I Ysi

A r 5/ 3

ceINCREASE IN APPOINTMENTS FOR

GOVERNMENT ITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

Storage KSU LIBRARIES 

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

-UNITED STATES SENATE

EIGHTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

H.R. 7356

RELATING TO THE NOMINATION AND SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE MILITARY, NAVAL,

AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

ru

r9

ru DECEMBER 5, 1963

a1-1 Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services

rg

•

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

27-780 WASHINGTON : 1964
, ezt f

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Georgia, Chairman

JOHN STENNIS, Mississippi

HARRY FLOOD BYRD, Virginia

STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri

HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington

SAM J. ERVIN, JR., North Carolina

STROM THURMOND, South Carolina

CLAIR ENGLE, California

HOWARD W. CANNON, Nevada

ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia

STEPHEN M. YOUNG, Ohio

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii

HARRY L. WINGATE, Jr., Chief Clerk

_ _

II

LEVERETT SALTONSTALL, Massachusetts

MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine

J. GLENN BEALL, Maryland

BARRY GOLDWATER, Arizona

CLIFFORD P. CASE, New Jersey
CONTENTS

Statements of—

Bennett, Hon. Charles E., a Representative in Congress from the Page

State of Florida 8

Carlton, John T., executive director, Reserve Officers Association of

the United States 6

Lampert, Maj. Gen. James B., Superintendent of the U.S. Military

Academy 12

Long, Hon. Russell B., U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana__ 7

Smedberg, Vice Adm. W. R., III, Chief, Bureau of Naval Personnel 13

Stone, Lt. Gen. William S., Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel,

Department of the Air Force 10

Zn

INCREASE IN APPOINTMENTS FOR MILITARY AND

AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1963

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES,

Washington,D.C.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m., in room 212,

Old Senate Office Building.

Present: Senators Stennis (presiding), Symington, Jackson, Thurmond, Cannon, Young of Ohio, Inouye, and Beall.

Also present: William H. Darden professional staff member; Harry

L. Wingate, Jr., chief clerk; T. Edward Braswell, Gordon A. Nease2

professional staff members; and Herbert S. Atkinson, assistant chief

clerk.

Senator STENNIS. The Armed Services Committee will please come

to order.

First, I want to express the regrets of Chairman Russell for his inability to be here today. He certainly considers this legislation important, but he and Chief Justice Warren and others were recently

appointed to a commission which is having its initial meeting today,

with reference to the savage attack on President Kennedy, and related

matters. He asked me to express his regrets and asked me to preside

here today.

The committee is meeting today to consider H.R. 7356.

(H.R. 7356 follows:)

[H.R. 7356, 88th Cong., 1st sess.]

AN ACT To amend title 10, United States Code, relating to the nomination and selection

of candidates for appointment to the Military, Naval, and Air Force Academies

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States

of America in Congress assembled, That chapter 403 of title 10, United States

Code, is amended as follows:

(1) Section 4342 is amended to read as follows:

"§ 4342. Cadets: appointment; numbers, territorial distribution

"(a) The authorized strength of the Corps of Cadets of the Academy is as

follows:

"(1) 40 cadets selected in order of merit as established by competitive

examinations from the sons of members of the armed forces who were killed

in action or died of wounds or injuries received or diseases contracted in, or

preexisting injury or disease aggravated by, active service—

"(A) during World War I or World War II as defined by laws providing service-connected compensation or pension benefits for veterans

of those wars and their dependents; or

" (B ) after June 26, 1950, and before February 1, 1955.

The determination of the Veterans' Administration as to service connection

of the cause of death is binding upon the Secretary of the Army.

1
2 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

"(2) Five cadets nominated at large by the Vice President.

Senator 

"(3) Ten cadets from each State, five of whom are nominated by each from that State.

Representative 

"(4) Five cadets from each congressional district, nominated by the from the district.

"(5) Five cadets from the District of Columbia, nominated by the Com- missioners of that District.

"(6) Five cadets from each Territory, nominated by the Delegate in Congress from that Territory.

"(7) Six cadets from Puerto Rico, five of whom are nominated by the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico and one who is a native of Puerto Rico nominated by the Governor of Puerto Rico.

"(8) One cadet nominated by the Governor of the Panama Canal from the sons of civilians residing in the Canal Zone or the sons of civilian personnel of the United States Government, or the Panama Canal Company, residing in the Republic of Panama.

"(9) One cadet from American Samoa, Guam, or the Virgin Islands nominated by the Secretary of the Army upon recommendations of their respective Governors.

Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in Congress, including the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate a principal candidate and five alternates for each vacancy that is available to him under this section. "(b) In addition, there may be appointed each year at the Academy cadets as follows:

"(1) 75 selected by the President from the sons of members of regular components of the armed forces.

"(2) 85 nominated by the Secretary of the Army from enlisted members of the Regular Army.

"(3) 85 nominated by the Secretary of the Army from enlisted members of the Army Reserve.

"(4) 20 nominated by the Secretary of the Army, under regulations prescribed by him, from the honor graduates of schools designated as honor schools by the Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, or the

Department of the Air Force, and from members of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps.

"(5) 150 selected from qualified alternates nominated by the persons

named in clauses (3) and (4) of subsection (a).

(c) The President may also appoint as cadets at the Academy sons of persons who have been awarded the Medal of Honor for acts performed while in

the armed forces.

"(d) All cadets are appointed by the President. An appointment is conditional until the cadet is admitted.

"(e) If the annual quota of cadets under subsection (b) (1), (2), (3) is not

filled, the Secretary may fill the vacancies by nominating for appointment other

candidates from any of these sources who were found best qualified on examination for admission and not otherwise nominated.

"(f) Each candidate for admission nominated under clauses (3)-(7) and (9)

of subsection (a) must be domiciled in the State or Territory, or in the congressional district, from which he is nominated, or in the District of Columbia, Puerto

Rico, American Samoa, Guam, or the Virgin Islands, if nominated from one of

those places.

"(g) The Secretary of the Army may limit the number of cadets appointed

under this section to the number that can be adequately accommodated at the

Academy, as determined by the Secretary after consulting with the Committees

on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives, subject to the

following:

"(1) He may not limit by more than one the number of cadets that could

otherwise be appointed by each nominating authority under subsection

(a) (3) or (4).

"(2) If he limits the number of appointments under subsection (a) (3)

or (4), any appointment that will cause the total number of cadets at the

Academy, chargeable to the nominating authorities named in subsections

(a) and (b), to be more than 2,505 must be made under subsection (a)

(3) or (4).

"(3) If he limits the number of appointments under subsection (b) (5),

and the total number of cadets upon admission of a new class at the Academy

will be more than 3,737, no appointments may be made under subsection

(b) (2)-(4) or section 4343 of this title."
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 3

(2) The second sentence of section 4343 is amended—

(A) By striking out "two-thirds" and inserting in place thereof

"three-fourths".

(B) By striking out "clauses (1)-(6) of section 4342(a), and clause

(2) of section 4342(e)," and inserting in place thereof "clauses (2)-(8)

of section 4342 (a )".

SEC. 2. Section 6954 of title 10, United States Code, is amended as follows:

(1) Subsection (a) is amended by inserting at the end thereof the following flush sentence:

"Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in Congress, including the Resident

Commissioner from Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate a principal candidate

and five alternates for each vacancy that is available to him under this section."

(2) Subsection (b) is amended by striking out "160" in clauses (2) and

(3) and inserting "85" in place thereof, and by inserting the following new

clause after clause (4) :

"(5) 150 selected from qualified alternates nominated by persons named

in clauses (3) and (4) of subsection (a)."

(3) The following new subsection is added at the end:

"(d) The Secretary of the Navy may limit the number of midshipmen appointed under subsection (b) (5). When he does so, if the total number of

midshipmen, upon admission of a new class at the Academy, will be more than

3,737, no appointments may be made under subsection (b) (2 )- (4 ) or section

6956 of this title."

SEC. 3. Section 6956 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(1) By striking out "one or more alternates" in subsection (a) and

inserting in place thereof "five alternates".

(2) By striking out "two-thirds" in the second sentence of subsection (e)

and inserting in place thereof "three-fourths".

SEC. 4. Chapter 903 of title 10, United States Code, is amended as follows:

(1) Section 9342 is amended to read as follows:

1 9342. Cadets: appointment; numbers, territorial distribution

"(a) The authorized strength of Air Force Cadets of the Academy is as

follows:

"(1) 40 cadets selected in order of merit as established by competitive

examination from the sons of members of the armed forces who were killed

in action or died of wounds or injuries received or diseases contracted in,

or preexisting injury or disease aggravated by, active service—

"(A) during World War I or World War II as defined by laws

providing service-connected compensation or pension benefits for veterans of those wars and their dependents; or

"(B) after June 26, 1950, and before February 1, 1955.

The determination of the Veterans' Administration as to service connection

of the cause of death is binding upon the Secretary of the Air Force.

"(2) Five cadets nominated at large by the Vice President.

"(3) Ten cadets from each State, five of whom are nominated by each

Senator from that State.

"(4) Five cadets from each congressional district, nominated by the

Representatives from the district.

"(5) Five cadets from the District of Columbia, nominated by the Commissioners of that District.

"(6) Five cadets from each Territory, nominated by the Delegate in

Congress from that Territory.

"(7) Six cadets from Puerto Rico, five of whom are nominated by the

Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico and one who is a native of

Puerto Rico nominated by the Governor of Puerto Rico.

"(8) One cadet nominated by the Governor of the Panama Canal from

the sons of civilians residing in the Canal Zone or the sons of civilian

personnel of the United States Government, or the Panama Canal Company,

residing in the Republic of Panama.

"(9) One cadet from American Samoa, Guam, or the Virgin Islands

nominated by the Secretary of the Air Force upon recommendations of their

respective Governors.

Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in Congress, including the Resident

Commissioner from Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate a principal candidate

and five alternates for each vacancy that is available to him under this section.
4 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

"(b) In addition, there may be appointed each year at the Academy cadets as

follows:

"(1) 75 selected by the President from the sons of members of regular

components of the armed forces.

"(2) 85 nominated by the Secretary of the Air Force from enlisted members of the Regular Air Force.

"(3) 85 nominated by the Secretary of the Air Force from enlisted members of the Air Force Reserve.

"(4) 20 nominated by the Secretary of the Air Force, under regulations

prescribed by him, from the honor graduates of schools designated as honor

schools by the Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, or the

Department of the Air Force, and from members of the Air Force Reserve

Officers' Training Corps.

"(5) 150 selected from qualified alternates nominated by the persons

named in clauses (3) and (4) of subsection (a).

"(c) The President may also appoint as cadets at the Academy sons of persons

who have been awarded the Medal of Honor for acts performed while in the

armed forces.

"(d) All cadets are appointed by the President. An appointment is conditional until the cadet is admitted.

"(e) If the annual quota of cadets under subsection (b) (1), (2), or (3) is

not filled, the Secretary may fill the vacancies by nominating for appointment

other candidates from any of these sources who were found best qualified on

examination for admission and not otherwise nominated.

"(f) Each candidate for admission nominated under clauses (3)—(7) and (9)

of subsection (a) must be domiciled in the State or Territory, or in the congressional district, from which he is nominated, or in the District of Columbia, Puerto

Rico, American Samoa, Guam, or the Virgin Islands, if nominated from one of

those places.

"(g) The Secretary of the Air Force may limit the number of cadets appointed

under this section to the number that can be adequately accommodated at the

Academy, as determined by the Secretary after consulting with the Committees

on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives, subject to the

following:

"(1) He may not limit by more than one the number of cadets that could

otherwise be appointed by each nominating authority under subsection (a)

(3) or (4).

"(2) If he limits the number of appointments under subsection (a) (3)

or (4), any appointment that will cause the total number of cadets at the

Academy, chargeable to the nominating authorities named in subsections

(a) and (b), to be more than 2,505 must be made under subsection (a) (3)

or (4).

"(3) If he limits the number of appointments under subsection (b) (5),

and the total number of cadets upon admission of a new class at the Academy

will be more than 3,737, no appointments may be made under subsection

(b) (2)—(4) or section 9343 of this title."

(2) The second sentence of section 9343 is amended:

(A) By striking out "two-thirds" and inserting in place thereof

"three-fourths".

(B) By striking out "clauses (1)—(6) of section 9342(a), and clause

(2) of section 9342(e)," and inserting in place thereof "clauses (2)—(8)

of section 9342 (a ) ".

SEC. 5. (a) Paragraph (2) of section 4348, paragraph (2) of section 6959, and

paragraph (2) of section 9348 of title 10 United States Code are each amended

by striking out "three" and inserting in lieu thereof "five".

(b) The fourth sentence of section 182 of title 14 of the United States Code

is amended by striking out "four" and inserting in lieu thereof "five".

(c) The amendments made by this section shall apply only with respect to

cadets and midshipmen appointed to the service academies after the date of

enactment of this Act, and shall not affect the obligated period of service of any

cadet or midshipman appointed to one of the service academies on or before the

date of enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives July 23, 1963.

Attest:

RALPH R. ROBERTS, Clerk.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 5

Senator STENNIS. The principal purpose of this legislation (H.R.

7356) is to increase the authorized strength of the Military and Air

Force Academies to the number now authorized for the U.S. Naval

Academy.

As we know, since their beginning in the last century, the service

academies have provided the hard core of officers for the Regular components of the military departments. Because of the quality of Academy training and the higher retention rate of the graduates, it has

been the goal of the Army and Air Force that the service academies

provide about 50 percent of the annual input of Regular officers.

The pending bill is intended to further this objective by permitting

eventual graduating classes of about 930 at each academy, as compared to the present number of about 550. For the Army, the larger

class would provide about 50 percent of the Regular officer input, as

compared to 26 percent at present; and for the Air Force, the larger

number would constitute about 31 percent, as compared to 18 percent

at present.

It might be observed that the Military Academy has not been increased in size since 1942. At that time the authorized strength of the

Regular Army Officer Corps was 14,490, as compared to 49,500 at present. The Air Force Academy legislation, based on the Military Academy laws, was passed at a time when the authorized number of

Regular Air Force officers was 27,500 as compared to the present authorized strength of 69,425.

For the record, the Chair might mention the principal aspects of the

bill : 

• •

(1) The authorized strength of the Military and Air Force Academies would be increased from 2,529 to 4,417, which is the present level

for the Naval Academy. This increase will involve for these two

Academies an increase from four to five in the number of congressional principals and a substantial increase in the number of competitive appointments;

(2) At the same time, the bill would establish for all 3 Academies

a new category of 150 appointments annually to be made solely from

alternates nominated by Members of Congress. For the Navy the

number of appointments from among enlisted reservists and enlisted

Regulars would be accordingly reduced to accommodate the new

category; and

(3) The bill authorizes the Army and Air Force Secretaries to

limit the appointments to the number that can be adequately accommodated. The bill, however, requires that the first priority for expansion will be the appointment of the fifth congressional principal.

