TO PROVIDE FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN ENLISTED MEN AND FORMER ENLISTED MEN OF THE NAVY FOR THE VALUE OF PERSONAL EFFECTS LOST, DAMAGED, OR DESTROYED BY FIRE AT THE NAVAL TRAINING STATION, HAMPTON ROADS, VA., ON FEBRUARY 21, 1927 NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, January 22, 1929. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: There is inclosed herewith a copy of a letter, together with a copy of a proposed bill to provide for the reimbursement of certain enlisted men and former enlisted men of the Navy for the value of personal effects lost, damaged, or destroyed by fire at the naval training station, Hampton Roads, Va., on February 21, 1927, which has been forwarded to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Sincerely yours, CURTIS D. WILBUR, Secretary of the Navy. NAVY DEPARTMENT, L11-15/P8-2(14)(280303) M. Washington, January 18, 1929. The SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. SPEAKER: I have the honor to transmit herewith a draft of a proposed bill to provide for the reimbursement of certain enlisted men and former enlisted men of the Navy for the value of personal effects lost, damaged, or destroyed by fire at the naval training station, Hampton Roads, Va., on February 21, 1927. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to authorize the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse enlisted men and former enlisted men of the Navy who lost their effects as the result of a fire which occurred in unit J, naval operating base, Hampton Roads, Va., on February 21, 1927. The facts and circumstances are substantially as follows: At about 10.47 p. m. a fire was discovered in the south end of Building No. 14, unit J. The fire completely destroyed the building and property which was stored inside, including wearing apparel, mattresses, and other personal effects belonging to 61 enlisted men of the Navy. A naval board of investigation was convened to inquire into the circumstances of the fire and determine responsibility. The board found that the fire originated in the electric fixtures in a corner of the building but was unable to place responsibility on any person. (509) 2197-29-No. 85 The men whose effects were lost were either (a) on duty fighting the fire or on guard, (b) in the hospital or sick quarters, or (c) otherwise unable to assist in rescuing their effects. All of the effects lost were stowed in places regularly provided and used for that purpose. The fire spread so quickly after discovery that there was no time to save effects without risk of life or personal injury. The men who suffered loss were not at fault. On the contrary, most of them were recruits who, though never having had duty at sea, were intrusted with and satisfactorily performing duty more responsible than usual for persons with their limited experience. The fidelity displayed and the prompt and effective action of these men and others prevented the spread of the fire and consequent great damage to other buildings. The losses suffered by the men were very great when considered in connection with the low pay of their rating, all of them being apprentice seamen at the time of the fire. The Bureau of Navigation, Navy Department, has recommended that, in view of the special circumstances surrounding the losses of the effects of these men, special legislation be sought for their reimbursement. The Navy Department is strongly of the opinion that the proposed legislation should be enacted. The total amount involved will not exceed $3,500. This proposed legislation has been referred to the Director of the Bureau of the Budget who advises that it is not in conflict with the financial program of the President. In view of the foregoing the Navy Department recommends that the proposed legislation be enacted. Sincerely yours, CURTIS D. WILBUR, A BILL To provide for the reimbursement of certain enlisted men and former enlisted men of the Navy for the value of personal effects lost, damaged, or destroyed by fire at the naval training station, Hampton Roads, Virginia, on February 21, 1927. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sum or sums, amounting in the aggregate not to exceed $3,500, as may be required by the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse, under such regulations as he may prescribe, enlisted men or former enlisted men of the Navy, for value of personal effects lost, damaged, or destroyed as a result of the fire which occurred in Unit J, naval operating base, Hampton Roads, Virginia, on February 21, 1927. A HEARING ON A BILL (H. R. 10664) FOR THE RELIEF OF THE STATE OF MAINE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, Wednesday, January 16, 1929. The committee this day met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Fred A. Britten, chairman, presiding. The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen of the committee, we have before us this morning H. R. 10664, introduced by Mr. Beedy, for the relief of the State of Maine. The bill and a report thereon by the Navy Department read as follows: A BILL For the relief of the State of Maine Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the State of Maine an amount equal to the unexpended balance of appropriations made by Congress to aid in the construction of a bridge between Kittery, Maine, and Portsmouth, New Hampshire, remaining unexpended upon final settlement of contracts made by the United States for the construction of such bridge; but the total payments under this act shall not exceed $35,000. FOR THE RELIEF OF THE STATE OF MAINE (H. R. 10664) The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, March 17, 1928. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of February 9, 1928, transmitting the bill (H. R. 10664) for the relief of the State of Maine, and requesting the views and recommendations of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to inform you as follows: The purpose of the proposed legislation is to authorize the payment to the State of Maine of an amount not to exceed $35,000 out of the $500,000 appropriated to pay the share of the United States toward the cost of the PortsmouthKittery Bridge across the Piscataqua River. A complete statement of the facts relating to the construction of this bridge will be found in a communication from the Chief of the Bureau of Yards and Docks, a copy of which is attached hereto. The substance of this communication is to the effect that while it was the intention of the enabling legislation that the United States and the States of New Hampshire and Maine should each pay the same amount estimated at $500,000 toward the construction of the bridge it became necessary for the State of Maine to expend a larger sum because of the length of the causeway on the Maine side of the river. The total expenditures of the State of Maine were $650,000 while the United States has expended about $465,000. The cost of this legislation will not exceed $35,000 but the amount can not be exactly stated. The bill H. R. 10664 was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information as to cost and a statement that the Navy Department contemplated recommending the enactment of the proposed legislation. Under date of March 7, 1928, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that the proposed legislation is in conflict with the financial program of the President. In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill H. R. 10664. Subject: Bill (H. R. 10664) for the relief of the State of Maine-Letter, February 1. The bill H. R. 10664 authorizes payment to the State of Maine of “An amount equal to the unexpended balance of appropriations made by Congress to aid in the construction of a bridge between Kittery, Me., and Portsmouth, N. H., remaining unexpended upon final settlement of contracts made by the United States for the construction of such bridge," with the condition that "the total payments under this act shall not exceed $35,000." The State of New Hampshire, it is understood, makes no claim for any part of this unexpended balance. 