Изображения страниц

category is shown in Table 1. Of 32 ships engaged in the carriage of dry cargo, 10 are owned by the U.S. Government; 22 are privately owned. Of the 33 ships engaged in the carriage of POL products for DOD, 9 are owned by the U.S. Government, with 24 chartered from the private sector. The balance of the MSC Fleet is engaged in U.S. Navy Fleet support or special project (non-transportation) roles for the government. In this area 6 ships are chartered from private industry.

3. The decline in MSC's dry cargo ship totals since 1967 is shown in Table 2. This decline reflects the reduction in DOD cargo requirements that has occurred since the height of U.S. support to South Vietnam.

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


[blocks in formation]

General agency agreement ships leased from MARAD's NDRF. Includes 35 LST'S


Washington, D.C., June 12, 1975.
Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installations and Logistics), Department

of Defense, Washington, D.C. DEAR Doctor BENNETT: As you know, the Subcommittee is interested in obtaining specific information in regard to the national defense requirements for a U.S. merchant marine. Although we appreciated your excellent testimony before the Committee on June 5, we feel that we need more specific information before fully understanding the national security issues before us.

Consequently, I would appreciate it if you could list the ten most likely conflicts in which the United States might be engaged during the next 25 years, and describe the number and kinds of ships and the amount of tonnage necessary for each conflict.

We would also like precise advice as to the U.S. shipbuilding capacity necessary for each of the ten most likely conflicts in which the United States might be engaged over the next 25 years. Which specific shipyards are likely to be used ?

If there are security considerations involved, we are prepared to receive in Executive Session such information as you feel should remain classified. In addition, would you provide recommendations for methods to keep this Committee informed, on a continuing basis, of the shipping and shipbuilding requirements necessary for changing contingencies?

Would you also provide recommendations for ways that the merchant marine can be more fully integrated into Department of Defense operations.

Thank you for your consideration of these questions. I look forward to your further testimony before the Subcommittee. Sincerely,

THOMAS N. DOWNING, Chairman, Subcommittee on Merchant Marine.


Washington, D.C., July 10, 1975. Hon. THOMAS N. DOWNING, Chairman, Subcommittee on Merchant Marine, Committee on Merchant Marine

and Fisheries, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: We have considered with deep interest and concern the questions posed in your letter of June 12, 1975. A complete response faces us with some difficulty for two reasons. First, the detailed information you require does involve classified material. Secondly, your questions lead into areas of new consideration for the Department of Defense (DoD), where no previous body of policy deliberation exists from which we might draw soundly based responses. Within that framework, we will answer your questions as fully as possible, then discuss a further course of action.

With respect to shipping requirements for 10 scenarios, our basic future plan. ning requirement is premised upon a combination of two scenarios which produces the most demanding contingency planning requirement that is reasonably foreseeable. The continuing availability of assets to meet this requirement becomes our planning objective over the subsequent five to seven years. The concept here is that if the most demanding scenario can be met, any other scenario can be met within the planning objective. Of course, while all possible lesser contingencies cannot be anticipated with any degree of precision, quite a large number of these contingencies are considered from time to time. Over the years, we have found that the planning methodology explained above is highly reliable.

As to shipyard requirements and capabilities, the same general major-demand scenario holds true as expressed for shipping. However, the planning equation becomes more complex because of the impact of lead time assumptions and materiel availability, among others. For this reason, shipyard capabilities and requirements perhaps have not been given the necessary integrated national attention in the past few years.

As discussed during my testimony, we are aware of these problems, and are undertaking intensive studies in this area. In order to avoid premature conclusions, this matter should be evaluated further upon the completion of these studies later this summer.

With respect to keeping your Committee informed of shipping and shipbuilding requirements, from a DoD standpoint, this could be readily accomplished within the "most demanding scenario” planning concept mentioned above. We suggest, however, that such information would be of value only if provided in conjunction with a total national requirements capabilities evaluation contemplating joint considerations by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Departments of Commerce and Transportation.