We will cover this and the other expansion priorities during the discussion of the bill. There is before each member a committee print

setting forth an analysis of the bill. We have with us today as a

representative of both the Department of Defense and the Air Force,

Lt. Gen. William S. Stone, Deputy Chief for Air Force Personnel and

former Superintendent of the Air Force Academy. General Stone

will be followed by Maj. Gen. James P. Lampert, Superintendent of the

Military Academy; and Vice Adm. W. R. Smedberg III, Chief of the

Bureau of Naval Personnel.

We have with us also the Honorable Charles E. Bennett, U.S. Representative from Florida, and Col. John T. Carlton, executive director

of the Reserve Officers Association of the United States.

27-780-64--2
6 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

Colonel Carlton, I will recognize you first, as I understand you have

a statement for the record.

STATEMENT OF JOHN T. CARLTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES

Mr. CARLTON. I would like the privilege of submitting for the record

a brief statement.

Senator STENNIS. Your statement will be accepted and put in the

record, along with the covering letter submitted.

Mr. CARLTON. Thank you, sir.

(The documents referred to follow:)

RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Washington, D.C., December 3, 1963.

Hon. RICHARD B. RUSSELL,

Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee,

Senate Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR RUSSELL: We appreciate your giving this association an oppor- tunity to insert in the record our views in connection with H.R. 7356 upon which

you are holding hearings on December 5, 1963.

I have attached copies of a short statement outlining our views which in general support this worthy bill. We do, however, earnestly solicit your serious

consideration to providing an amendment that will allow the sons of all active

duty career people to compete for appointments under the so-called presidential

quota. We feel that this particular amendment has great merit, and we note

that it is supported by the administration, as indicated in the Department of

Defense report to you dated October 1, 1963.

We therefore respectfully request that the attached statements be considered

by your committee and inserted as part of the record of the hearings on H.R.

7356.

Sincerely,

JOHN T. CARLTON, Colonel, USAR.

Enclosures.

STATEMENT OF COL. JOHN T. CARLTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, RESERVE OFFICERS

ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, we appreciate the opportunity

to express to you our views on H.R. 7356, a bill to amend title 10, United States

Code, relating to the nomination and selection of candidates for appointment to

the Military, Naval, and Air Force Academies.

The Reserve Officers Association is fully in accord with the purpose of this

bill which will increase the cadet strength of the Military Academy and the

Air Force Academy to the equivalent of that authorized the Naval Academy.

We feel that the requirements of each service in the foreseeable future for

officers in its Regular Establishment fully justify this request.

We know that even with this bill the total requirements for officers of the

Active Forces, both Regular and Reserve, cannot be filled, and we have just

testified strongly before the Armed Services Committee of the House of Representatives for a stronger and more effective ROTC program which will supplement the output of our great service academies. These things together, we are

convinced, will assure the country of a highly qualified and motivated body of

military officers, and thus contribute to our national security.

There is one feature of this bill which we sincerely believe requires amendment. Current law and practice and the provisions of H.R. 7356 in the form

now before you for consideration permits only the sons of personnel of the

Regular components to be tendered Presidential appointments to the academies.

This has its genesis at a time when the active duty forces were virtually all in

a Regular status.

Today a significant proportion of our Active Force consists of career Reserve

officers who have served side by side with the Regular officers for many years.

We most strongly feel that the sons of this group should be afforded the same
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 7

opportunities for appointment to a service academy as the sons of members of

the Regular service. It is our opinion that the primary purpose of the Presidential appointment authority is to overcome the disadvantage that accrues from

long-time military service which precludes the fathers of these applicants from

establishing a permanent residence (thus barring them from consideration for

appointment by the various Members of Congress). This disadvantage accrues

to the sons of career reservists the same degree as to those of Regular officers.

At our national convention, June 29, 1962, our membership adopted a resolution urging that Presidential appointments to service academies be offered to

the sons of reservists on active duty. This resolution was forwarded to the

Department of Defense.

In July of this year the Honorable Charles E. Bennett, Congressman from

Florida and a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, also forwarded a letter to the Secretary of Defense urging consideration of this amendment.

As a result, the Secretary of the Air Force in a letter to the chariman of this

committee, October 1, 1963, on behalf of the Department of Defense, recommended an amendment which would give effect to our mandate and Congressman

Bennett's suggestions.

We most strongly support this stand and urge the adoption of the amendment

which would change the eligibility for appointments by the President "from

the sons of members of Regular members of the Armed Forces" to "from the

sons of members of an armed force, active or retired, who have served on active

duty for at least eight years."

Therefore, subject to our comments regarding this single amendment, we

highly commend this legislation and urge its favorable consideration.

Senator STENNIS. I wish also to have included at this point in the

record a statement from Senator Russell B. Long of Louisiana.

(The document referred to follows:)

U.S. SENATE,

Washington, D.C., December 5.1963.

Hon. RICHARD B. RUSSELL,

Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee,

Old Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR DICK: It is my understanding that a hearing is being held today before

your committee on H.R. 7356, relating to the nomination and selection of candidates for appointment to the service academies.

As you know, I have been quite concerned for some time with the manner in

which additional appointments to our service academies should be made. You

will recall my statements on and amendments to H.R. 7913, the bill on this

same subject that came before the Senate last year.

After studying H.R. 7356 as it was referred to the Senate Armed Services

Committee, I believe it to be an improvement over the bill that passed the

House and was sent to the Senate last year. However, it is my feeling that

H.R. 7356 should be further amended in your committee.

By this time, I believe members of the committee are aware of the fact that

some people use this proposal to increase the number of appointments to the

academies as a device to monopolize the best athletic talent in the Nation.

In order to try to prevent such a use, the first amendment to the bill which I

think your committee should make is one to require disclosure in the public

record of the name of each appointee to the academies, his address, the high

school from which he graduated, the manner in which he was selected, and, if

he were appointed by a Member of Congress, the name of the Member who appointed him.

At a minimum, it is fair to insist that the identity of the Member of Congress

appointing an individual should be a matter of public record available to anyone interested. The unlawful manner in which Members of Congress have sometimes been induced to play a part in the academy appointment deception is

subject to severe criticism and this should be stopped for the future. Accordingly, I would recommend that information as to the residence of an individual,

the high school from which he graduated, and the name of the Member of Congress making the appointment should all be available to the Presiding Officer of

the Senate at the time that the selection is made.

The other modifications I would like to see made in H.R. 7356 would be

amendments to section 4342(b) (5), having to do with the Military Academy,
8 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

and the corresponding section 6954(b) (5) for the Naval Academy, and section

9342(b) (5) for the Air Force Academy.

There should be an addition in the language of (b) (5) of sections 4342, 6954,

and 9342 to show who selects the 150 cadets which are "selected from qualified

alternates nominated by the persons named in clauses (3) and (4) of subsection

(a)." In every other group under subsection (b) there is stated who makes the

selection or nomination. However, it is not stated in the bill who selects these 150

who are taken from those nominated by Senators and Representatives.

Also, it should be stated in (b) (5) of each of these sections that the 150 will

be selected "in order of merit as established by competitive examinations." According to the House report on page 3, this is the intent of the bill. However,

it is not spelled out in the language of the proposed statute. Again, the House

report on page 5 says that assurance has been given that the 150 will be selected

in order of merit, but I would prefer, in addition to the assurances given by reprepresentatives of the service academies, that the specific language be inserted in

the bill.

I regret that I am unable to appear in person before your committee on this

measure, but I would appreciate your committee giving serious consideration

to the modifications of H.R. 7356 which I have proposed above.

With best personal regards, I am,

Sincerely,

RUSSELL.

Senator STENNIS. We are glad to have with us the Honorable

Charles E. Bennett, and you may proceed at this time.

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES E. BENITETT, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE SECOND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE

STATE OF FLORIDA

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. Chairman, thank you deeply for this opportunity

to appear in behalf of an amendment to the Academy bill which would

give a much-deserved opportunity to sons of career reservists for Academy appointments under the Presidential quota.

Some years ago a career naval officer, William Bliss, called to my attention what he felt was a very grate inequity in not giving a reasonable

chance for Academy appointments to sons of military personnel who

were, in fact, career personnel even though they did not hold Regular

commission. I told him that I thought that such an amendment to

the laws would be seriously considered by Congress if it could obtain

the backing of some nationwide organization representing a wide

general interest. He took the matter up with the Reserve Officers Association and they have, in fact, passed at the national convention a

request for legislation along this line. The bill before you now is the

perfect place for this legislation to be added, and I understand that

the Department of Defense has favorably reported on the idea.

I have looked over the Department of Defense proposed amendments, and it seems to accomplish the objective that everyone has in

mind; but I would respectfully suggest that perhaps it would be a good

idea to delete from the proposed amendments, page 9, lines 19, the

words "strike out '75' and insert '100' in place thereof". I say this

because if this is deleted from the Department of Defense amendments then the amendments will simply amount to giving an opportunity for all career personnel, whether Reserve or Regular, to have

their sons apply for Academy appointments under the enlarged quota

provided in the House version of this bill. It is not to be anticipated

that many would apply because not many reservists would have attained the required degree of Reserve status while also having reached

the age to have children of college level.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 9

Since the number of spaces authorized under the Presidential quota.

is almost double, it would seem that the Department of Defense's proposed amendment with the slight change that I have suggested wouldl

be a very practical way to bring about the desired objective.

Before closing, I would like to emphasize my enthusiasm for the

view that sons of career reservists should have an opportunity to be

appointed under the Presidential quota because they, like the sons of

Regular officers, have great difficulty in establishing the type of 

residence which is usually expected for the congressional appointments.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Senator STENNIS. Thank you for your contribution. I imagine

your amendment will be favorably acted on. If there are no other

questions, we will proceed, gentlemen.

Thank you, Congressman.

Mr. Reporter, I have already given the statement as to this bill for

the record, but perhaps, to bring the matter into focus, I will briefly

state some of the high points of the bill for the information of the

members of the committee who have not had a chance to go over it.

Gentlemen of the committee, this bill proposes to increase the number of trainees, cadets at the Military Academy at West Point, and the

Air Force Academy, a considerable increase. The Navy is not included directly because they already have a larger number.

As we know, since their beginning the service academies have provided a hard core of officers for the Regular components of the military

departments. The pending bill is intended to further the objective of

having the service academies provide about 50 percent of the annual

input of Regular officers. That would bring about eventual graduating classes of about 930 each year at each Academy as compared with

the present number of about 550. For the Army the largest class

would provide about 50 percent of the Regular officer input as compared to 26 percent at present. For the Air Force the larger number

would constitute about 31 percent as compared to 18 percent at present.

For the record, the Chair might mention the principal aspects of the

bill as follows:

(1) The authorized strength of the Military and Air Force Academies would be increased from 2,529 to 4,417, which is the present level

for the Naval Academy. This increase will involve for these two

academies an increase from four to five in the number of congressional

principals and a substantial increase in the number of competitive

appointments; and

(2) At the same time the bill would establish for all three academies

a new category of 150 appointments annually to be made solely from

alternates nominated by Members of Congress. For the Navy the

number of appointments from among enlisted reservists and enlisted

Regulars would be accordingly reduced to accommodate the new

category.

Those are the high points of the bill. May I express the regrets of

Senator Saltonstall and Senator Smith that they could not be here this

morning. They are interested in the bill, of course. There are two

major appropriation bills having their final consideration by the Senate Appropriations Committee this morning. That accounts for the

absence of not only the two I have mentioned, but Senator Byrd of

West 'Virginia and Senator Case of New Jersey.
10 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

As I have said, gentlemen, witnesses are General Stone; General

Lampert, who is Superintendent of the Academy; and Vice Admiral

Smedberg, who is Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel. We are

delighted to have all of you here. We don't want this to be a preview

of the Army-Navy game Saturday or the Air Force game or anything

l'ke that. We will take you first, General Stone. You also represent

t ie Department of Defense.

STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. W. S. STONE, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF

FOR PERSONNEL, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

General STONE. I am Lt. Gen. William S. Stone, Deputy Chief of

Staff for Personnel, Headquarters, U.S. Air Force.

On behalf of the Department of Defense, I welcome the opportunity

to appear before you today regarding legislation which would increase

the authorized cadet strength of the U.S. Military Academy and the

'U.S. Air Force Academy to that presently authorized the U.S. Naval

Academy. In general, it adopts the appointment provisions applicable

to the Naval Academy although there are a few significant changes

which would apply to all three academies.

Approximately 32 percent of the Regular officer strength of the

Navy are Academy graduates. The Army with 22 percent and the

Air Force with less than 9 percent now have much smaller proportions

of their Regular officer strengths made up of Academy graduates.

Present Military and Air Force Academy production of about 550

graduates annually will constitute only 18 percent of the Air Force

and 26 percent of the Army Regular officer input when the authorized

Regular officer force of 69,425 and 49,500, respectively, is attained.

The 930 cadets who could be graduated annually upon full implementation of the new legislation would constitute about 31 percent of

the Air Force input into its Regular officer structure and about 50 percent of the Regular officer input into the Army branches where Academy graduates are normally assigned. Increasing the number of

graduates to this level would be a significant step toward having at

least 50 percent of the annual Regular officer input come from the

service academies. This goal was approved for the Navy in 1947 and

was recommended by the Department of Defense Service Academy

Study Group in 1949. We believe this to be a valid objective presently

and for the foreseeable future.

It is generally recognized that Academy graduates, because of their

unique background, establish a pattern for reaching and maintaining

the highest professional standards. Thus they exert an important

beneficial influence upon the officers and enlisted men of all the armed

services. Academy cadets meet higher selection standards and receive

more appropriate training than officers from other procurement

sources. They show outstanding accomplishments both in academics

and military training, including flying, and they show greater career

motivation than their contemporaries. This insures a higher experience level throughout the officer corps.

In addition to increasing the authorized strengths of the Military

and Air Force Academies, this legislation makes uniform the statutory provisions relating to the nomination and appointment of cadets

and midshipmen to the three service academies and extends the period
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 11

of obligated service for Academy graduates from 3 to 5 years. By

regulation, the period of obligated service is now 4 years.

The appointment provisions applicable to the Naval Academy are revised, and made applicable to the other academies so as to increase the

proportion of authorized cadets and midshipmen from congressional

sources from the present level of 61 percent to approximately 75 percent. This was accomplished by adding a new appointment category

for qualified alternates of Senators and Representatives. This new

category authorizes 150 vacancies annually which under current Navy

law are part of those reserved for enlisted members of the Regular

and Reserve components. The proposed legislation also changes the

present authority of the service secretaries to make additional appointments to bring the academies up to strength by increasing the percentage of such appointments which must come from congressional sources

from 66% to 75 percent.

Each Member of Congress will thus be authorized to have five principal appointees attending each of the academies at any one time, an

increase of one for the Military and Air Force Academies, plus any

" qualified alternates appointed under the new category or by the service

secretaries. Further uniformity is added by the provision that each

Member of Congress is entitled to nominate six candidates for each

principal vacancy available to him. Previously, in the absence of

statutory provisions, the number of nominations accepted by the three

services for each vacancy has varied from 4 to 11.

The Military and Air Force Academies will have to build up to

the new authorized strength over a number of years. This legislation provides that any increase of the present authorized strength

must come first from congressional sources so that each Member has

an allocation of five cadets. Further increases can come first from

the Presidential source, second from the new congressional qualified

alternate category, and finally from the other competitive sources.

