R. 6829) to authorize certain con-
struction at military, naval, and Air
Force installations, and for other pur-
poses, pursuant to House Resolution 283,
he reported the same back to the House
with sundry amendments adopted in
the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER. Under the rule the
previous question is ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any
amendment? If not the Chair will put
them en grosse.
The amendments were agreed to.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, and was read the
third time.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the passage of the bill.
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Speaker, on final
passage I ask for the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken; and there
were-yeas 316, nays 2, answering "pres-
ent" 2, not voting 114, as follows:
[Roll No. 971
YEAS-316
,7941
Abbitt
Fernandez
Multer
Abernethy
Fine
Murray, Ill.
Addonizio
Fisher
Murray, Tenn.
Alger
Fjare
Natcher
Allen, Ill.
Flood
Nicholson
Andersen,
Flynt
Norblad
H. Carl
Fogarty
Norrell
Andresen,
Forand
O'Brien, Ill.
August H.
Ford
O'Hara, Yll.
Andrews
Forrester
O'Hara, Minn.
Arends
Fountain
O'Neill
Ashley
Frazier
Osmers
Ashmore
Friedel
Ostertag
Aspinall
Gary
Passman
Auchincloss
Gavin
Patman
Avery
Gentry
Patterson
Ayres
George
Pelly
Baker
Gordon
Perkins
Baldwin-
Grant
Pfost
Bass, N. H.
Green, Oreg.
Philbin
Bass, Tenn.
Gregory
Phillips
Bates
Griffiths
Pilcher
Baumhart
Gross
Pillion
Beamer
Gwinn
Poage
Belcher
Haley
Poff
Bell
Hand
Preston
Bennett, Fla.
Harden
Price
Bennett, Mich.
Hardy
Priest
Bentley
Harris
Prouty
Berry
Harrison, Va.
Rabaut
Betts
Hays, Ark.
Radwan
Blatnik
Hays, Ohio
Rains
Boggs
Hayworth
Ray
Bolling
Hebert
Reed, Ill.
Bolton,
Henderson
Rees, Kans.
Frances P.
Herlong
Reuss
Bow
Hess
Rhodes, Ariz.
Bowler
Hiestand
Rhodes, Pa.
Boyle
Hill
Richards
Bray
Billings
Riley
Brooks, La.
Hinshaw
Roberts
Brown, Ga.
Hoffman, Mich. Robeson, Va.
Brown, Ohio
Holifleld
Rodino
Broyhill
Holmes
Rogers, Colo.
Buchanan
Hope
Rogers, Fla.
Budge
Hosmer
Rogers, Mass.
Burleson
Huddleston
Rogers, Tex.
Burnside
Hull
Rooney
Bush
Hyde
Rutherford
Byrd
Jarman
Sadlack
Byrnes, Wis.
Jenkins
Saylor
Cannon
Jennings
Schenck
Carlyle
Jensen
Scott
Carnahan
Johansen
Scudder
Carrigg
Johnson, Calif,
Seely-Brown
Cederberg
Jones, Ala.
Selden
Celler
Jones, N. C.
Sheehan
Chelf
Judd
Shelley
Chenoweth
Karsten
Short
Chiperfleld
Keating
Shuford
Christopher
Kelley, Pa.
Sieminski
Chudoff
Kelly, N. Y.
Sikes
Church
Keogh
Slier
Clark
Kilburn
Simpson, Ill.
Clevenger
Kilday
Sisk
Cole
Kilgore
Smith, Miss.
Colmer
King, Calif.
Smith, Va.
Cooley
Kirwan
Smith, Wis.
Coon
Kluezynski
Spence
Cooper
Krueger
Springer
Corbett
Landrum
Staggers
Coudert
Lane
Steed
Cramer
Lanham
Sullivan
Cretella
Lankford
Taber
Crumpacker
Latham
Talle
Cunningham
LeCompte
Teague, Calif.
Curtis, Mass.
Lipscomb
Thomas
Curtis, Mo.
Long
Thompson,
Dague
McCarthy
Mich.
Davis, Ga.
McCormack
Thompson, N. J,
Davis, Wis.
McCulloch
Thomson, Wyo.
Dawson, Ill.
McDonough
Thornberry
Dawson, Utah
McDowell
Tollefson
Deane
McMillan
Trimble
Delaney
McVey
Tuck
Dempsey
Macdonald
Tumulty
Derounfan
Machrowicz
Udall
Devereux
Mack, Wash.
Van Zandt
Dies
Madden
Vinson
Dixon
Mahon
Vorys
Do111ver
Marshall
Vursell
Dondero
Martin
Wainwright
Donohue
Mason
Walter
Dorn, N. Y.
Matthews
Watts
Dorn, S. C.
Metcalf
Weaver
Durham
Miller, Calif.