As to ways for more fully integrating the merchant marine into DoD operations, we would first have to consider the objectives of such integration. If the objective were to increase the employment of the U.S.-flag ships in peacetime, this might envision the use of merchant marine ships as naval auxiliaries in direct support of the combat fleet. This support is now provided by Navy ships and it would have to be assumed that the employment of merchant marine ships would supplant those Navy ships. This would not improve our defense readiness posture, since it would only exchange one asset for another and could result in certain inefficiencies. If the objective is to familiarize the existing merchant marine with DoD contingency requirements, this may well be desirable and could possibly be achieved through a closer coordination with the merchant marine management during the Defense planning process. A certain amount of dialogue transpires, but it could be broadened. This is a possibility we would have to explore. In any event, there is a certain amount of integration now. U.S.-flag merchant ships are constantly under charter by MSC for cargo purposes and merchant marine ships are, as the opportunity arises, chartered or otherwise engaged in military maneuvers and test operations.

We recognize that the foregoing answers do not meet your need for specific data. We also recognize the importance and difficulty of the task undertaken by your Subcommittee, and are sincerely interested in assisting as much as possible. We do have quantitative data as to shipping requirements and would be happy to provide it, but the classified nature of this information requires certain administrative steps. While this information can be discussed in Executive session, we note that none of the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee staff holds a current security clearance. This would prevent the staff from receiving classified material or being present when classified matter is discussed. The attached fact sheet summarizes the procedure for obtaining these clearances. A SECRET clearance would be required.

Prior to compiling additional data, we believe that an informal discussion would be very helpful in developing a better mutual understanding of the problems and objectives being dealt with here. To this end, I suggest that members of my staff meet with members of the Subcommittee staff at your pleasure, and I await your advice in this regard. Sincerely,

JOHN J. BENNETT, Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense (Installations and Logistics). [ Whereupon, at 12 noon, the subcommittee was recessed, subject to the call of the Chair.]




Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a.m., in room 1334, Longworth Office Building, Hon. Lenor K. Sullivan (chairman of the full committee) presiding.

Mrs. SULLIVAN. The Subcommittee on Merchant Marine is now in order.

While we are awaiting the arrival of more of the members of the committee I would like to make an announcement concerning the ship Maraques that we all heard about some time ago. This morning's Washington Post has a picture showing two marines raising the U.S. flag aboard that ship.

We just found that civilian merchant mariners were with the marines and got the vessel underway. Let me read the release, because I, think it is interesting. The release is dated June 12, 1975, from the Military Sealift Command of the U.S. Navy, it reads, and I quote:

Six Civil Service Mariners help in Mayaguez rescue.

Washington, D.C.-When U.S. Marines stormed over the rail of the USS Holt onto the captured American vessel SS Mayaguez and raised the American flag last week, they were accompanied by six C.S. civil service merchant mariners from the Military Sealift Command cargo ship U'SXS Greenville Victory.

While taking a much deserved rest at Subic Bay, P.I. following their ship's rescue of approximately 10,000 Vietnamese refugees in the previous weeks, the men volunteered to form a skeleton crew to sail the Mayaguez to safety after her recapture.

The men were 1st Officer Clinton J. Harriman of Cedar Grove, New Jersey; 3rd Officer (deck) Karl P. Lonsdale of Arlington, Virginia : 2nd Assistant Engineer Michael A. Saltwick of Dorchester, Massachusetts; Robert A. Griffin, a reomanstorekeeper (deck) of Mattapan, Massachusetts ; Epifanio Rodriquez, an oiler from New York City and Hermino Rivera, a fireman-water tender of Jamaica, New York.

The USC mariners flew to l'tapao Air Base, Thailand early on the morning of Mar 14. where 1.100 U.S. Marines were preparing for the assault on Kach Tang Island where the Mayaguez was anchored, and where its crewmen were believed held.