2. The Congress by the acts of July 11, 1919 (41 Stat. 143), and July 1, 1922 (42 Stat. 804), appropriated $500,000 to aid in the construction of a bridge connecting the city of Portsmouth with the navy yard at Kittery, on condition that an equal amount should be contributed by each of the two States of Maine and New Hampshire and that the location of the bridge should be approved by the Secretary of the Navy for convenient access to the navy yard. Maine and New Hampshire each appropriated an equal amount, and a location for the bridge satisfactory to them and to Portsmouth and Kittery was approved by the Secretary of the Navy. The authorizing acts of the two States provided that the bridge should be known as a memorial to their soldiers and sailors of the World War. 3. The sum of $1,500,000 was insufficient for a bridge extending from mainland to mainland. The bridge constructed spans the Piscataqua River from Portsmouth to Badgers Island off the Maine shore. It consists of three steei spans each 300 feet long, resting on two piers in the channel and two abutments near the shores. The two outer spans are fixed; the central span is movable and of the vertical lift type. The piers and abutments are of concrete-and-masonry construction. 4. The approaches at the ends of the bridge were provided by the States or municipalities concerned without cost to the United States. From the Pertsmouth side the approach consists of roadways converging from two streets. carried on a reinforced concrete viaduct. On the Kittery side it consists of a viaduct of substantially the same construction as the bridge extending from the bridge to the shore of Badgers Island, a roadway across the island, a pile trestle over the back channel from the island to the mainland, and roads connecting with existing highways. 5. The bridge was built under two contracts, to which representatives of the two States and the United States were parties, one covering the piers and abutments, the other the steel superstructure. The amounts of the contracts were $698,813.52 and $649,000, respectively. There was delay of 229 days (from December 31, 1922, to August 17, 1923) in the completion of the superstructure, for which liquidated damages amounting at $200 a day to $45,800 have been assessed against the contractor. The contractor has not accepted settlement on this basis, and the superstructure contract is accordingly not closed. The amount unpaid under this contract is $64,900. 6. Besides the two contracts mentioned, many expenses incident to the building of the bridge were paid from the appropriations for its construction. Of the $500,000 contributed by the Federal Government $41,139.78 is unexpended. against which there is a charge of $21,633.34 as the Government's share of the $64,900 unpaid under the superstructure contract, leaving $19,506.44 unobligated. The assessment of $45,800 as liquidated damages reduces the amount still payable for the superstructure to $19,100, the Government's share of this obligation being $6,366.67, the payment of which would leave unexpended, of the Federal appropriation, $34,773.11. All other adjustments under this appropriation have been made. 7. Understanding that the cost to the State of Maine of the bridge and the Kittery approach is in excess of $630,000, the bureau recommends favorable action on H. R. 10664. L. E. GREGORY, Chief of Bureau. STATEMENT OF HON. CARROLL L. BEEDY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MAINE The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Beedy, will you be good enough to take the witness chair and tell the committee why you think this committee has jurisdiction over the pending measure and why it should be reported favorably? Mr. BEEDY. Yes. I have given some thought to the question of jurisdiction of this committee over this subject. The legislation itself shows that the matter was turned over by the Government to the Navy Department. The bridge in question is an auxiliary or adjunct of the navy yard at Portsmouth, N. H., or, properly speaking, at Kittery, Me. In 1917 the Legislature of the State of New Hampshire authorized the appointment of a commission to consider the matter of construction of a highway bridge across the Piscataqua River between the States of Maine and New Hampshire, and the commission in 1919 made a report advocating the construction of such a bridge. The States of New Hampshire and Maine and the Federal Government each appropriated $500,000 to aid in the construction of the bridge, or a total of $1,500,000. The share of the State of New Hampshire was appropriated by an act of her legislature approved March 27, 1919, and the enabling act of the State of Maine was passed on March 13, 1919. Thereupon the Federal Government passed an enabling act as a matter of fact, two acts were passed, one under date of July 11, 1919, and another under date of July 1, 1922. The authorizing provision of the act of July 11, 1919, the Federal act, reads as follows: To aid in construction of bridge connecting city of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, with navy yard at Kittery, Maine, $500,000, of which $250,000 is hereby appropriated: Provided, That an equal amount shall be expended concurrently for the same purpose severally by the States of Maine and New Hampshire, the location to be approved by the Secretary of the Navy for convenient access to the navy yard, Portsmouth, N. H. I think that probably explains the jurisdiction of this committee over the subject matter. Suffice it to say that the authorizing acts of the two States each provided that the governor and the council should have power to agree upon the location of the bridge between points in Portsmouth and Kittery, but not until the Federal Government had been asked to make an appropriation toward the construction of the bridge, "for the reason that the most expensive location for said bridge is the one which will best serve the navy yard of the Federal Government" at Kittery and "it is equitable that the Federal Government should share in the expense and cost of said bridge, particularly if constructed in said location most favorable to it." Thereupon the bridge commissions of the States of Maine and New Hampshire met with authorities of the Navy Department and at length agreed upon the construction of this bridge at the point where it was finally built and completed. The bridge was opened to traffic in August, 1923. |