EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OCEANOGRAPHY HI 



Mr. Ding ell. Was the question of bids ever discussed with you, 

 sir, or within the framework of your committee? 



Commander Alexander. No, sir. 



Mr. Dingell. They were not? 



Commander Alexander. No, sir. 



Mr. Dingell. As to the relative capabilities or acceptance, and so 

 forth, of bids and the abilities of different shipbuilders to provide a 

 seaworthy and sound vessel according to the terms of the contract 

 to meet the needs of the Government? 



Commander Alexander. Not with specific reference to the Woods 

 Hole ship. We did make an extensive study of how each agency 

 allocated bids once the design was established. 



Mr. Dingell. Woods Hole has the first vessel being built by the 

 Government for a private concern, is it not, or a private agency? 



Commander Alexander. Well, no, sir. 



Mr. Dingell. Of this type? 



Commander Alexander. I think the very first one that will be 

 made available for private institutions will be the first fiscal year 

 1960 Navy AGOR that will be made available for Lamont. 



Mr. Dingell. I see. The AGOR is good enough for Lamont, but 

 the AGOR is not good enough for Woods Hole, is that it? 



Commander Alexander. No, sir. We had two ships planned in 

 fiscal year 1960 for the Navy. One was to go to Lamont, and one 

 was to go to Woods Hole. During one of our initial panel meetings, 

 we found that the National Science Foundation was making plans 

 to provide a ship for Woods Hole. At that time, we thought that 

 the ship would be available before the Navy ship was, so the Navy 

 diverted that ship to Government laboratories. 



Mr. Dingell. Do you know the difference in cost between the 

 two vessels? 



Commander Alexander. The Navy's ship costs $4.2 million and 

 this will be a ship that is ready for sea. My records show $3.5 million 

 in 1962 and $1.5 million in 1961 for NSF. The National Science 

 Foundation has spread their costs over a number of years. I think 

 the costs for both ships are on the same order. 



Mr. Dingell. So it is nearer $5 million instead of $3.2? 



Commander Alexander. $4.2 million for the Navy, sir. 



Mr. Dingell. And an even $5 million for the NSF? 



Commander Alexander. I presume so, Mr. Chairman. I would 

 have to check. 



Mr. Dingell. That is $800,000 difference, because they are 



Commander Alexander. If you will permit me, sir, I would like 

 to check the figures and then submit them for the record. 



(The requested information follows:) 



Department of the Navt, 

 Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, 



Washington, D.C., March 7, 1962. 

 Mr. John Drewry, 



Chairman, Subcommittee on Oceanography, 

 House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, 

 House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 



Dear Mr. Drewry, The attached material, requested by the subcommittee is 

 submitted for inclusion in the record of the subcommittee's hearings on the na- 

 tional oceanosraphic program. 



I have also been informed by Dr. John Lyman of the National Science Founda- 

 tion that my testimony on March 1, 1962, concerning the Foundation's shipbuilding 