The MSC men joined 20 marines in one of the three helicopters that took off from l'tapao. The bulk of the Marine landing force left in helos from t'tapao.

Crews of the helos carrying the boarding party lowered ropeladders to the deck of the l'SS Holt and the Marines, six Air Force explosive orinance disposal spe. cialists and the six MSC volunteers clamhered down. The Iolt maneuvered close to the Jayaguez, and then, with engines at full stop. alongside, the Marines boarded the Mayaguez: Finding it deserted, ther raised the American flag.

Minutes after the Marines went over the side, the MSC volunteers followed. Weighted down by heavy flak jackets and combat helmets, the men made their var to the engineroom and within five miinutes, had the emergency diesel generator running.



While Saltwick, Rodriguez and Rivera labored over the engines, Harriman took charge of the wheelhouse, and Griffin first hauled out lines so the Holt could tow the ship, and then cut the anchor chain with an acetylene torch.

By noon all 39 Mayaguez crewmen were back aboard their ship. The MSC volunteers continued to help the crew until three p.m. when the Ship's Master Captain Charles L. Miller, told them to relax, since he and his men now had everything under control.

Early that evening, the men climbed down a Mayaguez accommodation ladder into a waiting Army tug which took them to Sattahip, Thailand, where they reported on the operation, and then had a good night's rest.

Secretary of the Navy J. William Middendorf II, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General George S. Brown, lauded the Marines, Xavy men, Air Force pilots, and all those who had helped in the successful rescue of the ship and its crew.

Rear Admiral Sam H. Moore, Commander of Military Sealift Command, also congratulated the volunteers.

In a message to Captain Raymond lacobacci, Master of the Greenrille Victory, he said. “I wish to convey to you and Messrs. Harriman, Lonsdale. Saltwick, Griffin, Rodriguez and Rivera my deeply felt appreciation and admiration for U'SXS Greenville Victory's immediate response to the Joint Chiefs of Staff request for Mayaguez rescue crew volunteers.

These civilian seafarers disregarded their safety to undertake what was expected to be an extremely hazardous mission.

Although events enabled the boarding party to recover the Mayaguez without bloodshed, this does not detract from the courage and determination of these volunteers.

Surely these men by their heroic actions have reaffirmed that the American Mercbant Marine, as it has consistently demonstrated since our nation was formed, stands ready to respond to the nation's call.

The actions of these civilian Merchant Mariners tend to contradict those who have criticized our Merchant Marine saying that it is inefficient and that it has nothing to contribute in a national emergency.

To those who maintain that Merchant Marine/Navy cooperation is tant, that one can get along without the other, I would ask why it was necessary to have these six civilian seafarers accompany our armed forces aboard the Mayaguez?

Undoubtedly it was because these men had something to offer--their professionalism, their technical knowledge, their bravery helped insure the success of the mission.

We owe these men our deepest gratitude and praise. They have reaffirmed my belief in the ability of the U.S. Merchant Marine to assist our armed forces whenever and wherever called upon.

Mrs. SULLIVAN. Now then, this morning the subcommittee continues oversight hearings with respect to the national security and economic benefits associated with the U.S.-flag merchant marine.

I am temporarily taking over this morning because Mr. Downing had to testify before the Judiciary Committee, and he will be in as soon as he is through.

Although there will be only two witnesses today, this hearing should be most informative.

Our first witness, from the Brookings Institution, is the author of an extremely well-written book that questions some of the basic assumptions underlying Federal support for our merchant marine.

Our second witness, from the Transportation Institute, has always been a strong supporter of the U.S.-flag merchant marine.

Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us this morning. We look forward to learning your views on these very important aspects of the C.S.-flag merchant marine.

Mr. Jantscher, as you are our first witness, if you will please come forward, we can proceed.

Mr. Jantscher, let me say that the House is going to meet at 11, and

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »