Mr. PILLION. Who was hurt? That is a large settlement. How many people were hurt and what happened? Admiral ROLAND. There was at least one person who was killed. They were suing for a very large sum. Mr. PILLION. You can always sue for $10 million and expect to get $56, but it has nothing to do with the merits of the settlement. Admiral ROLAND. It has been under litigation for almost 2 years, Mr. Pillion, and the Justice Department has finally decided to settle for $275,000. Mr. PILLION. What happened to the man? How badly was he hurt? Admiral ROLAND. I wish I could tell you, sir; I do not know that part of it. Mr. PILLION. He was in his own car? Admiral ROLAND. His own car, but the Government was found at fault under the Tort Claims Act. Mr. PILLION. You more or less have admitted liability; there has been no finding because it has never been in court. Admiral ROLAND. It is in court and the Justice Department apparently is settling it out of court for $275,000. It is in court but it will be settled out of court for $275,000. Mr. GARY. You had nothing to do with the settlement of it? Under the Tort Claims Act the duty is on the Department of Justice to represent the U.S. Government in these claims; is that correct? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, sir; that is right. Mr. GARY. And this claim was handled by the Department of Justice; that is the settlement that they have made, which means that automatically under the law you have to pay it out of your appropriation? Admiral ROLAND. If we may insert in the record we will put in a description of the damages to the people and the extent of their injuries. Mr. GARY. If you have that information I think it would be well to insert it. (The information requested follows:) BRIEF ON THE JULES R. FOREMAN, JR., CLAIM On September 27, 1962, the officer-in-charge of the New Orleans Light Station, along with two other coastguardsmen, drove his car to the 8th Coast Guard District office on official business. Returning to the station, the Coast Guard car, on the wrong side of the road, collided head-on with the car driven by Mr. Foreman. The driver of the Coast Guard car and another coastguardsman were injured and one coastguardsman was killed. The Foreman automobile was occupied by Mr. Foreman, his wife, and two children. One child was killed. Mr. Foreman received injuries resulting in permanent scars. Mrs. Foreman was severely injured and is practically a paraplegic, requiring care for the rest of her life. The surviving child was scarred severely about the face and suffered serious injury. Mr. Foreman sued for a large sum. The Justice Department has worked out a settlement with Mr. Foreman for $275,000. Mr. GARY. Have you any questions on the $10,800,000 for the operating expenses, Mr. Pillion? Mr. PILLION. No, Mr. Chairman. Mr. GARY. The next is the retired pay. DEFICIENCY FOR RETIRED PAY Does this deficiency result entirely and exclusively from the provisions of Public Law 88-114 which removed the percentage limitation on retirement and 88-132 which was the pay bill? Admiral ROLAND. This, I believe, is all pay bill. Captain TRIMBLE. Yes, sir; what we are asking for is all pay bill. We are absorbing the removal of the 1-percent limitation. We are absorbing part of the pay bill also. We are absorbing a total of $488,000, sir, under the retired pay appropriation. Mr. GARY. And this deficiency of $1,125,000 results entirely from the pay bill? Captain TRIMBLE. Yes, sir. Mr. GARY. And the Coast Guard was included in the regular pay bill that went through the Congress dealing with the armed services, is that correct? Captain TRIMBLE. That is right. Mr. GARY. And the Coast Guard was on the same basis as the other branches of the service. Now, on your Reserve training here, you are requesting $700,000 but I believe you propose-instead of asking for an appropriation there you propose to transfer that from "Salaries and expenses, Office of the Treasurer." Is this amount required entirely to meet the increased cost of the military pay bill? Captain TRIMBLE. Yes, sir. The total amount required is $960,000 as a result of the pay increase, but we are absorbing $260,000 of that, leaving a net requirement of $700,000 which we are requesting in the supplemental. Mr. GARY. Do you intend to increase the number of drills or Reserve personnel participating in drills over that originally contemplated for fiscal year 1964 ? Admiral ROLAND. No; there is no change in our plan for fiscal 1964. This is the result of the pay increase. Mr. GARY. Thank you, gentlemen. covers all of the deficiencies, does it not? That seems to be all. That Mr. GUNNELS. Yes; that is all of the deficiencies. REPROGRAMING OF FUNDS Mr. GARY. We will now consider the reprograming of certain funds which have been requested by the Treasury Department. I have before me a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Dillon, requesting the reprograming. It does not require additional funds but it involves certain