You will note that this proposal does not authorize any increase

in facilities at either the Air Force or Military Academy. Obviously,

it will be necessary to provide additional facilities if the proposed

authorized strengths are to be attained. Authorization for such facilities will necessarily be the subject of separate legislation. In the

meantime, upon enactment of this legislation, both the Military and

Air Force Academies will be permitted to add several hundred cadets

so as to make maximum use of existing facilities.

There is one change that should be made to the Department's October 1 letter which comments on the bill as passed by the House of

Representatives. Section 4342(b) (b) , 6954(b) (1), and 9342(b) (1)

should read:

(1) Do selected by the President from the sons of members of an armed

force who are, or who died while they were—

( A) on active duty (other than for training) ; or

(B) retired with pay or granted retired or retainer pay other than those

granted retired pay under section 1331 of this title;

and who have served continuously on active duty for at least 8 years.

This change is necessary to clarify the eligibility of sons of career

• reservists, the matter about which Congressman Bennett just spoke.

We would propose an additional minor technical amendment which,

in effect, would delete the words "authorized strength" from the section permitting the appointment of qualified alternates. The change
12 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

would result in a provision identical to what is now contained in the

corresponding Naval Academy provision. The first sentence of sections 4343 and 9343 should be amended to read as follows:

If it is determined that, upon the admission of a new class to the Academy, the

number of cadets at the Academy will be below the authorized number, the

Secretary of the Army (Air Force) may fill the vacancies by nominating additional cadets from qualified candidates designated as alternates and from other

qualified candidates who competed for nomination and are recommended and

found qualified by the Academic Board (faculty).

I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this committee about the

urgent need for more Army and Air Force Academy graduates and

will gladly attempt to answer any questions that you may have.

If I may, at this time I would like to pay a word of compliment

to your able assistant, Mr. Braswell, who has been working with us

the past few weeks on this matter, and we appreciate greatly his

patience, his understanding, and his very competent help.

Thank you.

Senator STENNIS. We appreciate your compliment of our staff

member. We already know the facts about him, but we like to hear

you express them, too, seeing that you recognize them.

I hope it, will meet with the pleasure of the committee now if we

present and hear next Major General Lampert, who is the Superintendent of the Military Academy at, West Point, and also Admiral

Smedberg, Chief Bureau of Naval Personnel.

Senator STENNIS. General Lampert, you have a statement, do you

not?

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. IAMES B. LAMPERT, SUPERINTENDENT

OF THE U.S. MILITARY ACADEMY

General LAMPERT. Yes, I have.

Senator STENNIS. Will you proceed?

General LAMPERT. I am Maj. Gen. James B. Lampert, Superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I welcome this opportunity to appear before you today, on behalf of the Chief of Staff

of the Army, in connection with the proposed legislation which would

increase the authorized cadet strength of the U.S. Military Academy

and the U.S. Air Force Academy to that presently authorized the

U.S. Naval Academy.

The Department of the Army strongly approves of the proposed

legislation and supports the statement made by Lieutenant General

Stone, representing the Department of Defense.

The Military Academy has continued to be successful in instilling

in its graduates, an attitude of service to their country. The words

of our motto "Duty, Honor, Country" are the heart of the basic

philosophy of West Point. As our colleges and universities respond

to the national need for leaders in civilian pursuits, the service academy plays a special part in meeting the need for leaders for the military, all of whom contribute to the total of our national strength.

The Military Academy's total curriculum—a program encompassing:

academic preparation, leadership training, and physical development—produces a graduate uniquely prepared to spread the ideals

of the military profession throughout the officer corps. Insofar as
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 13

career training is concerned, the Military Academy's total curriculum

is "specialist oriented"—it is designed to develop as fine a career Army

officer as we know how to produce. Recognizing the vital importance

of other sources of Regular Army and Reserve officers to our officer

corps, we believe that the opportunity for career training for the

profession of arms should be available to more young men desiring

to serve our country as Regular Army officers.

This legislation will accomplish the goal sought by the Department

of the Army for more than 10 years; namely, that 50 percent of the

annual input into the Regular officer corps emanate from the Military

Academy. This would provide a highly desirable mix among the

numbers of the Regular officer corps thus fostering the developing of

a high sense of professionalism in the Army.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the

committee, and I would also, if I may, join to associate the Department

of the Army with the remarks made by General Stone with respect

to the understanding and consideration we have had from Mr. Braswell of the committee staff.

Thank you.

Senator STENNIS. Thank you, General. We are very glad to have

you here.

Admiral Smedberg, we will be glad to hear from you now.

STATEMENT OF VICE ADM. W. R. SMEDBERG III, CHIEF, BUREAU

OF NAVAL PERSONNEL

Admiral SMEDBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Personnel and Naval

Reserve, and also the Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.

I am Vice Adm. W. R. Smedberg III, U.S. Navy.

I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today regarding

H.R. 7356 and to comment on the changes that this legislation would

make in present law relating to the Naval Academy.

The bill, as originally introduced in the House of Representatives

(H.R. 661:1), would merely have increased the authorized cadet

strength of the U.S. Military Academy and the U.S. Air Force

Academy to that presently authorized the U.S. Naval Academy.

The Department of the Navy, of course supports such an equalization. H.R. 7356 retains this principle of equalization but in addition

makes certain changes with respect to the Naval Academy. I would

like to outline briefly the substance of these changes, as they affect

the Naval Academy.

(1) Under present law, two appointment source categories for the

Naval Academy are estalelished for enlisted men—one for Regular

enlisted men of the Navy and Marine Corps and one for Reserve

enlisted men. The annual quota for each of these categories is 160,

or a total of 320. H.R. 7356 would reduce each of these quotas for

enlisted men to 85—a total reduction of 150. These 150 annual appointments in the bill under consideration, would be assigned to qualified alternate candidates nominated by the Senators and Repre'smtafives of the Congress. The appointment of these 150 qualified alternates is placed in priority above the remaining quotas for Regular and

Reserve enlisted men.

27-780-64-3 1 11
14 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

(2) Under present law, Senators and Representatives are entitled

to nominate a candidate and one or more alternates for each vacancy

at the Naval Academy. H.R. 7356 would provide by law for the

nomination of a principal candidate and five alternates. This change

would make current Navy administrative practice a matter of law.

We do exactly that today as you know, sir.

(3) Under present law, if an entering class at the Naval Academy

will fall below the authorized number, the Secretary of the Navy

may fill vacancies from other qualified congressional alternate candidates and from qualified candidates who competed for appointment

from noncongressional sources such as the enlisted categories. Twothirds of such appointments must, however, be from congressional

sources. H.R. 7356 would require that three-fourths of these appointments be from congressional sources.

(4) Under present law, a midshipman is required to sign an agreement to accept a commission and serve for a minimum of 3 years after

graduation. This obligation has been extended to 4 years administratively by our Secretary. H.R. 7356 would extend the legal obligation to 5 years required service on graduation.

This completes my summary of changes affecting the Naval Academy

and I shall be pleased to try to answer any questions that you might

have relating to the Naval Academy,.

Senator STENNIS. Thank you, Admiral Smedberg. We will ask

all of you gentlemen to stand by and be questioned together with reference to matters that come to the attention of the different members of

the group. I am going to briefly ask a few questions of my own, and

then there will be some from the committee, gentlemen, and we will

move around the table as rapidly as we can.

You just mentioned there the bill requires 5 years of service. General Stone

'

1 year was added in the House I believe, is that correct?

General STONE. Yes, sir.

Senator STENNIS. Do you approve of that 5-year period, sir?

General STONE. The 5-year 

Senator STENNIS. You are certainly free to disagree now with anything that either House has done of course. We are here to get your

judgment.

General SrorrE. That 5-year amendment was added on the floor of

the House.

Senator STENNIS. Yes.

General STONE. There was some discussion of the matter in the

hearings before the House. I believe I am correct in saying that all

of the witnesses of all the services were against the extension at that

time.

The Department of Defense was silent on the matter in their comments on the bill as passed by the House, and I think I can say without

-any question, however, that it is the feeling of all three services that

a 5-year obligation added onto the 4 years in school makes a total of 9

years of committed service that a young man must agree to at the

time he thinks about going to the Academy.

He starts thinking about going to the Academy a year before he

ever gets there so this makes a 10-year commitment for a 17-year-old

boy, which is alittle hard to swallow on the part of some well-qualified

young men. It is our job, after we get these young men into the
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 15

Academies, to motivate them to stay in the service, and I think the

record of the past is pretty clear evidence that we have done a good

job on that. The retention rate of Academy graduates for a full career

of service has been something in the order of 85 to 90 percent over the

long term of years. So if we can get them into the Academy, I think

we can motivate them to stay in the service.

But what I am afraid of, and I think all the services are afraid of,

is that an obligation of such duration that it might turn away some

good, well-qualified young men before they ever got a chance to come

to us and let us work on them and motivate them. Perhaps Admiral

Smedberg would like to comment.

Senator STENNIS. Pardon me just a minute. Are you for or against

the 5 years?

General STONE. I would like to see the law stay the way it is. It is

3 years in the law at the present time. By administrative practice we

have required 4 years. We require 4 years of all people for officers

and enlisted. It is a 4-year commitment for everybody.

The people who come into us from sources other than the Academy

do not stay at nearly the same rate that the Academy people do, so I

think it is pretty clear evidence that Academy people are, during the

process of education, also motivated for a career service to their

country.

Senator STENNIS. I don't know anything about this, except as a layman. I was going to ask what would be the situation if it was made

10 years? I am certainly no model, but I don't appoint anyone unless

he tells me in writing, in his own handwriting, that as of now he expects to make the military his career.

Senator BEALL. I do the same thing.

Senator STENNIS. That gives him an honorable way out if he

honestly desires not to do it. I think the young man himself rather

than mama or papa ought to say definitely, before lie is even considered

for appointment, what his present plans are. I believe that would

help you, wouldn't it?

General STONE. All young men entering the Academies are required

to agree that they will (1) complete the course at the Academy; (2)

they will accept a commission if tendered one upon graduation; and

(3) that they will serve at least the minimum required by law. They

are required to do that now.

Actually 90 percent of them, or 85 percent of them at least, stay on

for a full 30-year career or until they have died or are discharged for

disability.

Senator STENNIS. I think each one of those slots are made for a

future general or future admiral, and they should be filled by those

who want a real military career.

I see your problem. What about the idea at the end of 2 years,

they have more maturity and also know more about what they are

in, requiring them to make a choice there of staying on and serving

say 8 years after they graduate, or just honorably withdraw. What

do you think of that?

Senator BEALL. May I ask a question? At the end of the second

year?

Senator STENNIS. At the end of the second year in the Academy,

let that be a dividing line and decision time. I am not exactly proposing that. They would be 20 years of age on the average.
16 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

General STONE. I have not had the opportunity to study that, but

I would certainly like to give it some consideration and submit the

comments of the Department to you for the record.

(The following comments were subsequently submitted:)

Appointees to the service academies must presently agree to finish the course

of instructions, accept the commission, and serve 4 years of active duty after graduation. The proposal to require that cadets/midshipmen agree at the end of the second year at the Academy, to serve 8 years following graduation merely

serves to extend the present postgraduate tour of duty by 4 years. Such an obligation seems excessive to ask a young man who has no military service, except in cadet status. It would very likely discourage many fine young men from aspiring to attend a service academy and, therefore, lower the quality of

our graduates. For this reason, we would like to see the present law remain unchanged.

Senator STENNIS. I did not exactly propose it, but it seems to me that would be a good change to have a weeding out time when he gets beyond the immature age of 18. If you have made a bad investment or he has made a choice that is bad, it is better to just dissolve the partner- ship right then. That appeals to me somewhat. Is there any comment

you wish to make on these points, General, or Admiral?

Admiral SMEDBERG. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I would like to comment

that I feel very strongly that a young man, after his second year in the Naval Academy, does not really know much about the Navy. I

know that in my own case, after I graduated, I was not sold on the

Navy until I had been at sea on a destroyer for about a year. Then

I determined that I liked it. I really did not know very much about it until after I had tried it.

I think the young man should be asked after he has graduated and

gotten into the Navy then to make up his mind. I would like to also

say, Mr. Chairman, if I might, that having had experience as Super- intendent of the Naval Academy, and also a tour as head of the Department of Electrical Engineering for 3 years before that, we never talk to a young man about a period of years of service except that he

serves at the pleasure of the President.

For 4 years at all of these Academies we tell the young man that this is his life, not that he is in for 3 years, 4 years, or 5. He is in at the pleasure of the President. Every time he accepts a commission and he signs it, it says

'

"I accept this commission and agree to serve at the pleasure of the President."

We would much prefer to have the secretarial authority which he has today. All Secretaries can administratively change the length of service in accordance with the needs of the service. The law says a

minimum of 3 years. Today all of our Secretaries have prescribed

4 years because that is our need today. If the need dissipates, they

can go back to the 3 years. If it becomes greater, they can increase it to 4 or 5. We think that is preferable, sir.

Senator STENNIS. All right, thank you.

General, do you have a comment?

General LAMPERT. Mr. Chairman, my own view is that the young

man should express a commitment at the time he is admitted to the service academy, and I personally feel, sir, as Admiral Smedberg

does, that the present law and the administrative option which is

available to the service secretaries is an adequate arrangement.

Senator STENNIS. There may be some other questions on that later,

but we will pass on. What is the proposal from the services as to
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 17

what shall happen if this law passes in substantially its present form?

What, do you propose to do about the other parts of your recruiting

program for officers? What do you propose to do about ROTC? I

would think of course that you would reduce it. Is that the plan?

General STONE. If we got this bill through substantially as it is

today, this would increase the number of Academy graduates, and

obviously the number of people procured through other sources would

be reduced, and probably in a greater proportion than just 1 for

1, because if you get a man who stays with you for a longer period

of time, you don't have to get the replacements.

Senator STENNIS. What is your proposal if any that goes along

with the bill as to just what you are going to do about the other

program? It seems to me like they are inseparable questions.

General STONE. I think each service should answer that individually.

As far as the Air Force is concerned, we have generally three major

sources of officers that we depend upon. One is the service academy

graduates, two is the ROTC graduates, and three is what we call

the Officer Training School graduates. This Officer Training School

graduate gets the least amount of military training, and consequently

that would be the one that we would drop first.

Senator STENNIS. I understand there is a bill over in the House,

I don't know that I recall just what the status of it is, which proposes to increase those programs. Is that sponsored by the Department of Defense?

General STONE. That is a change in the present ROTC legislation

that is in the House Armed Services Committee at this time, as I

understand it.

Senator STENNIS. Is that proposed by the Department of Defense?

General STONE. It. was originally proposed by the Department of

Defense to change—this is a very general view of the bill—to add to

the present 4-year program for ROTC, a 2-year program, to take

place in the junior and senior years of college, and a 6- to 8-week encampment in the summer before the junior year.

The bill, however, was considerably modified in the committee, and

it permits a great flexibility in the ROTC program. As I understand

it, the bill presently provides the flexibility of having a 4-year or a

2-year program with scholarships in the 4-year program only.