Westland
Edmondson
Miller, Md.
Wharton
Elliott
Miller, Nebr.
Whitten
Evins
Mills
Wickersham
Fallon
Minshall
Widnall
Fascell
Mollohan
Wier
Feighan
Moreno
Wigglesworth
Fenton
Moss
Williams, Miss.
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
 Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2
,7942
Williams. N. Y. Wolcott Young
Willis Wolverton Younger
Wilson, Ind. Wright Zablocki
Winstead Yates
NAYS-2
Bailey Harvey
ANSWERING "PRESENT"-2
Brownson Berivner
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE - June 27
Adair
Garmatz
Meader
Albert
Gathings
Merrow
Alexander
Granahan
Miller, N. Y.
Allen. Calif.
Gray
Morgan
Anfuso
Green. Pa.
Morrison
Barden
Oubser
Moulder
Barrett
Hagen
Mumma
Becker
Hale
Nelson
Blitch
Halleck
O'Brien. N. Y,
Boland
Harrison, Nebr.
O'Konski
Bolton,
Heselton
Polk
Oliver P.
Hoeven
Powell
Bonner
Hoffman, III.
Quigley
Bosch
Holt
Reece, Tenn.
Boykin
Holtzman
Reed, N. Y.
Brooks, Tex.
Horan
Riehlman
Buckley
Ikard
Rivers
Burdick
Jackson
Robslon, Ky.
Byrne, Pa.
James
Roosevelt
Canfield
Johnson, Wis.
St. George
Chase
Jonas
Scherer
Chatham
Jones, Mo.
Schwengel
Davidson
Kean
Sheppard
Davis, Tenn.
Kearney
Simpson, Pa.
Denton
Kearns
Smith, Kans.
Diggs
Kee
Taylor
Dingell
King. Pa.
Teague, Tex.
Dodd
Klein
Thompson. La.
Dollinger
Knox
Thompson. Tex.
Donovan
Knutson
Utt
Dowdy
Laird
Vanik
Doyle
Lesinakt
Van Pelt
Eberharter
Lovre
Velde
Ellsworth
McConnell
Williams, N. J.
Engle
McGregor
Wilson. Calif.
Fino
McIntire
Withrow
Frelinghuysen
Mack, III.
Zelenko
Fulton
Magnuson
Gamble
Mailliard
So the bill was passed.
The Clerk announced the following
pairs :
Mr. Mack of Illinois with Mr. Halleck.
Mrs. Blitch with Mr. Fino.
Mr. Klein with Simpson of Pennsylvania.
Mr. Morrison with Reece of Tennessee.
Mr. Alexander with Mr. Nelson.
Mr. Zelenko with Mr. Kean.
Mr. O'Brien of New York with Mr. James.
Mr. Dollinger with Mr. Wilson of Califor-
niR.
Mr. Donovan with Mr. Harrison of Ne-
braska.
Mr. Buckley with Mr. Heselton.
Mr. Powell with Mr. Canfield.
Mr. Sheppard with Mr. McConnell.
Mr. Holtzman with Mr. Miller of New York.
Mr. Green of Pennsylvania with Mr. Fre-
linghuysen.
Mr. Barrett with Mr. Gubser.
Mr. Granahan with Mr. Holt.
Mr. Byrne of Pennsylvania with Mr. Horan.
Mr. Morgan with Mr. Becker.
Mr. Eberharter with Mr. King of Pennsyl-
vania.
Mr. Polk with Mr. Withrow.
Mr. Denton with Mr. Van Pelt.
Mr. Doyle with Mr. Taylor.
Mr. Chatham with Mr. Scherer.
Mr. Anfuso with Mrs. St. George.
Mr. Albert with Mr. Riehlman.
Mr. Lesineki with Mr. Fulton.
Mr. Roosevelt with Mr. Ellsworth.
Mr. Dingell with Mr. Robsion of Kentucky.
Mr. Garmatz with Mr. Bchwengel.
Mr. Bonner with Mr. Smith of Kansas.
Mr. Williams of New Jersey with Mr.
Hoeven.
Mr. Vanik with Mr. Hoffman of Illinois.
Mr. Quigley with Mr. Jackson.
Mr. Engel with Mr. Velde.
Mr. Davidson with Mr. Utt.
Mrs. Knutson with Mr. Gamble.
Mrs. Kee with Mr. Adair.
Mr. Thompson of Louisiana with Mr. Jonas.
Mr, Thompson of Texas with Mr. Kearns.
Mr. Teague of Texas with Mr. Allen of
California.
Mr. Ikard with Mr. McGregor.
Mr. Davis of Tennessee with Mr. Mailliard.
Mr. Dowdy with Mr. McIntire,
Mr. Moulder with Mr. Lovre.
Mr. Magnuson with Mr. Bosch.
Mr. Boykin with Mr. Chase.
Mr. Brooks of Texas with Mr. Knox.
Mr. Boland with Mr. Laird.
Mr. Jones of Missouri with Mr. Reed of
New York.
Mr. Hagen with Mr. O Konakl.
Mr. Gray with Mr. Meader.
Mr. Rivers with Mr. Merrow.
Mr. Gathings with Mr. Mumma.
Mr. Barden with Mr. Hale.
Mr. Diggs with Mr. Burdick.
Mr. Johnson of Wisconsin with
ney.
terings" congratulates the State of West
Virginia for having such in illustrious
daughter as our colleague, the Honora-
ble ELIZABETH KEE, Fifth District, West
Virginia. I have known ELIZABETH as the
wife of my good friend and former col-
league, the late John Kee. I have
known her as a vivacious woman and an
active, sincere representative for her dis-
trict.
Under unanimous consent to extend
my remarks I include this article in the
RECORD.
I plume myself I'm getting up in the
world-on my acquaintance list are not only
West Virginia's queenly royalty of festival
days and the hermit of the Alleghenies, but
I also claim acquaintance with the former
West Virginia mother of the year. the be-
loved Mrs. Alex Thompson of Alderson. I
count as my close friends a few people rich
as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider
the table.
I enough to he retired. But this "bla bin bin
was laid on fanfare" is to tell you I also know West Vir-
ginia's daughter of the year. My gracious
friend, the Honorable ELIZABETH KEE, of
GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND
Mr. VINSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to extend
their remarks in the RECORD on the bill
just passed.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Geor-
gia?
There was no objection.
PERSONAL ANNOUNCEMENT
Mr. WAINWRIGHT. Mr. Speaker,
during rolicall No. 95 I was necessarily
absent at the Pentagon. Had I been
present, I would have voted "yea."
CORRECTION OF ROLLCALL
Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, on roll-
call No. 91 my colleague, Mr. JAMES, is
recorded as having voted. On that day.
he was in the hospital in Bethesda, and
I ask unanimous consent, therefore, that
the RECORD and Journal be corrected ac-
cordingly to show that he was not pres-
ent and did not vote.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Penn-
sylvania?
There was no objection.
CORRECTION OF ROLLCALL
Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. Speaker, I un-
derstand that I was not recorded as vot-
ing on rollcall No. 95. I voted "yea"
and ask unanimous consent that I be so
recorded.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Vir-
ginia.?
There was no objection.
ELIZABETH KEE-WEST VIRGINIA'S
DAUGHTER OF THE YEAR
(Mr. BURNSIDE asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point.)
Mr. BURNSIDE. Mr. Speaker, In the
June 17 issue of the White Sulphur Sen-
tinel, White Sulphur Springs, W. Va.,
Miss Pat Sullivan in her column "Saun-
Bluefield, W. Va., and of the House of Rep-
resentatives In Washington. D. C.. received
this distinct honor last May 7 when the West
Virginia Society of the District of Columbia
held its annual son-and-daughter banquet
honoring West Virginia's outstanding son
and daughter of the year 1955. Mrs. KEE
was selected as our State's most distinguished
daughter and she was presented with a beau-
tiful plaque by a former Member of the
House of Representatives, the Honorable
Jennings Randolph. Just naturally letters
and telegrams of applause poured into her
mailbox from friends and acquaintances ex-
pressing their confidence and appreciation
of her integrity and eminent service to her
people. The Honorable ROBERT C. BYRD, of
West Virginia, paid tribute to ELIZABETH KEE
in appreciative poetic phrases that were writ-
ten into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of May
10. 1955. plus letters like orchids from such
biggles as Speaker SAM RAYBURN, Senator
H. M. KILGORE. and GaACIE PFosT, of Idaho,
and a half dozen others were applause in
the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD for West Vir-
ginia's favorite daughter. Humbly I add
my soprano cheers for my favorite politi-
cian. Once a year at least we meet at the
State fairgrounds at Fairlea, W. Va. But
where in heck were you last summer, ELIZA-
BETH KEE? I missed you. I want to com-
plain also about your pictures on the road-
side billboards, because the pictures were
not nearly so pretty as you are. Congratu-
lations. Daughter of 1955, room 1016, New
House Office Building, Washington, D. C.
CORRECTION OF RECORD
Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to make certain cor-
rection in the RECORD at page A4001.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Flor-
ida?
There was no objection.
AMENDING THE TRAVEL EXPENSE
ACT OF 1949
Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H. R. 6295) to
amend section 3 of the Travel Expense
Act of 1949, as amended, to provide an
increased maximum per diem allow-
ance for subsistence and travel expenses,
and for other purposes, with Senate
amendments thereto, disagree to the
Senate amendments, and agree to the
conference asked by the Senate.
Approved For Release 2006/07/28: CIA-RDP63T00245R000100120005-2