transfer of items which the committee is asked to approve. The letter is dated December 19 and reads as follows: THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, Hon. J. VAUGHAN GARY, Chairman, Treasury-Post Office Subcommittee, House Appropriations Committee, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Funds totaling $1,700,000 are available in the Coast Guard's acquisition, construction, and improvements appropriation as a result of protracted delay in the delivery of Department of Defense TACAN equipment for major Coast Guard cutters; $1.7 million was appropriated in 1964 for installation of the TACAN. Proposals for reprograming have been received from the Coast Guard explaining the need to apply $1,686,000 of these funds to the following four projects: (a) Repair the east bulkhead Coast Guard yard__ On December 31, 1962, a 150-foot portion of the 1,000-foot east bulkhead at the yard collapsed due to below-freezing temperature, and extremely low tide and high winds. The collapse of the steel sheet piling caused a sinking of the adjacent area and the breaking of steam, water, and air lines. The failure of the bulkhead at other points is imminent, thus endangering nearby shore structures. (b) Restoration of Tamaroa___ The CGC Tamaroa was drydocked in a commercial shipyard on March 14, 1963, when the entire drydock capsized. This caused the vessel to become submerged with the drydock and created extensive damage. Repairs within the capabilities of the ship's crew have been accomplished; however, to correct the remaining damage will necessitate additional funding. The amount required for this restoration compared to continued life of the vessel warrants the expenditure of these funds. An early return of this vessel to an operating status is necessary. (c) Quarters for the Commandant.. The 1957 appropriation authorized the construction of quarters for the Commandant. Subsequent to the initial approval, the Department requested additional funds and a total of $135,000 was approved. Construction was delayed however, and the funds were reallocated to meet more immediate needs such as the repair of storm damage. It is proposed that the project be reactivated at this time. The Commandant of the Coast Guard is the only head of a military service who is not provided with Government quarters. The Commandant, like the chiefs of other services, must use his home for both a dwelling and as a center for the many official and semiofficial functions which are dictated by his position. It is planned to acquire by purchase a dwelling suitable for the needs of the service. (d) Rehabilitation of Lynde Point Light Station, Saybrook, Conn__ The existing structures at this station are in excess of 100 years old and cannot be economically renovated or remodeled. The condition of the quarters is far below standard and replacement should proceed as soon as possible. The proposed rehabilitation will include construction of a replacement generator building and duplex-type replacement living quarters. Installation of new power, water, and sewage systems will also be required. Total $800,000 686, 000 100, 000 100,000 1,686, 000 There is one additional project which, while not requiring a reprograming of funds, has produced a change in timing. The plans for reconstruction of Coast Guard facilities on Guam, destroyed by Typhoon Karen in November 1962, originally anticipated the early restoration of the depot and section office with funds appropriated through 1964, while the construction of a suitable air detachment would be part of the 1965 program. It is now proposed that the reconstruction of the air detachment proceed without delay. Temporary repairs to the depot and section office will make it possible to defer reconstruction of these facilities until 1965. Meanwhile an advantageous site for the Coast Guard air detachment very near the naval air station has become available. This will permit maximum use of naval facilities with attendant economies. The desired rescheduling of work on Guam will have the effect of advancing by 1 year the rebuilding of the air detachment and the restoration of former Coast Guard operational potential. Restoration of the air detachment involves the construction of a reinforced concrete building to house a nose dock for cargo aircraft, a supply area, and detachment offices to cost $1,300,000. Funds totaling $1,050,000 are available from 1963 and 1964 A.C. & I. appropriations. The remaining $250,000 will be programed from loran C funds, since a responsibility of the station is logistic support of the new loran C station currently under construction. These proposals have been formally presented to the Bureau of the Budget and have been approved subject to the favorable consideration of your subcommitteee. Your approval will be appreciated. Sincerely yours, DOUGLAS DILLON. Mr. GARY. Now, Admiral, suppose we take these up one at a time. REPAIR OF BULKHEAD AT COAST GUARD YARD Will you explain the need for this first item, the repair of this east bulkhead at the Coast Guard yard? That, I take it, is at your yards located at Curtis Bay, Md.? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, sir. Part of the bulkhead that collapsed is part of the docking facility and the mooring space at the yard. It is badly needed and it is completely unusable now. It cannot be used at this time. It is necessary to repair it; the damage, of course, if not repaired would spread to adjacent parts of the bulkhead. So, it is necessary to do this. Mr. GARY. According to the pictures which you have just exhibited here, the bulkhead is caving in under one of the buildings there and if something is not done very shortly, that whole structure will collapse; is that right? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, sir. There will be additional damage if steps are not taken. We have taken some temporary steps, of course, such as we were able. RESTORATION OF THE "TAMAROA” Mr. GARY. What about the restoration of the Tamaroa? Admiral ROLAND. The Tamaroa was in a commercial drydock, in Brooklyn, and one evening the drydock collapsed. Investigation revealed that one of our men who was under the influence of many things, he was a little disgruntled and he also had had a few drinks, opened the valves to the chambers of the dock and the dock capsized. With it capsized the Tamaroa and she was flooded in her engineroom and almost throughout. The damage was very extensive, as you can see from this amount of money. This is a 210-foot vessel. We have, of course, refloated the Tamaroa and she is now at the base in Staten Island. This is the estimate of the cost of putting her back in operating condition. She is the type of vessel we need, she is in good shape, and these funds would put her in good condition. It would be economical to do it this way rather than get another vessel. Mr. GARY. And you do need it? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, sir. We need the vessel very badly. Admiral ROLAND. Yes, it is somewhat like the new type of mediumrange cutter that we are building. It is about the same size and capability. Mr. GARY. Do you not have some litigation on this? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, sir. I am not sure of the status of that. The company, of course, blames us because it was our man who did this. We contest that because we feel-it happened to be our man, it could have been anybody-the company should have taken some precautions, of course. So there is litigation. The company's insurance was not enough to cover this so they are very anxious not to have to pay. Mr. GARY. Would proceeding with this complicate or affect the litigation in any way? Admiral ROLAND. I am sure it would not. We have discussed this matter with the Department of Justice which, of course, is handling our part of the litigation, and this is all right as far as they are concerned. Mr. GARY. What happened to the man? Admiral ROLAND. Well, the Department of Justice refused to prosecute him, but we tried him. We gave him a court-martial and he was sentenced to 9 months at hard labor and loss of all his pay and other benefits. He is in Portsmouth right now. I think there is an appeal or a board of review that is going to review his case soon. Mr. TRIMBLE. And how long has he been in, quite a while? Admiral ROLAND. October. He has been in since October, so I don't know what the board of review will do. Of course, this is a legal proceeding. Mr. PILLION. Is the Justice Department proceeding with the prosecution of the civil action to recover whatever they can? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, they are handling our side of it. Mr. PILLION. They are in complete charge of it now and they are proceeding? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, sir. COMMANDANT'S QUARTERS Mr. GARY. What is the status of the Commandant quarters at the present time, Admiral? Admiral ROLAND. Well, so far there have been no steps taken except that we have talked to the Bureau of the Budget. The Bureau of the Budget approves this action that we are requesting. I would like to say something in the line of justification if I may. Mr. GARY. Yes, sir. Admiral ROLAND. I am the only chief of a military service who does not have quarters furnished by the Government, and my home is my dwelling and it is where my family lives. Mr. GARY. Most of the other services not only furnish them for the top man but they furnish them for a good many of the lower grades, do they not? Admiral ROLAND. Yes, sir; I was going to mention that. My home, of course, is also the place where many official and semiofficial functions should be held. However, from a financial viewpoint I am not able to furnish an adequate place for this sort of thing. It is true that I get an allowance in lieu of quarters. Well, that allowance is $201 a month, and the place that I live in now costs well in excess of that. It is a duplex, a half a house, and it is just not 29-190-64- 3 |