Senator STENNIS. Speaking from a legislator's standpoint, I don't

see how you can consider one part of this question without considering

the other part. You don't have the legislation with you. You at least

have a plan with you. You are in effect saying to the Congress "We

want you to do this," and we ask you the quesiton if we do that, what

are you going to do about the rest of the program.

Speaking just as one Senator, it seems to me that you should have

with you the effect of this plan on the rest of your recruiting. Otherwise you bring in an incomplete picture.

General STONE. May I say this, Senator. Each year the number of

people who will be entered into the academy or into an ROTC program depends upon the requirements of the services as forecast 4

years later. The impact of this bill and the proposed ROTC bill on

officer procurement for the Army and Air Force is as follows:

Subject: Impact of Academy and ROTC bills on officer procurement in the Air

Force.

The purpose of the ROTC legislation is to vitalize the ROTC program by

providing suitable modifications to adapt the program to the present require-
18 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

ments of students, educational institutions, and the Armed Forces. The bill

affirms the conviction of Congress that the primary source of commissioned officer personnel for the Reserve components shall continue to be the ROTC program; that all commissioned graduates of the program should be required to

perform on active duty; and that each year a substantial number of these

graduates should be offered commissions in the Regular components of the

Armed Forces.

The major purpose of the Academy legislation is to increase the authorized

strength of the Military and Air Force Academies to the level now authorized

for the Naval Academy. The larger graduating classes will make it possible

for the Air Force to increase the proportion of Academy graduates in the annual

Regular officer input from 18 percent to 31 percent. Similarly, the proportion

of Academy graduates in the annual Army Regular officer input would increase

from 26 percent to 50 percent.

It is significant to note that of the total annual officer input into the Air Force,

even with the increased strength authorized by the bill, Academy graduates will

constitute only 6 percent in fiscal year 1968 when the input is expected to be about

16,000 new officers. Of this total, approximately one-third should be ROTC

graduates.

The Air Force anticipates that an increase in Academy graduates would be.

countered by an appreciable decrease in the OTS program. A decrease, on

a more than 1 for 1 ratio, is probable because the career retention rate for Academy graduates doubtless will be greater than for OTS graduates. Any increase

in procurement of Regular officers occurring as a result of changes in ROTC

legislation also would be followed by a decrease in the OTS program. Thus, for

the Air Force, the ROTC and Academy legislation bills are independent. Changes

in one would not affect the other, but rather, would affect short-term officer procurement programs such as OTS.

Subject: Impact of the expansion of the U.S. Military Academy on Army officer

procurement from other sources

1. REGULAR ARMY OFFICER PROCUREMENT

(a) The annual desired input of Regular Army second lieutenants into the

branches in which USMA and ROTC graduates are normally assigned (excludes 

forexamples Medical Corps, Chaplains, Judge Advocate General's Corps) totals

1,950. Of these 500 are now obtained from the Military Academies and 1,100

from the ROTC distinguished military graduate program. The balance for the

year group (354) more officers) is obtained by direct appointment of persons in

civilian status and through the appointment in later years of Reserve officers

commissioned during this year who perform well and volunteer and are selected

for appointment in the Regular Army. Reserve officers appointed in the Regular

Army are credited with active duty service and thus are placed in the group for

the year of their original Reserve appointment.

( If production from the Military Academy is increased, the ROTC-DMG

and integration inputs will be adjusted downward, taking the best available

from those who volunteer under these programs with a possible improvement in

the already high quality level of the officers obtained from these sources. Anyadjustments would be as gradual as the increase in numbers produced' from the

Military Academy.

an increasing number of Regular officers, reaching 1,127 during fiscal year 1963.

(c) For the past several years the Army ROTC-DMG program, has produced

It is hoped that this level of input from this voluntary program can be at least

maintained until there is an increase in production from the Military Academy.

It is also desired to leave a number of vacancies to provide an opportunity for

appointments in the Regular Army of Reserve officers and other ROTC officers;

who desire a Regular Army appointment.

2. OTHER ARMY OFFICER PROCUREMENT

The procurement of up to 380 additional Military Academy graduates per year

would cause a corresponding decrease in the number of officers procured for the

active Army from other sources, i.e., the ROTC and Officer Candidate Schools.

Since the Army conducts its Officer Candidate Schools primarily to keep the

system and techniques available in event of mobilization, procurement for the

active Army from this source would probably not be reduced below what, in the

time frame 1968 and later might be a minimum figure. The decrease could then
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 19

be largely in the number of officers obtained for the active Army from the ROTC.

This would not result, however, in a reduction in total ROTC production.

ROTC officers not needed for assignment to the active Army could then after

appropriate training, fill increasingly greater projected officer shortages in the

Reserve components. These would be selected from those not motivated for a

career of active Army service.

Senator STENNIS. I know it has problems.

General STONE. It is a matter of annual changes in the numbers.

Senator STENNIS. You point out here that you are going to have

to ask for a construction program which I believe is very substantial.

That involves expenditures for buildings and equipment, and then

there is the cost of the added cadets, and still we don't know what the

impact is on the rest of the program, what savings there will be if any.

We still think about the cost of things sometimes.

General STONE. I can get those figures for you and submit them for

the record.

Senator STENNIS. I think not only the cost, but I think there ought

to be a complete picture here of the impact of this new program on

your present program.

General STONE. All right, sir.

Senator STENNIS. As I say, I am just speaking as one Senator, but

it is inescapable to me that you have to have that picture. Do you

have any estimate at all now as to your construction program and the

estimated cost of it?

General STONE. Yes, sir. Insofar as the Air Force is concerned,

the figure for the construction of an additional barracks facility to

accommodate the first increments of the increase authorized under

this bill through the first 4 years, to permit a modification of the dining

hall and the construction of a fieldhouse, is $17.2 million.

Senator STENNIS. I see Mr. Braswell has the figures. For the Military Academy expansion through the year 1972 it would be $110 million new money, construction costs I should say. That is $110 million

for the Military Academy at West Point, $66 million for expansion

and $44 million for modernization. That is through the year 1972,

and there would be an estimated Air Force Academy expansion cost

of $40.7 million for military construction.

It is estimated it will add by those years from $28.5 million to

around $43.2 million, an increase of $14.3 million in operating costs

for the Military Academy at West Point, and an increase of $12.8

million to a total of $41.3 million for the Air Force. Are those Department figures?

General STONE. Those are Department figures. The figure I gave

you is the one that is indicated on page 5 of the Committee Print No. 1,

modified slightly. It is $17.2 against $16.5. This is a slight increase

in the first year of expansion, which will be matched by an equivalent

decrease later.

Senator STENNIS. Could you cover briefly how this new bill will

affect these boys, these men who come into the enlisted categories. One

of the most outstanding men I ever appointed was a man who was already in the Navy; lie had been there a couple of years I think. He

had that burning ambition to be a naval officer. I know I appointed

him with some misgivings, frankly. I am very proud of him now.

How many of these do you let come through like that? How many

do you take in a year into these academies?
20 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

General STONE. Under the present law West Point and Annapolis

have 90 appointments available for both the Regulars and the Reserve, that is 90 for each group. That means on the average there are

about 27 per year who may be admitted to the Academy from the

Reserve group, and about 27 from the Regular group.

Senator STENNIS. That is the Military Academy, you say?

General STONE. Military and Air Force Academy. On the other

hand, the Navy presently has authorized 160 from the Regulars and

160 from the Reserves. This bill as proposed would reduce the number of 160 that the Navy now has authorized in each of these categories to 85 in each per year.

Senator STENNIS. Pardon me. Just to be certain I understand,

you take in 160 from the ranks or from the enlisted men each year?

General STONE. 160 from the Reserve enlisted men, and 160 from

the Regular enlisted men in the Navy as against 27, and 27 at the other

two academies.

Now, this bill reduces the number available in the Navy for this

purpose in order to accommodate the 150 qualified alternates of congressional members, and at the same time it increases the Army and

the Air Force allocation in each of these categories from 27 to 85,

to make it the same across the board in all three services.

• So the net result would be, if this were passed, that there would be

85 opportunities in each of the three services for enlisted men in the

Reserves, and 85 for enlisted men in the Regulars of each of the three

services.

Senator S'TENNTS. I don't see why you should reduce the Navy any,

but I am certainly pleased that you are going to increase the others.

Admiral, do you want to Say something?

Admiral SMEDBERG. Yes, sir. I want very much to speak to it because we are actually being harmed by this bill, in my opinion. Some

of the finest officers we have in the Navy today are ex-enlisted men.

When I was Superintendent, our brigade commander was an exenlisted man. These men are people who have tried the Navy, like it,

and want to make a career of it, and we want everyone who is qualified that we can 0-et.

I frankly think this cut into our enlisted opportunities is too great.

I .would like to see the cut reduced so that instead of 85 we would

have a. restoration of some portion of that.

I recognize that •there is a desire to get more congressional appointments. and I understand this, but frankly I don't think that 85 spaces

for the Reserves and 85 for the Regular Navy is sufficient for us to

get all the young men who really want to be naval officers and whom

we would like to get. We would like to see a minimum restoration of

25 in each of those categories.

Senator STENNIS. Will you prepare an amendment along that line

to carry out what you have, just said?

Admiral SMEDBERG. I will at your request.

Senator STENNIS. That is .at my express request. Put that in the

record. •

Senator Jackson, do you have any questions?

Senator JACKSON. No.

Senator CANNON. Would the. Senator yield on that particular point?

Senator STENNIS. Yes I would be glad to.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 21

Senator CANNON. Admiral, that does not prohibit the congressional

member though from appointing from either the active or the enlisted

ranks, does it?

Admiral SMEDBERG. No, sir.

Senator CANNON. And the additional authorizations go to congressional sources.

Admiral SMEDBERG. That is correct, sir.

Senator CANNON. SO we have actually the same number of appointments available, and the congressional sources can appoint from these

sources, if they desire.

Admiral SMEDBERG. That is correct.

Senator CANNON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator STEN-NIS. Thank you.

Concerning the gentleman I mentioned, I just went on and made the

appointment because he convinced me of his burning ambition, and his

talents were redoubled I think, and his efforts, and I did not want to

take a chance on his being overlooked by the Navy. But it made me

realize what a fine program it is, and I would hate to see you give it

up, frankly.

Senator YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?

Senator STENNIS. Certainly, Senator Young.

Senator YOUNG. I am wondering, Admiral, if you couldn't have a

greater number from the active enlisted men in the Navy, and a fewer

number perhaps from the Naval Reserve. Have you thought of that?

Admiral SMEDBERG. Yes, sir we have thought of that, but to be

honest with you, sir, we have not every year filled the 160 from either

the active Navy or the Reserve. We think we could give up some, perhaps 50 from each, without hurting our quality too much.

Senator YOUNG. So you would like the same number to remain?

Admiral SMEDBERG. We would like that, yes, sir because some

youngsters in school, for instance, are able to join the Naval Reserve

and become eligible for and have a competitive opportunity for the

Academy, whereas the boy who is in the Regular Navy has finished

school. We would like each to have the same opportunity to compete

in the Reserve and the Regular.

General STONE. May I comment on that, sir?

Senator STENNIS. Yes, sir, General.

General STONE. Whereas the Navy has had this larger allocation,

we have had only 27 available in each of these categories per year,

and with the large number of people who are trying to _get these

appointments, this has never been enough to go around. So we are

delighted to see the sizable increase in the numbers available to people

in these categories.

Senator STENNIS. I wanted you to comment on that, and see just how

you felt about it.

General STONE. Yes, indeed.

Senator STENNIS. You expect to exercise it to the limit is that

right?

General STONE. We certainly do.

Senator STENNIS. In proper years, I mean when you have available

candidates.

General STONE. That is right yes, sir.

27-780-64-4
22 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

General LAMPERT. Mr. Chairman, may I say that the Army feels

exactly the same as the position expressed by General Stone. This

represents an increase for us in this category, which we are extremely

glad to see.

Senator STENNIS. And you will put on an active and vigilant campaign among the eligibles to encourage them to compete.

General LAMPERT. Yes, sir; we certainly will.

Senator STENNIS. General, do you answer for the Mr Force in the

same way?

General STONE. Yes, sir. I might just add that just last week we

were out at the Air Force Academy on what we call an annual visit

of the General Officers Advisory Committee. This came up at that

time, and the committee emphasized that a strong campaign be put

on to see that we get from the ranks those people who are well

qualified.

Senator STENNIS. This congressional appointment has its merits,

but it is not perfect by any means. I don't know how to pick talent

from among the eligibles. You gentlemen have a real chance.

Senator Inouye, you have a question?

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, I concur with the admiral that

many of our outstanding officers come from the enlisted ranks. However, I would like to hear from the admiral as to his justifications for

placing the Naval Academy in a special category as it relates to the

A Tray and the Air Force. The amendment just applies to the Navy,

does it not, the one that the chairman requested?

Admiral SMEDBERG. No, sir; I did not propose that it would apply

only to the Navy.

Senator INOUYE. Across the board?

Admiral SMEDBERG. I was only going to set forth our argument

that we felt we needed very much 

Senator INOUYE. This amendment would apply to all Academies?

Admiral SMEDBERG. AS proposed, yes.

Senator INOUYE. Wonderful. Thank you, sir.

Admiral SMEDBERG. That would be my intention.

Senator STENNIS. Did someone else have a question?

Senator THURMOND. On this same point, Mr. Chairman, one question.

Senator STENNIS. All right, Senator Thurmond.

Senator THURMOND. Would not this increase in the bill result in

your ability to reduce the short-term officer training programs, that

is, the OTC. OCS, and OTS programs, thus not resulting in a reduced

need for ROTC?

General STONE. This was my intent in my previous remarks

'

to

indicate that we would reduce the procurement source from which we

get the least well trained officer.

Admiral SMEDBERG. Might I comment, Senator?

Senator THURMOND. That should be advantageous to the service.

General STONE. Very much SO.

Senator THURMOND. I would be very pleased to have you comment.

Admiral SMEDBERG. As far as the Navy is concerned, it makes no

difference because we have no increase.

Senator STENNIS. Senator Thurmond, have you finished?

Senator THURMOND. That is all. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 23

Senator STENNIS. Members of the committee, here is one question

that is partly factual and partly a question.

Gentlemen, I understand the cost per graduate today is about

$45,600 per year for the Military Academy, $47,120 for the Air Force

Academy, and $31,000 for the Naval Academy. The expansion program is estimated to bring the cost down to $39,000 for the Military

Academy, $37,500 for the Air Force Academy.

At the same time the ROTC cost per graduate is about $6,000 for the

Air Force and $4,000 for the Army. The Holloway program, which

commissions Regular Navy ROTC personnel, is $9,000 per graduate.

The Chair would like to have an opinion as to why this expansion is

justified, in view of the greater cost of the Academy graduates.

Those figures for the Academy are for a 4-year period on a cadet

basis. The Chair also understands that the retention rate among the

distinguished ROTC graduates who are given regular commissions

is about 80 percent, the same as Academy graduates. This gives you

a chance to comment upon this cost, gentlemen, and also this retention

rate among your distinguished ROTC graduates.

General Stone, I will ask you to comment first.

General STONE. All right, sir. The overall retention rate of

Academy graduates, as I indicated earlier, is somewhere in the order

of 85 to 90 percent who stay with us for a career. The next largest

traditional source of procurement, of officers for the Air Force and

the Army has been the ROTC procurement source.

Admittedly the cost of training an ROTC cadet is less than the

cost, of training an Air Force Academy cadet. However, in the Air

Force, the retention rate of an ROTC graduate in general runs around

30 to 33 percent. So out of 100 young men going into the Air Force,

Academy or any of the academies, you would keep 80 to 85 percent

of them for a full career.

Of 100 young men going through the Air Force ROTC system and

who are commissioned, you would keep only about 30 percent of

them, and you would have to replace the other 70 after their initial

commitment was over.

So it is in the long-term retention of the Academy graduates and

the buildup of experience which is gained by retaining those people

that the benefit to the military is derived. It makes it not only a

matter of initial cost, but it is a matter of cost and experience associated with these retention factors, which vary, as you can see, by

about a factor of 2/12to 1.

Senator STENNIS. I am just wondering—I don't know how we can

get at it—but I am just wondering what the general opinion was to

the services about this bill of the men who have come up the various

ways. I don't expect you gentlemen to answer this. You are here in

your official capacity.

I would like to know what some of these captains, majors, and others

think about this plan, getting their viewpoint concerning this law,

what they think about the change, the plan to increase the number in

the academies. Do you make any contacts with these men ancl get

their ideas about it?

General STONE. I have not made any specific contact w..#113/4*ect _

to this particular piece of legislation. However, I ha ' talked to d 4.

great number of young men from both the Academies iyf from other

'V163 j

r

co 1- 11
24 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

sources, and they get along beautifully in the services together.

There is no apparent resentment between them. There will be in

isolated cases I am sure, as there will be resentment between any

group of people coming from different backgrounds.

Senator STENNIS. That is why I don't want to rely only upon one

person's opinion, you know. If I just talked to one young fellow,

I would not want to act on what he said.

General STONE. I would say that I don't think there would be any

objection from the run-of-the-mill officers to this particular piece of

legislation. As a matter of fact, I am certain that the average officer

looks up to the Academy graduate as something that he wants to

aspire to be like.

Senator STENNis. All right; I want others to have a chance to ask

questions also.

Senator Thurmond, I will call on you first, on the entire bill. We

have other questions for the committee, but I want to give the members a chance to ask questions.

Senator THURMOND. I want to get again those figures on each of

the services as to how many are now required each year, and how

many of those come from the Academies.

General STONE. You mean input of the Regulars?

Senator THURMOND. That is right. Take each one now. Give me

the total number.

General STONE. The total number of Regular officers in the Army

who are Academy graduates at the present time is 22 percent.

Senator THURMOND. Could you give me the figure. How many

officers does the Army need each year and how many come from the

Academy?

General STONE. You want the actual number of officers who go in

per year?

Senator THURMOND. That is right. I am trying to determine the

number required each year in each of the services, and how many of

those come from the Academies.

General STONE. All right, sir.

Senator THURMOND. Take the Army first.

General STONE. The total number of Regular officers put into the

Army in fiscal 1962 was 1,646.

Senator THURMOND. 1,646?

General STONE. Of which 537 came from the Military Academy

as graduates.

Senator THURMOND. That was what percent?

General STONE. It is about a third.

Senator THURMOND. And the Navy?

General STONE. Under the proposed bill, it would be a little bit

better than 50 percent. In the Navy the input of Regular officers in

fiscal year 1962 was 1,654, of which 616 came from the Naval Academy graduates, which is about 40-some percent.

In the Air Force in fiscal year 1962 we commissioned 5,501 Regular

officers, of which 290 came from the Air Force Academy.

Now this is not a very accurate portrayal of what the average situation would be in the future as far as the Air Force is concerned, because of two things. One, in that year the number of graduates was

less than what we are getting on the average now, which is around the
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 25

same number that West Point is getting, around 500. This was before

we had the first big class of graduates, you see.

Secondly, the total number of Regular officers commissioned in 1962

was larger than the average is going to be in the future, because we are

building up our Regular officer strength to the authorized strength

which has never yet been attained. So our average over the long term

will be more like a total of 3,000 Regular officers per year, with 500

coming from the present Academy outputs, so those are the relative

figures you should use for making a comparison.

Senator THURMOND. 3,000 taken into the Air Force. That would be

about 500 from the Academy, I presume. I notice 3,000 would still

be about twice as many taken in from the Army or the Navy. To

what do you attribute that?

General STONE. We have the largest officer strength of the three

services, sir.

Senator THURMOND. It. runs at about that proportion?

General STONE. I don't know the actual figures. We have about

130,000 officers.

Senator THURMOND. I am wondering if your efficiency is greater, or

just what.

General STONE. We have 132,000 officers authorized. The Army

has 99,000, and the Navy has 61,000. The Regular forces are 49,000

for the Army, 43,000 for the Navy, and 69,000 for the Air Force,

which is the Regular part of the overall officer strength.

Senator THURMOND. I have just been handed some figures. The

Regular officer strength, the Air Force is authorized 69,425.

General STONE. That is right.

Senator THURMOND. Actually it is 57,000, Academy graduates being

4,731. Does that accord with Your figures?

General STONE. 69,425 is the authorized strength of the Regular

portion of the Air Force. What was the second figure?

Senator THURMOND. Actually it is 57,000.

General STONE. I don't have the figures before me, but I think that

is about right.

Senator THURMOND. Academy graduates are 4,731.

General STONE. Yes, about 4,700. That includes graduates of the

Air Force Academy, the Naval Academy, and the Military Academy.

Senator THURMOND. Who are in the Air Force ?

General STONE. Who are in the Air Force, that is correct.

Senator THURMOND. The Army has an authorized strength of

49,500.

General STONE. Yes, sir.

Senator THURMOND. Actually 40,000, Academy graduates, 8,000.

Does that accord with your figures?

General STONE. That is right.

Senator THURMOND. The Navy has authorized 43,600, actually it is

44,000. The Navy there is above, the actual is above the authorized.

I wanted to ask Admiral Smedberg about that. That is the only

service where the actual is greater than the authorized.

The Air Force, you see, is about 12,000, the actual is about 12,000

under the authorized, the Army is about 9,500 under the authorized,

but the Navy, where the authorized is 43,600, the actual is 44,000. It

is just about 400 over. But I was just wondering why the greater

proportion there compared with the other services.
26 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

Admiral SMEDBERG. I think, sir, it is because we have in the Navy

tried to stick closer to our authorized Regular strength than the other

services, and also I think their authorized Regular strength has been

increased in the last few years, whereas ours has stayed pretty constant. So we have stayed at about our authorized strength.

Senator THURMOND. I notice your Academy graduates, 10,782. You

seem to have a greater proportion than any other of Academy

graduates.

Admiral SMEDBERG. Yes, sir.

Senator THURMOND. You have either held them better or stole them

from the other academies. Now which is it?

Admiral SMEDBERG. No, sir. We have the largest output each year.

We have the largest academy and have had for many years. As a

matter of fact, for years we were twice the size of the Military

Academy.

Senator THURMOND. Why has that been allowed to go on all these

years?

Admiral SMEDBERG. I can't answer that question, sir. We have been

happy.

Senator CANNON. Because Congress has authorized it.

General STONE. That is what this bill is designed to correct.

Senator THURMOND. Of course you haven't complained about it.

Admiral SMEDBERG. No, Sin

Senator THURMOND. General, Senator Stennis just mentioned some

figures about the cost per man at the various academies being $40,000

or $45,000 a year.

Senator STENNIS. Excuse me, Senator, I corrected that. That was

for the 4-year tenure, $45,000.

Senator THURMOND. I was thinking that sounded more like it would

have been for the 4 years. I thought maybe that was what it was.

If this authorization is increased, then that would reduce it per man

because your overhead would be less. A lot of the same buildings

could be used, and so forth.

General STONE. That is right. We have estimated that with the

more or less constant overhead, regardless of the size of the student

body, the average annual cost per cadet would go down from say

$11,500, something in that order, to about $9,000 to $9,500. So there

is a saving by increasing the output.

Senator THURMOND. So from the standpoint of producing an Academy graduate, if this bill is passed, the cost per man would be less.

General STONE. That is right; yes, sir.

Senator THURMOND. And I believe you said the Academy graduates remain in at about a rate of 80 percent, compared with about

33 from other sources.

General STONE. About 80 to 90 percent.

Senator THURMOND. Senator Stennis had some figures there about

the distinguished military graduates having a record of retention of

80-odd, which would be practically equivalent to the Academy graduates. Do you have the exact figures on that, sir?

General STONE. Yes, sir. Last year, fiscal year 1962, we took into

the Air Force a total of 12,000 new officers, and this is about the average. Of that group, there were 129 out of 12,000 who were distinguished military graduates of the ROTC.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 27

It is true they do stay with us. But at the same time we took in

that 129 distinguished military graduates, we took in 3,204 other

ROTC people whose retention rate is only about 30 percent. In fact,

it is down as low as 10 percent in some categories including the

science and engineering area.

Senator THURMOND. In other words, you are able to obtain only

a very small percentage.

General STONE. Just a handful.

Senator THURMOND. Of the distinguished military graduates.

General STONE. That is right

Senator Tn-crRmoNn. Now, is it the fact that there are no more

distinguished military graduates available, or is it that they choose

not to go into service?

General STONE. The distinguished military graduate is the man

who is in an ROTC unit, is picked out by the professor of military

or air science at the institute as being an outstanding young man in

that particular ROTC detachment. It is a matter of quality of the

individual. Those who are highly qualified and do come to us, they

are given Regular commissions incidentally, not Reserve commissions.

Senator THURMOND. The point I was trying to get at though is,

Are we failing to get as many distinguished military graduates as

we should? What. percent of the distinguished military ROTC

graduates are you getting into the service?

General STONE. They all come in. They all are committed to come

onto active duty.

Senator THURMOND. What is that?

Senator STENNIS. Retained, that is.

General STONE. As soon as they graduate from college and get

their commissions, all of them have to come onto active duty, regardless of whether they are distinguished military graduates or not, or

whether they get Reserve commissions or Regular commissions. We

call them all to active duty, the whole group of graduates of the

ROTC program.

Senator THURMOND. I understand they go into the service. I probably used the wrong word. They go into service, but I mean retain

them.

General STONE. We offer to all distinguished military graduates,

more than 129, Regular commissions. Some of those turn Regular

commissions down, take the Reserve commission, do their obligated

tour and get out.

Senator THURMOND. I was trying to get your breakdown on that.

General STONE. I would say that about 20 percent or 25 percent

of the distinguished military graduates do not accept Regular commissions, something like that.

Senator THURMOND. Approximately 75 percent do.

General STONE. Do accept Regular commissions.

Senator THURMOND. I am glad to hear that. I had understood

that the percentage was high.

Now, General, what other advantages do you see in this bill, other

than what you have mentioned?

Senator STENNIs. Senator, would you yield to me, before you

leave that point?

Senator THURMOND. I would be pleased to yield.
28 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

Senator STENNIS. SO the record will reflect this matter now. General, in talking about retaining such a small percent, you don't offer to retain anything like all of these ROTC graduates, do you?

You don't have room for them. You couldn't afford to keep them all, isn't that correct?

General STONE. At the present moment, sir, as I indicated to Sena- tor Thurmond a moment ago, we are taking in about 12,000 new officers per year. We are retaining on the average something in the order of about 5,000 of those beyond their 4- or 5-year committed service period.

If we could retain more of them beyond the obligated service period, we would not have to take in nearly as many each year, and

we would not have to go through the training process of all these people year after year. The only reason we are taking in such a large number is in order to have enough to carry on the senior experience level in the Air Force or in the Army or 

Senator STENNIS. When you say you are keeping such a small percent of all of them, you just don't have room to keep them 'anyway. There is not enough money appropriated to you. There are not enough slots there for them.

General STONE. But for every man that we could keep beyond his 4- or 5-year obligated tour, we would drop one in the initial procure- ment, so we would balance those off one for one, and we would be much better off if we could retain more, and have to procure annually

a fewer number.

Senator STENNIS. Yes but you just could not keep anything like all of them though. You shoot for a larger number to get the quality. Isn't that a part of this, a superior, quality, I mean?

General STONE. Assuming that we could get, theoretically, at least, retain 100 percent, then we would have to' put into application a

screening process through your promotion system to keep diminishing the total number as it progressed through the years.

Senator STENNIS. That is the point, so when you say you retain such a small percentage, you just could not take care of but a small

percent.

General STONE. I would like to say very definitely we could certainly stand a much larger percentage than the 30 percent we are retaining

at the present time, because we are going through a constant retraining

Program that we could obviate if we could raise our retention factor by 50 percent.

Senator STENNIS. I see here for fiscal year 1962 the Army officer input for that year, the Regular officers

'

U.S. Military Academy, 537, rate percent of retention 80 percent. The same year ROTC, 1,070, retention rate 80 percent.

In other words, they ran right together. I assume that they were the distinguished graduates. The Army took in 1,070 that year, as I

understand it. That is taken from an official report here.

General STONE. That is right. That is the distinguished military

graduates' I presume in the' Army, and the number is considerably

larger than ours, and the retention rate is the same. But you look down one step below that and you get 10,900 other ROTC taken in, with a 16-percent retention rate.

Senator STENNIS. I was looking at the Regular there. Those are the

ones who made the choice to be Regulars.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 29

General STONE. These are the same type of people that I was speaking about with Senator Thurmond a moment ago, the distinguished

military graduate who are offered Regular commissions, and 80 percent

of them do take it, roughly 80 percent, and they do stay with us as

well as Academy graduates.

Senator STENNIS. And that proves to be a very profitable source of

recruiting, is that correct? Is that true with all the services?

General STONE. It is a good source, but it isn't a large one. In view

of our requirements for large numbers annually, it does not provide

us with a very high percentage of our input.

Senator STENNIS. Is he as well trained as the Academy graduates,

this distinguished man who distinguishes himself in the ROTC?

General STONE. In all honesty I can't say that he is, sir, because he

spends much less time at the military training then the people do at

any one of the three Academies. The academic background he has is

comparable if he has gone to a good school.

He has a good academic background, but there just is not time in

the average civilian school to devote as much time to military subjects

as we give them at the Academy.

Senator STENNIS. On the other hand, there is not as much time at

the Academy to devote themselves to nonmilitary matters as there is

of the other universities, isn't that right ?

General STONE. We have them under better control.

Senator STENNIS. Answer the question if you will. Is there as

much time?

General STONE. You mean for academic work?

Senator STENNIS. Yes.

General STONE. Oh, yes. The academic programs at all three of

the Academies compare most favorably with the best institutions in

the country.

Senator STENNIS. That is rather general, but my point is you just

said that you devote more time to military matters, and I think you

should. At the same time, that does not leave as much time for what

I call a general education.

General STONE. Let me give you some exact figures.

Senator STENNIS. Is that correct or not, in your opinion?

General STONE. No sir;' I don't believe that is correct.

Senator STENNIS. All right; go ahead.

General STONE. Because the total number of academic hours, and I

am speaking of the Air Force Academy now, and the other two

Academies are comparable, I am more familiar with the Air Force

Academy because I used to be the Superintendent out there, the

total curriculum out there including academic, physical training, and

military subjects is 189 semester-hours. This is a common term of

measurement in collegiate circles. Of that., 141 are devoted exclusively

to academic subjects, 141.

To get a degree at MIT requires 145 semester-hours. To get a

bachelor of arts degree at the average liberal arts college requires only

120 semester-hours, So the Academy total is well above what a student

Would get at the average liberal arts college. It is slightly below what

a student would be required to complete in order to get a degree at

Cal Tech, or MIT.

On the annual examinations, which are called 'graduate record

examinations, which we administer at all three Academies, they all
30 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

come right up at the very top of the list. I think there are about 230

colleges who annually have all of their graduates take this graduate

record exam. Some of the colleges are big, some are little, some are

intermediate. Some are good, some are not so good.

But out of this 230, the three military Academies always are within

the first ten, and I might say that last year the Air Force Academy

was first. And this includes the humanities and the social sciences

as well as the natural sciences.

Senator STENNIS. That is a good record. You have select men to

start with, and you seem to use them to the best advantage. I favor

the discipline you give them, too, and you get more time out of them.

All right, Senator Thurmond. Excuse me for taking so much time.

Senator THURMOND. That is all right.

General, in addition to the economy that you referred to, by increasing the number at the Academies which would reduce the cost per

man, also would you not have a greater continuity which would be

a saving in the end, and would be from the standpoint of economy

beneficial?

General STONE. Yes, sir very much so, in terms of experience is

what I think you mean.

Senator THURMOND. That is right. In other words, you are able to

retain a larger percentage because the matter of having to take some

officers each year is expensive, because they have to be trained, don't

they?

aeneral STONE. That is right. May I give you just one example?

If we can take one officer from the Academy and keep him 12 years,

let's say, much less than the 30 that we expect, but let's just say that

we keep him for 12 years, and we train him as a pilot, we have amortized his training cost over a period of 12 years.

If, on the other hand, we get an officer from another source and the

retainability is only for 4 years, we have to train three people in order

to get 12 years of pilot duty. So it costs three times as much, and one

pilot costs $100,000 to train.

Senator THURMOND. $100,000?

General STONE. Yes, sir. So if we can retain these Academy graduates and keep them as pilots, we save a tremendous amount .on the

other side of the fence in the training. This is a very good point, sir.

Senator THURMOND. And not only is there a saving in the cost on

that, but really doesn't it promote more efficiency, too, by having the

continuity?

General STONE. Yes, sir, continuity and experience both.

Senator THURMOND. General, that is about all the questions I have,

except there is one question I started to ask you. If there is anything

else you want to say about the advantages of this bill other than what

you have already said, will you do so

General STONE. I think it would be a very fine thing for the Academies, for the Air Force, the Army, the Navy, and for the country.

Senator THURMOND. It should produce economy in the end. It

should produce more continuity, which in turn should produce more

efficiency, shouldn't it?

General STONE. That is right. The admiral just whispered in my

ear if we get more experience and better experience and continuity, we

will lose fewer aircraft and fewer ships.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 31

Senator THURMOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is all.

Senator STENNIS. Thank you. Senator Cannon?

Senator CANNON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

General, does this have the provisions in it that were contained in the

last year's so-called West Point football bill?

General STObTE. No, sir.

Senator CANNON. It does not carry the provision for keeping up to

strength by reason of the dropouts?

General STONE. It will allow us to do this, until we get to an actual

full strength. It will allow us to have more people in at the beginning of the summer than we could accommodate throughout the period

of the year insofar as barracks space is concerned.

Senator CANNON. But simply by reason of the fact that your authorized strength would be more than you are able to take care of at the

present time.

General STONE. That is right.

Senator CANNON. And it would not affect the Navy at all in that

respect.

General STONE. No. The Navy is in that position right now. They

have got an authorized strength of about 4,400. They only have about

4,000 enrolled, so they have that flexibility, and this would permit us to

do it until we get to final full strength as authorized.

Senator CANNON. Until you got full strength, there would not be

any need for the proposal that was being considered last year that the

Senate passed last year.

General STONE. That is correct.

Senator CANNON. Now on this tour of obligated service, do you

think that there is anything basically bad about that provision as it

now stands in this bill?

General STONE. My fear is a psychological fear.

Senator STENNIS. Pardon me, Senator. What provision is that

you are talking about?

Senator CANNON. The tour of obligated service, Mr. Chairman, the

5-year provision.

Senator STErms. Thank you.

General STONE. My fear is that this would cause an adverse reaction

on the part of the young man. You go out to him and interest him

in going to the Academy. He may be the son of a military person, he

may be a civilian. You say, "Son, we think you ought to go to the

Academy." He says, "Fine."

But then you face him with forecasting what his thoughts and desires are going to be 10 years in advance, and this is pretty tough for

a 17- or 18-year-old kid to do, and he might say, "Well, I am not going

to commit myself that far in advance at this point because I don't

know enough about it."

Now when I was at West Point on one tour of duty up there, we

made quite a sizable survey at the request of the Defense Department

Service Academy Board. They were interested in this motivation,

why people wanted to go to the Academy.

We found through this-survey of the cadets who were there at the

time that not many of them went there with the idea of making the

service a career. Most of them went there because somebody talked

them into it, because it was a glamorous thing, they had seen a movie
32 INCREASES FOR MILITARY 'AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

about it, their parents thought it was a good chance to get a free education, all sorts of diverse reasons, and very few went in there with the

objective of making the service a career.

During the time they were there, and in their first initial service in

the service, they make up their minds to be career soldiers, sailors,

and airmen, and they stay. The facts are that most of the people who

have gone through the system do stay without any arbitrary restrictions that might limit their entrance in the first place.

Senator CANNON. But isn't it unfair to put a man in a position that

he can think he can go ahead and get the education without the obligated service, if he wants to do it, and some of them would want to do

it? That it would seem to me, would be unfair to the services, and

also unfair to the Government.

General STONE. I see your concern. I share your concern. I felt

that anybody who goes through this magnificent experience should devote his entire career to the service. But there may be some other way

of doing it besides just saying a 5-year commitment. I don't know

exactly what it is, but I would prefer to try to find some other expedient.

Senator CANNON. Right now by administrative action you have

a 4-year commitment, so we are really talking about only 1 year. Do

you really think that a man would elect not to go to the Academy

now if " he is interested enough to take a 4-year obligation and say,

"I won't go because I have to take a 5-year obligation"? Do you

really think we would lose any people because of that 1-year difference

right now?

General STONE. I think you might lose some, yes, sir. It used to

be 3, and then the 4, which makes 7, and he often has to go a year

before he enrolls, which makes 8. Then by administrative process

we made it 9.

Now it is proposed to make it 10. I don't know when you get to

the breaking point. Are you going to be able eventually to say you

hkve to stay in 30 years by law? You can keep moving this thing

up year after year. It was 8. Now it is 9; now it is proposed to be

10. Maybe next year it will be 12. I don't know where you stop.

Senator CANNON. I can see your point here, but I also am not unmindful of the fact that you have got a cost of an education that

you have got to amortize and I don't think that the Government

should be required to amortize the cost of the education over a 2-year

period, for example.

'General STONE. I agree with you.

Senator CANNON. And we have got to look at it realistically if

.we are going to justify it to the American taxpayer, and say that

we itre amortizing the cost, of this education over a reasonable length

of service.

Where the reasonable length of service is I don't know, but I know

this. I have never lost an applicant yet to any one of the service

academies by reason of the fact that the boy thought the period of

obligated service was too long. Of all the boys who have applied to

me, none have ever not gone through for that reason.

General STONE. Each year we get a considerable number of appointees who turn out to be thoroughly qualified. We offer them an

appointment and they turn it down. Now, why they turn it down,
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 33

we can't say in all cases, but I am sure that this has an influence. I

have those figures.

Senator CANNON. When you say you offer them an appointment,

are you referring now to a man who has made an application for an

appointment, and then 

General STONE. Gone through the whole system, medical exams.

Senator CANNON. Do you have figures on that?

General STONE. 11 to 14 percent of those people who have gone

through the system, are found to be fully qualified, and then turn

down an offer of appointment. For example, in the class of 1966

in order to get the 751 cadets who actually did enter, we offered 872

people appointments. These were people that you and your colleagues

had nominated. Some had come through the Reserves and so on, even

some people who had principal appointments who went through and

were found to be fully qualified, when it came to say, "OK, I sign here,"

there were 121 who said "No."

Senator CANNON. And you think that that reason might have been

the obligated tour?

General STONE. A part of it, yes. A lot of them were young men

who changed their minds after having investigated the military a

little bit more. Some of them had scholarships in their pockets to

other institutions, all sorts of different reasons, but I think this was a

factor, very definitely.

You can keep extending it, but I think West Point's long-term retention figures are 92 percent of their graduates who stay for a career.

Now you can't improve much on that because some of these people

are going to have hardship discharges they will ask for, and I am sure

the Secretary of any service, when a man comes in and presents a

legitimate hardship case, will let him get out regardless of what the

service commitment is.

We do it all the time in the officer and enlisted areas, even though

they have been given some wonderful training. But when we are

dealing with human beings, we have to do this. I don't think you can

put these young men into iron bands at the age of 17, and expect to

really get much out of such a commitment. They are minors at the

time you make it in the first place.

Senator STENNIS. Gentlemen, may I observe time is going to run

out on us. If we could be a little more brief with our answers, General,

we can cover this.

Senator CANNON. I have no more questions.

Senator STENNIS. Senator Inouye?

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, this year I was privileged to serve

as a member of the Board of Visitors to the Military Academy at West

Point, and I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to insert at

this time a portion of a report appearing in section 6(b), which appears

on pages 3 and 4 of this report, relating to the expansion plans. and

also the proposed legislation that we have before us. I would like to

note at this time that the Board unanimously concurred with the recommendation, and they looked upon the expansion of the Academy with

favor.

Senator STENNIs. All right, Senator. That is pages 3 and 4 of the

report?

Senator INou YE. Yes, section 6(b) appearing on pages 3 and 4.
34 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

Senator STENNIS. Without objection it will be included in the record,

Mr. Reporter.

(The section of the report referred to is as follows:)

(b) Ewpansion plans.—The Board was most interested in the proposed expansion plans for the Academy. The Superintendent conducted formal conferences for all members on the subject, discussing both the proposed legislation

(DOD 88-13) dealing with an increase in the authorized Strength of the corps of

cadets, and the master plan for modernizing and expanding its physical facilities

to permit the support of the corps at an average of 4,250 cadets. In these conferences the Superintendent utilized models, photographs, maps, artists renderings, and graphical charts to outline the successive stages of the proposed construction program and forecast the annual fund requirements therefor.

With regard to the proposed increase in corps strength from the currently

authorized 2,540 cadets to an average strength of 4,250, the Board took cognizance

of the 1949 recommendations of the Service Academy Board to the Secretary

of Defense.

The Board was informed that, in order to fulfill the recommendations of the

Service Academy Board, the Department of the Army had determined that the

annual input of Regular Army Officers from the Military Academy should be

approximately 900, recognizing that the enactment of new legislation would

be required to permit this since, under existing law, approximately only 560 are

graduated each year. The administration is presently considering submitting

to the Congress proposed legislation which would authorize an input of 1,380

candidates for admission to each of the 3 Academies. This would result, allowing for attrition, in an average strength of approximately 4,250 cadets at the

U.S. Military Academy, and a graduating class of an estimated 960.

The Board was further informed that, in anticipation of the eventual submission to Congress of this legislation, the Department of the Army in 1961 directed

the Superintendent to plan for and make recommendations as to an incremental

expansion of existing facilities, or provision of new facilities to accommodate the

proposed expansion. The facilities expansion plan presented in brief to the

Board by the Superintendent was that submitted by him to the Chief of Staff

of the Army on February 1, 1963.

While the Board has insufficient opportunity to make a detailed inquiry into

either the proposed legislation providing for an increase in the size of the corps,

or into all facets of the facilities expansion plan to support such increase, it

observed that an increase in the strength of the corps appeared to be highly

desirable. In this connection the Board took note of the diversity of the Army's

tasks and the fact that it is the largest of the services, yet less than 20 percent

of its Regular officers are graduates of West Point.

During the general discussion of this matter, the Supertendent pointed out

that, under conditions presently obtaining, the outstanding college senior, the

one with the best mind and the highest leadership potential, is not likely to be

tempted to enter the Army as a career officer. The material inducements offered

by industry and business are just too persuasive, in most cases, to be withstood

by the young man who has but a superficial knowledge of the Army and at best

a vague idea of the dignity and satisfaction of a life of military service. Under

these circumstances the Army finds itself in a poor position to compete for the

high-potential young manpower it needs. To the degree that the cadet corps be

expanded, to that degree the opportunity of imbuing high-quality young men

with the ideals of public service, and of motivating them toward a lifetime Army

career, is increased.

In connection with the proposed increase, the Board concurred in the statement of one of its members having extensive experience and knowledge of the

situation that the supply of high-potential manpower of the type produced by

the Military Academy, and other first-class institutions of learning, is one of the

most critical problems that the Nation today faces and will continue to face with

increasing urgency. This member observed that despite the efforts of Statesupported and private institutions to expand their output to help meet the

• national requirement, it can be confidently forecast that the number that they

can produce will fall far short of the need. He pointed out that it seems clearly

incumbent upon the Government and upon the Military Academy, its agency, to

increase its contribution of such trained manpower; and equally clear that the

Academy should be expanded in order that it be capable of playing its appropriate role in producing this national resource so urgently needed to assure our
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 35

Nation's continuing development and the maintenance of its position in world

affairs, as well as assuring the Army an adequate supply of these high-potential

As to the facilities expansion plan presented to it, the Board, without attempting to close analysis, commented upon it favorably. The Board took occasion to

commend the Academy's initiative in utilizing its organic personnel to prepare

the plan, thereby effecting a considerable economy in engineering costs. The

Board noted with satisfaction that under the expansion plan it is forecast that

the annual total operation and maintenance cost per cadet will decline from its

current figure of slightly over $11,000 to slightly over $9,000.

The Board expressed the desire that its report, in its published form, embrace

appropriate pictorial and descriptive matter of the proposed physical facilities

.expansion plan.

Senator STENNIS. Any further questions?

Senator INOUYE. That is all.

Senator STENNIS. Senator Cannon, let me make clear I was not cutting you off. I said let the answers be a little more brief, not the

luestions.

Senator CANNON. I got the hint, Mr. Chairman. I have no more

questions.

Senator STENNIS. Senator Thurmond.

" Senator THURMOND. That is all. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator STENNIS. We have some questions here for the committee

that are a little technical. May I ask, General, do you oppose the

provision that was in the bill of last year which had this disclosure

provision with reference to appointments, what place they were from?

General STONE. I can't recall offhand what the position of the Department was.

Senator STENNIS. Gentlemen, I don't think we can pass on this bill

today, for several reasons. Is that question clear to you now, General?

General STONE. Yes, sir; I will get the position of the Department

.of Defense on that point, and submit it for the record.

Senator STENNIS. All right. We would want to have a yes or no

answer with an explanation as to whichever way it is, as to whether

you oppose or do not oppose that provision.

(The following information was subsequently submitted:)

The Department of Defense defers to the judgment of Congress with reference

to disclosure of any information about appointees.

Senator STENNIS. Now may I comment. In measuring here the

tenure of service, you are an expert in your field, General, all of you

are, extra good ones, too, but I don't see how you can count the 4

years at the Academy and say that you make them promise to give

9 years of service. If he hasn't got the purpose and wants to go 4

years of formal training, which is his college career, and if he doesn't

have the fortitude and courage to stay with it, I don't believe you

want him anyway. If he hasn't enough appreciation to give something in return for this free ticket he gets for the 4 years, I don't believe you would want him.

So when you talk about requiring 9 years, it seems to me like that is

not the proper estimate to put on as to the time. You are giving him

4 years and you would merely be requesting him to give you 5 back,

under the provisions of the bill. That is the way I see it. I believe

that is the way it should be looked at. I just make that comment for

whatever it might be worth. Do you wish to respond?

General STONE. I think that my reply to Senator Cannon covered

this point.
36 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

Senator STENNIS. I think it does, too. Are there any additional

points, General, that you wish to make now? We are about to close

the hearing.

General LAMPERT. Thank you very much.

Senator STENNIS. Admiral, do you have something?

Admiral SMEDBERG. No, Mr. Chairman.

Senator STENNIS. You gentlemen certainly have been well prepared

and we appreciate your appearance here. Mr. Braswell has some

questions and I think we will ask these questions, and then if you

want more time you may submit the answers.

The first question pertains to secretarial limitation on expansion.

The two Academies will be in the process of expansion until at least

1971, if this bill is enacted. It is important therefore to have a clear

understanding of the language now in the form of permanent law

which permits the Army and Air Force Secretaries to limit the appointment to the number that can be adequately accommodated.

The bill provides that the first source of expansion will be in the

appointment of the fifth principal. It is further provided that after

service academies have reached the strength of 3,737, there would be

no appointments from among enlisted Regulars

'

enlisted reservists, or

honor school graduates, if the Secretaries limit the new congressional

alternate category.

Now since all Members of Congress cannot be given a fifth principal

during the first year of expansion, and since the bill does not indicate the method of appointment, would the Army and the Air Force

indicate precisely how the fifth principal will be nominated?

General STONE. Yes, sir; I would be glad to. The proposal that

both the Army and the Air Force have for the appointment of the

fifth member for each Member of Congress, or fifth nominee for each

Member of Congress, is that the first year after this bill is enacted, the

first appointment cycle after the bill is enacted, that one-half the

Members of Congress would be allowed to exercise their prerogative

with regard to the fifth appointment. This would be about 266.

The next year the other half of the Congress would so do. At that

time, senior Senators and the odd-numbered districts, the first year,

let's say, the junior Senators, the even-numbered and the at-large districts the next year, or some arrangement along that line, so that in

the 2-year period all of the fifth appointments would be offered.

Now this does not mean that they would all be filled necessarily,

because some appointments are never filled up to the full authorized

strength. But at least they would be tendered in the first 2 years of

operation of the law.

Senator STENNIS. You say there is a division here in the Congress.

You started off on a seniority basis for this first half that you are

going to appoint.

General STONE. We could do it by seniority in the two Houses. We

could do it the senior Senator 1 .year and the junior Senator the next

year.

Senator STENNIS. Which are you going to do? That is the

question.

General STONE. We had proposed to do it by taking the senior Senator in each State the first year, the junior Senator the second year,

the odd-numbered districts one year and the even-numbered and

at-large districts the next year.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 37

Senator STENNIS. That would give the spread through the States.

General STONE. That is right, and this would be done without regard to personalities, or anything like that.

Senator STENNIS. All right. Now the second part of that, on page 3

of the committee print, the Military and Air Force Academies have

indicated that after the fifth principal has been made available to all

_Members in about 1966, the next source of expansion will be both the

'congressional alternate category and an increased number of presidentials. Thereafter the other competitive categories will be increased.

This plan of expansion apparently carries out the intent of the House

bill, although the present language is not specific.

The staff has drafted amendatory language which will more explicitly spell out the plan of expansion. In effect, it provides, one, that

the number of congressional principals must be at least four; that if

the Secretaries limit the fifth principal, then the number of appointments under the presidentials, enlisted Regulars, enlisted reservists,

and honor school graduates will be limited to a finite number, which

is the current annual input; and three, that if the Secretary limits the

new congressional alternate category, then the number of appointments from among enlisted Regulars, enlisted reservists, and honor

school graduates will be a finite number, which is the same as the current annual input.

This language has been discussed with the military departments.

Now the Chair would like to ask as a matter for the record, however,

if the witnesses have any comment or wish to make any observations

on this clarification?

General STONE. The Department of Defense position is that we

agree completely with that modification proposed.

Senator STENNIS. Thank you very much. There are a few questions

here, gentlemen, some of which have been answered in part already by

the discussion. We will submit those to you for answers to the record

shortly, such parts as are still applicable.

General STONE. All right, sir.

(The answers subsequently submitted follow:)

Question. The Department of Defense recommends the deletion of the language requiring the Army and Air Force Secretaries to consult with the House

and Senate Committees on Armed Services prior to limiting the appointments to

the Academies on the grounds that no need exists for this provision. It is understood that the Bureau of the Budget recommended this provision on constitutional grounds. Would the services indicate whether, in their opinion, this

consultation language would pose any practical problem from their point of

view?

Answer. Deletion of language requiring consultation with the two committees:

Senate committee print No. 2, December 3, 1963, of H.R. 7356, includes a revision

of the section which covers priorities for increasing the number of appointments

from the various sources. The wording of this revision is so precise that there

is little, if any, room for administrative variation from the priorities as stated.

Because of this, consultation with the two committees should not be necessary.

Such consultation would serve no valid need and, therefore, would be of no practical consequence. If the requirement for consultation remains in the legislation,

agreement on appointment procedures would have to be reached by mid-December of the year preceding application.

Question. The Department of Defense has proposed another amendment which

would increase the annual presidential appointments from 75 to 100 and which

would provide that presidential appointments may be made from the sons of any

member of an armed force who has completed at least 8 years of continuous

active service. This language was recommended in order to include the sons of

career reservists.
38 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

One effect of this amendment would be to increase on a 4-year basis the

authorized strength from 4,417 to 4,517. The physical capacity of the Military

and Air Force Academies will govern the number of appointments over at least

the next 8 years. The only way these additional 25 yearly appointments could

be made would be either to displace 25 of the presently planned appointments, or

to await the physical expansion of the Academies to the point where they could

accommodate this additional number. Would the services comment on how it

would handle the additional number?

Answer. Department of Defense amendment increasing presidentials to include

sons of career reservists: The additional vacancies would be filled only when

physical facilities become available. It is possible that toward the end of the

period which will be required to approach the strength of 4,417, qualified candidates will not be available to fill every authorized vacancy. In this event, the

additional presidential vacancies could be filled.

Question. As we all know, under existing law the service Secretaries fill the

unused vacancies from among the qualified alternates as recommended by the

Academic Board, with two-thirds coming from congressional sources. This is

known as the order of merit system. This system now has taken on added

significance, since the new category of 150 congressional alternates will also be

chosen by this method in addition to those who may be nominated for the unfilled

vacancies. The committee would like a brief explanation as to the basis for the

recommendations by the various academic boards.

Answer. New importance of the order of merit system: The services previously

have provided to the committee descriptions of the criteria and procedures used

for the appointment of cadets and midshipmen. In general, order of merit is

established on the basis of composite selection scores which are derived from

the entrance examinations, including evaluation of leadership potential. Copies

of the referenced descriptions are as follows:

COMPETITIVE APPOINTMENTS, 'U.S. MILITARY ACADEMY

After it has been decided which candidates are qualified for admission, the

Academic Board has the problem of determining the order of merit of the competitor within each of the specific categories. In doing this the Board gives

60 percent weight to the academic score which ranges from 200 to 800, 30 percent weight to the leadership score which ranges from 200 to 800, and 10 percent weight to the physical aptitude score which ranges from 200 to 800. The

sum of these three scores is the total score which is then arranged in order of

total value. The candidate with the highest total score is No. 1 within each

competitive category and the candidate with the lowest score is last in a given

category. The academic score consists of a candidate's secondary school record

and scores on the following named college entrance examination board tests:

Scholastic aptitude verbal; scholastic aptitude math; English composition

achievement; and mathematics achievement.

The leadership score consists of an evaluation of extracurricular activities,

both athletic and nonathletic, and of the comments by secondary school authorities. These evaluations are made by admissions officers at USMA, the Admissions Committee of the Academic Board, and the Academic Board. The physical aptitude score is determined from the results of the West Point physical

aptitude examination required of all candidates.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY.

BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL,

Washington, D.C., November 12, 1963.

Subject: Scholastic qualification and determination of qualified alternates and

competitors order of merit for admission to the U.S. Naval Academy.

This is in response to your recent inquiry which requested the criteria used

to establish scholastic qualification and the order of merit for the qualified

alternates and competitors.

The procedures currently employed for the scholastic qualification of Naval

Academy nominees require a minimum of subjective evaluation. Scholastic

qualification is determined by the achievement of acceptable college board test

scores and by the achievement of a satisfactory secondary school certificate

by each nominee. Both requirements are evaluated objectively. The test scores
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 39

must meet the minimum standard and the secondary school certificate must

present at least 15 credits in college preparatory subjects with grades appreciably better than the school's lowest passing grade.

For many years we have permitted candidates who are college students and

who hold noncompetitive nominations to present a transcript of college work

in lieu of taking the college board tests. The requirements for the college

transcript are carefully defined in our regulations and the transcripts submitted by the candidates are amenable to objective evaluation. Since the purpose of the scholastic qualification is the determination of the candidate's ability

to undertake college level work, this method of qualification is deemed to be

worthy of retention.

The foregoing objective procedures are employed to determine the scholastic

qualification of all candidates. It is only when the individual Member of Congress so directs that his nominees are evaluated subjectively. T'he Member,

of his choice, may nominate by the principal-alternate method or the competitive method. If he elects the competitive method, he is specifically requesting

the subjective evaluation of his candidates by the Naval Academy. The subjective, or "whole man," evaluation is performed only for those candidates who

have already met the basic scholastic qualifications for admission, and it serves

to place these candidates as well as all "qualified alternates" on their respective

lists in order of merit.

Subject: Scholastic qualification and determination of qualified alternates and

competitors order of merit for admission to the U.S. Naval Academy.

The "whole man" evaluation includes the following factors which are weighted

as indicated:

Factor Score range Weight

College board scores 200 to 800 47

High school class rank 200 to 800 23

Extracurricular activities:

Athletic 400 to 800 15

Nonathletic 400 to 800 15

Recommendations 200 to 800 10

Total weight 110

1 subjective evaluation; however, the reduced score range limits the effect of such evaluations.

The "whole man" evaluation is employed to place the following categories of

candidates in order of merit on their respective lists. It is emphasized that

all of these candidates have been found scholastically qualified for admission

using objective criteria. Approximate

Category: number on list

Presidential 335

Navy and Marine Corps 150

Naval and Marine Corps Reserve 200

Sons of deceased veterans 30

Honor schools/NROTC 60

Congressional competitors 1 4

Qualified alternates 1, 200

1 Per vacancy.

CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR AIR FORCE CADET APPOINTMENT, CLASS OF 1967

All candidates were required to meet qualifying standards on a medical examination administered at specified Air Force examining centers and on the aptitude and achievement measures as indicated in the accompanying chart.

Order of merit in all competitions was based on a selection composite which

includes the measures and weights, also as indicated in the accompanying chart.

All of the measures used are standardized and systematic in nature with the

exception of the rating on aptitude for service which is a subjective evaluation
40 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

of everything known about a candidate. This rating is given a weight of less

than 10 percent in the selection composite.

Measure Qualifying level Weight in selection composite

1. College board tests:

(a) Verbal aptitude 

(b) English composition 

(c) Math aptitude 

(d) Intermediate or advanced math 

2. High school graduation rank 

3. Academic composite (sum college board tests and

high school rank).

4. Physical aptitude 

5. Activities index:

(a) Athletic 

(b) Nonathletic 

6. Leadership composite (sum physical aptitude and

activities).

7. Rating on aptitude for service 2 

8. Selection composite 

465 average 

do 

525 average 

do 

400 

2,650 

400 

None 

do 

1,200 

None 

do

15 percent.

Do.

Do.

Do.

10 percent.

None.

10 percent.

Do.

Do.

None.

10 percent (added).

Sum of the exam composite

and rating on aptitude for

service.

1 scores on individual measures range from 200 to 800.

2 Rating assigned by a panel of 3 senior officers based on all information available on a candidate including

evaluations submitted by high school teachers or administrators. The objective is to evaluate factors which

are not readily subject to precise measurement.

Question. Would the services have any comment on the provision of the bill

which would require that three-fourths, rather than two-thirds under existing

law, of the qualified alternates come from congressional sources?

Answer. Increase in congressional quota from two-thirds to three-fourths of

qualifying alternates: The services have no objection to this change.

Question. It is understood by the Chair that the Bureau of the Budget has

indicated that for program purposes there is no commitment beyond an additional

800 cadets at this time. Is it the understanding of the military departments that

it is the intention of the executive branch to carry out the full expansion

authority contained in this bill in the years ahead and not limit the increase

to 800?

Answer. Bureau of the Budget letter: It is the understanding of the military

departments that the executive branch intends that the full expansion authority

be utilized, but that expansion beyond the level agreed upon for the first 4 years

under the new legislation will be approved only on the basis of detailed justification and in the light of the budgetary priorities then existing.

Senator STENNIS. We will not try to take up this bill of course

today. I think, General, that you have made a good presentation

here. We appreciate the testimony of all of you. I think you ought

to make a more complete disclosure of your plan, the impact of this

bill on your other recruiting systems and state definitely what you

propose to do about it.

I would much rather have that before I pass on this matter, particularly in view of the fact that there is pending over in the House a bill

to increase the ROTC program.

General STONE. That will not increase the number of people, sir.

This is just a change in the way in which ROTC people will be trained.

Senator STENNIS. Yes.

General STONE. And their education subsidized. It won't change

the numbers.

Senator STENNIS. It will increase the cost of the ROTC program,

will it not?

General STONE. The original bill sent over by the Department of

Defense did increase the cost slightly, as I recall it. The modifications

by the House Armed Services Committee have increased it further.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 41

Senator STENNIS. You don't resist the idea of making complete disclosure here as to what you propose to do?

General STONE. No sir.

Senator STENNIS. _And the impact of this program on your present

program.

General STONE. No, sir. We will get that and submit it for the

record.

Senator STENNIS. And you will get that together.

General STONE. Yes, sir.

Senator STENNIS. All right; is there anything else? With the

thanks of the committee, gentlemen, we will go into executive session now.

(Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the committee proceeded to executive

session.)

(The following information was subsequently submitted:)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE ON

IMPACT OF THE PENDING BILL ON PERSONNEL PROGRAM

1. The Air Force officer procurement program

(a) Current problems.—At the same time that the bulk of experienced World

War II officers has begun to leave the officer force, our preferred procurement

sources (Academy and ROTC) have been unable to provide the quantity and

quality of officers required, and the Air Force has had to draw a large number

of officers from supplemental sources. Insufficient numbers of Academy graduates are obtained to comprise a hard core of professionals; it has become impossible to draw the necessary quantity •and quality of officers from Air Force

ROTC; and it has become apparent that the technical competence of inputs to

the officer force must improve rapidly for the Air Force to accomplish its assigned missions. These problems are intensified by the fact that sufficient highquality officers with the requisite technical knowledge and leadership capacity

do not remain on active duty beyond their periods of obligated service.

(b) Recent program changes.—Certain changes under present statutory authority have been made to improve officer procurement. These include phasing

out those sources which produce non-college-graduate officers. The Officer Candidate School (00S) has been replaced by the airman education and commissioning program and the aviation cadet program will be completely phased out by

the end of fiscal year 1965. In addition, there has been an expansion of the

Officer Training School (OTS) program, which offers college graduates an

opportunity to secure a commission through a 3-month officer training school.

While we are getting college graduates through this program, we are not able

to attract enough top-quality applicants, especially in the science and engineering areas. With the program being less than 4 years old, we are not able to

forecast retention, although an informal survey indicates we will not retain

sufficient numbers in the critical areas.

(c) Input requirements.—In order for the Air Force to maintain an activeduty strength of 130,000 officers, an input of 9,000 to 13,000 line officers will be

required each year for the foreseeable future. At the same time, to maintain

a balanced Regular officer force at approximately the legal ceiling of 69,425,

about 3,000 Regular officers must be appointed each year. Half of these 3,000

are officers who enter the service from the Air Force Academy, Air Force

ROTC, and the Air Force Officer Training School. The other half of the annual

Regular officer input is selected from Reserve officers who have been on active

duty for a number of years.

2. Impact of H.R. 7356 and H.R. 9124 on officer procwrement

New statutory authority is necessary in order to solve the accumulating Air

Force officer procurement problems described above, i.e., increasing the numbers

from preferred sources and increasing the level of technical and overall competence of the input of new officers. Passage of H.R. 7356 and H.R. 9124 will

enable the Air Force to obtain a more desirable proportion of its officers from

the preferred sources (Academy and ROTC) and reduce its present forced
42 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

reliance on the Officer Training School which does not produce enough officers

of the quality and types which are necessary to meet our requirements.

( a) H.R. 7356.—Under this bill, the annual productivity of the Academy

could be increased from 550 to 690 by fiscal year 1968 and ultimately to 930, an

increase from 18 percent of the annual Regular officer input to 31 percent. This

still remains somewhat short of the long recognized goal of 50 percent. Academy

officers are trained in the best environment that the Air Force can provide.

With an increase from this source, there would be a compensating drop in procurement from the short leadtime programs, primarily Officer Training School,

in a greater than 1 to 1 ratio because of the significantly larger proportion of

Academy graduates who remain on active duty as career officers. Unfortunately,

the reduction from OTS can't take place until the increase from the Academy

takes place and until we can replace the expected loss of officers commissioned

in World War II between now and the 1970 time period.

( b ) H.R. 9124.—The impact of this bill on the officer procurement program

will be to provide badly n'eeded modernization and revitalization to a program

evolved in World War I. The provision in H.R. 9124 allowing all services

scholarship programs will enable the Army and the Air Force ROTC to attract

more of the Nation's best high school graduates. A similar program (Holloway)

has been available to the Navy since 1946 and has allowed them to successfully

attract the best high school students. Such students are most likely to meet the

qualitative standards for distinguished military graduates, thus qualifying for

Regular commissions upon graduation from college. Attracting these students

through scholarships should provide the opportunity to motivate them for lifetime military careers. Presently, the Air Force must take almost all the applicants for advanced ROTC in order to produce sufficient officers and to avoid

future humps and valleys in the officer corps. The ROTC bill will also permit

the Air Force to recruit larger numbers of top students in the academic specialities now foreseen to be vitally important in accomplishing our complex missions.

At present these include many engineering and scientific specialities also in

greatest demand in the industrial community and in the aerospace industries.

To perform these complex technical missions, the Air Force must be manned

with the requisite numbers of technically educated officers.

3. Procurement programing, fiscal years 1961-69

The quotas for each Air Force officer procurement source are shown in chart 1.

Shown are the numbers who came on active duty during fiscal years 1961-63,

and the programed inputs for fiscal years 1964-69 which would be possible under

H.R. 7356 and H.R. 9124. The anticipated increase in production from both the

Academy and the Air Force ROTC is indicated. The unduly large quota for

Officer Training School through fiscal year 1969 is made apparent. The significant rise in total procurement programed reflects the loss of the World War

II "hump." During the 1970-75 time period, procurement is anticipated to stabilize at about 9,000 line officers annually.

4. Relation of H.R. 7356 and H.R. 9124 to each other

There is no conflict between the purposes and expected effects of the two bills.

Both are needed to increase the procurement of top-quality officers with the

special education needed by the Air Force and to help stabilize the officer force

through procurement of career-minded officers.

5. Monetary considerations

Because the basic purpose of the two bills is to provide the Air Force with a

greater proportion of higher quality and more appropriately trained officers, there

will be no immediate monetary savings. For the Academy, some construction

will be necessary. After this one-time expenditure, the cost per Academy graduate will drop to three-quarters of the present amount; i.e., from approximately

$47,000 to about $36,000. Implementation of the senior ROTC features of the

House bill will increase the total ROTC expense for all services by approximately

$15 million, including the cost of 1,000 scholarships for the Army and the Air

Force ROTC.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 43

6. Summary

In summary, the impact of the Academy and ROTC bills on the present Air

Porce officer procurement program will be to substantially improve the level of

technical competence and overall quality of the input. The additional cost, most

of which is initial and one-time, is believed worth the assurance of quality leadership for the aerospace forces of the future. By increasing the input from

these sources, we expect to eventually reduce the large total input needed to

attract the numbers required for career purposes.

7. Air Force officer procurement program

The following is a brief description of the Air Force officer procurement

program:

(a) Air Force Academy.—This is a statutory program. Academy graduates,

because of their unique background, establish a pattern of the highest professional standards. They exert an important beneficial influence upon all Air

Force officers and enlisted men. Academy cadets meet higher selection standards

and receive more appropriate training than officers from any other procurement

source. They perform outstandingly in academics and military training, including flying, and they show greater career motivation than their contemporaries.

This insures a higher experience level throughout the officer force. Approximately

8.5 percent of Regular officers are Academy graduates, which is far below the

50-percent level recommended by the Department of Defense Service Academy

Study Group.

(b) Air Force ROTC.—Like the Air Force Academy, this is a statutory pro-.

gram operated under title 10. It is a 4-year course conducted by the Air Force

on 186 college campuses and provides 3 to 5 hours of military instruction per

week on campus and one summer training period at an Air Force base. The

Air Force has relied on this program for the bulk of its active duty officers,

but since the Korean conflict, it has declined in productivity. Officers from this

source provide college educations of many kinds needed in Air Force specialties

and meet much of our flying officer requirement. But the Air Force needs large

numbers of active duty officers, both Regular and Reserve, and AFROTC has

been unable to provide the numbers and quality of officers needed. The program has lost attractiveness to students for several reasons. Some of these

are because it provides low remuneration for time spent in the program and

because it adds an academic burden to students already loaded with heavy

schedules under modern curriculums. The AFROTC must compete with industry for top quality young men who have technical and managerial competence. The program has had a long and successful history in the past and

needs to be freed from the restrictions in the old law. H.R. 9124 is designed

to allow the services to lighten the student's military instructional load, increase allowances to nonscholarship cadets, and provide all services the type of

scholarship program by which the Navy has recruited top high school graduates

for careers in the Navy.

(c) Officer Training School.—This is a nonstatutory program which was

planned as a short leadtime program to produce small numbers of college graduate officers in scarce career fields. Begun in 1959, it is a 90-day course which

resembles the OCS programs of World War II. Because AFROTC did not

provide officers in needed quantities, OTS was rapidly expanded during the last

3 years and in fiscal years 1963 and 1964 outproduced AFROTC. It draws on all

college graduates, provides a short leadtime precommission source which is

easily adapted in numbers and academic specialties, and is economical to operate.

However, the program does not attract sufficient quantities of top quality applicants, and the time in which the candidates are in officer training is too short

to motivate many of them to full careers.

(d) Airman education and commissioning program.—Like OTS, this is a nonstatutory program and is the Air Force's replacement for the Officer Candidate

School. It provides an opportunity for our most talented and motivated enlisted

men, who have earned at least 30 college credit hours on their own, to complete their work for degrees. As shown on the chart, the program should level

off at about 400 per year. Following college, they receive officer training in OTS

and come on active duty as Reserve officers and can compete with other Reserve

officers for Regular commissions. We regard this as an excellent source of

officers since they have been exposed to the Air Force, have proven they are

capable, and are obviously motivated for full service careers.
44 INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES

Total annual Air Force, commissioned officer procurement

[In fiscal years]

Commissioning programs 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969

Academies 316 430 587 613 1 605 1 605 1 605 2 690 2 690

Air Force ROTC 3,096 3, 502 3, 590 3,695 4,635 3 5,200 3 5, 500 3 6,500 36,500

Officer Candidate SchooL 394 471 257 

Officr Training School 615 2, 200 5, 156 4, 254 4, 574 4, 662 4, 720 5, 000 5,000

Airman education and commissioning program 1 55 113 356 450 400 400 400 400

Aviation cadet 2, 194 534 383 297 159 

Recall and direct appointment 320 781 644 423 554 175 263 493 254

Correction of status 4 452 433 

Other 4 1,348 403 23 21 18 10 10

Total officers excluding medics 7,388 8,406 12,078 10,041 11, 000 11, 063 11, 506 13,093 12,854

Medical officers 2,272 2,938 2, 183 3,062 3,020 3,282 2,956 3,091 2,681

Total, all officers 9,660 11,344 14,261 13, 103 14, 020 14,345 14,462 16,184 15,535

1 550 from Air Force Academy and 55 graduates of the other service academies.

2 Air Force Academy graduates only, including 140 from initial expansion under H.R. 7356. Full implementation of the bill would provide 930 graduates a year.

3 Increased A FR OTC production to be realized by implementation of H.R. 9124.

Miscellaneous additions to meet contingencies not subject to accurate programing such as the Berlin

airlift and the Cuban buildup.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ON

IMPACT OF THE PENDING BILL ON PERSONNEL PROGRAM

1. The Army officer procurement program

(a) Regular Army officer procurement.—The annual desired input into career

branches in which USMA and ROTC graduates are normally assigned totals

1,950. This does not, for example, include Medical Corps, Chaplains and Judge

Advocate General's Corps. Of the 1,950, the USMA provides approximately 500

and the ROTC distinguished military graduate program provides approximately

1,100. To round out a particular year group, an additional 350 officers are later

obtained by direct appointment in the Regular Army of individuals from civilian

status, and Reserve officers on active duty who perform well, volunteer and

are selected for appointment in the Regular Army. A Reserve officer so appointed is credited with active duty service and is thus placed in the group corresponding to the year of his original appointment.

(b) Other Army officer procurement.—Procurement of officers, other than

Regular Army (OTRA), to meet the balance of overall Army requirements is

primarily from the Reserve Officers' Training Corps program and Officer Candidate Schools.

2. Impact of H.R. 7356

(a) Output from the U.S. Army Military Academy will be increased approximately 430 officers to effect an annual estimated total production of 930. Output

will be phased and gradually increased as shown at tab A, until the maximum

annual production of 930 officers is realized.

( b) Tab A also reflects the contemplated downward adjustments to Regular

Army officer inputs from ROTC—DMG, Reserve officers, and direct appointees.

These adjustments compensate for the increase in Military Academy output.

( c) For the past several years the Army ROTC—DMG program has produced

an increasing number of Regular officers, reaching 1,100 during fiscal year 1963.

During the last 3 fiscal years the Army has selected virtually every DMG (94

percent) who has applied for a Regular Army commission. The Army is acquiring high quality officers through this program, but an increased output from the

Military Academy and a downward adjustment of ROTC—DMG Regular Army

appointments (tab A) will enable the Army to achieve a more selective basis

for future commissioning of DMG's in the Regular Army.

(d) It is also desirable to retain some vacancies to provide an opportunity

for integration into the Regular Army of Reserve officers and direct appointees

who qualify for and desire a Regular Army appointment. The downward adjustment of input from these sources is shown at tab A.
INCREASES FOR MILITARY AND AIR FORCE ACADEMIES 45

(e) The increased production of the Military Academy and selection of the

best qualified officers available who volunteer under other programs will peak

the quality of the Regular officer corps.

(f) H.R. 7356 would not affect the procurement of OTRA officers from Officer

Candidate Schools (00S). Since the Army conducts these schools primarily to

keep this system and its techniques available in the event of mobilization, procurement for the active Army from OCS would probably not be reduced below

what has been programed as a minimum output in the time frame 1968.

(g) H.R. 7356 would have a negligible effect on the ROTC program. Total

ROTC production will not be reduced. Less than 2 percent of the annual programed production of ROTC officers would be affected. Officers who are not

needed for assignment to the Active Army could instead, after appropriate training, fill increasingly greater projected officer shortages in the Reserve components. These would be selected from officers not motivated toward a career of

Active Army service.

TAB A—REGULAR ARMY OFFICER ACCESSIONS UNDER H.R. 7356

1. The desired annual Regular Army appointment objective is 1,950 for those

branches into which USMA and ROTC Regular Army second lieutenants are

normally assigned.

2. Under H.R. 7356 the estimated annual increase in production from USMA

would be phased as shown below beginning in fiscal year 1968 (class of 1968).

3. To compensate for the USMA increase, the estimated annual outputs from

direct appointments of individuals from civilian status, or through appointment

of active duty Reserve component officers in later year groups would be adjusted

downward as shown below.

Year group

Fiscal year

1967 (for

cornparision)

1968 1969 1 1972 1973

USMA 8 565 650 725 900 930

ROTC (DMG) _ 1,100 1,075 1,050 900 870

Direct appointment and vacancies for later augmentation in the year group 285 225 175 150 150

Total 1,950 1, 950 1, 950 1, 950 1,950

1 Fiscal years 1969, 1970, and 1971 statistics are identical.

2 The USMA output estimates are based on the assumption that all graduates will be appointed in the

Army.

3 Estimated actual production. Currently the Army receives an input of approximately 500 officers

from the USMA. The difference of 65 officers over this current input reflects a recent decision to eliminate

initial assignment of USMA graduates to the other services effective with the fiscal year 1966 class (class of

1966).

Maximum production.

(Subsequently, in executive session, on Jan. 23, 1964, the committee

voted to report H.R. 7356, with an amendment.)

oillsiTte4

3 In


(kW *St

:;;

'••