.pr sjs:WINATIONS OF ROBERT H. SPIRO, JR., ROBERT J.

sf LI MURRAY, AND JOSEPH C. ZENGERLE III

GOVERNMEN

Storage KSU LIBRARIES 

UMENTS

2 2 1980

rAt-?RELL LIBRARY 

KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY HEARING A11900 304795 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

UNITED STATES SENATE

NINETY-SIXTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

NOMINATIONS OF

BERT H. SPIRO, JR., TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF THE

ARMY

BERT J. MURRAY TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

gEPH C. ZENGERLE III TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF

IE AIR FORCE FOR MANPOWER, RESERVE AFFAIRS AND

INSTALLATIONS

JANUARY 29, 1980

Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

59-460 () WASHINGTON : 1980
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

JOHN C. STENNIS, Mississippi, Chairman

HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington

HOWARD W. CANNON, Nevada

HARRY F. BYRD, JR., Virginia

SAM NUNN, Georgia

JOHN C. CULVER, Iowa

GARY HART, Colorado

ROBERT MORGAN, North Carolina

J. JAMES EXON, Nebraska

CARL LEVIN, Michigan

JOHN TOWER, Texas

STROM THURMOND, South Carolina

BARRY GOLDWATER, Arizona,

JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia

GORDON J. HUMPHREY, New Hampshire

WILLIAM S. COHEN, Maine

ROGER W. JEPSEN, Iowa

FRANCIS J. SULLIVAN, Staff Director

JOHN T. TICER, Chief Clerk
CONTENTS

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Page

Spiro, Robert H., Jr., of Florida, to be Under Secretary of the Army 3

Murray, Robert J., of Virginia, to be Under Secretary of the Navy 12

Zengerle, Joseph C., III, of the District of Columbia, to be Assistant

Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower, Reserve Affairs and Installations 19

(m)

NOMINATIONS OF ROBERT H. SPIRO, JR., OF FLORIDA,

TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF THE ARMY; ROBERT J.

MURRAY, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF

THE NAVY; AND JOSEPH C. ZENGERLE III, OF THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE FOR MANPOWER, RESERVE

AFFAIRS AND INSTALLATIONS

TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 1980

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

TV ashington,D 'D.C.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 212,

Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. J. James Exon, presiding.

Present: Senators Stennis, Byrd, Morgan, Exon, Warner, and

Jepsen.

Staff present: Frank J. Sullivan, staff director; John C. Roberts,

general counsel; John T. Ticer, chief clerk; Christine E. Cowart, assistant chief clerk; Rhett B. Dawson, counsel; George F. Travers,

Edward B. Kenney, professional staff members; Ralph 0. White,

research assistant; Judith P. Barr, clerical assistant.

Also present: John Stirk, assistant to Senator Morgan; Greg Pallas,

assistant to Senator Exon; and Michael Hastings, assistant to Senator

Cohen.

Senator EXON. I call the committee to order.

The committee meets this morning to consider three nominations

from the President for civilian statutory positions in the Department

of Defense. They are: Robert H. Spiro Jr. to be Under Secretary of

the Army; Robert J. Murray to be Under Secretary of the Navy; and

Joseph C. Zengerle III to be Assistant Secretary of the Air Force.

The nominees are present today and we welcome them on behalf of all

members of the committee.

At this time, I would like to call on the distinguished chairman of

the committee, Senator Stennis for any comments that he wishes to

make.

Chairman STENNIS. Thank you.

Senator, first of all, I want to thank you for taking the responsibility in conducting these hearings. Gentlemen, I do not think that

there is any more important function that this committee has than the

matter of passing on what I call the civilian nominees who are the real

operators, the users of this vast executive power.

I read in the paper where the Department of Defense wants to ask for more money than they have ever asked for before in fiscal year

1981. Well, it takes money. It takes a lot of it.

(1)
2

I cannot discover anything against any of these nominees Mr.

Chairman. To the contrary, it looks to me like they are outstanding,

all three, based on their previous achievements. I usually ask each

one just why is it that you are willing to come and take this position?

What do you have in mind in doing it? Why? But I won't ask that.

I am just compelled to ask you to excuse me for a minute, so I do thank

them as well as commend them for being willing to take this responsibility. •

I think that we are in serious times, very serious times, not referring

just to Afghanistan. There is the energy matter and so forth. It will

take men like you to help pull us out.

So again, I thank each of you for being willing to serve, if you

are confirmed. That is all I have to say, and I thank you, too.

Senator ExoN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

We want to welcome Senator Warner who has just joined us. Senator Warner, I have just opened the meeting and announced the three

civilian nominations we are considering this morning. As former

Secretary of the Navy, of course, the committee relies very heavily

on the experience that Senator Warner had before he became a member of the Senate and a member of this committee.

I just call upon you, Senator Warner, if you have any opening

statement at this time.

Senator WARNER. None, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for your comments. I have made an independent analysis of each of the candidates

and I am more than satisfied and actually commend the President for

securing such able talent.

Senator Exoisr. Thank you, Senator Warner. Let's start then with

Dr. Spiro. If you will take the chair there, Dr. Spiro. You are the

nominee for the post of Under Secretary of the Army.

Dr. Spiro comes from North Carolina originally. He has a Ph. D.

degree in philosophy and has taught history at several colleges and

universities. He later turned to academic administration and for the

past 15 years has been president of Jacksonville University in

Florida. He served as a naval officer in World War II and recently

retired from the Naval Reserve with the rank of rear admiral. He becomes Under Secretary of the Army at a crucial time for the Army

and faces some stiff challenges in the months ahead.

Before I call for any opening statements by the members of the

committee, I would just like to say that Dr. Spiro, and Mr. Murray

have not quite fulfilled the 7-day rule that we have for consideration.

If there is no objection, we will waive that rule for the purposes of

these hearings today.

Hearing no objection, so ordered.

Without objection, I will place in the hearing record, your nomination reference and report and also your biographical sketch.

[The information follows:]

NOMINATION REFERENCE AND REPORT

As IN EXECUTIVE- SESSION,

SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES,

January 22,1980.

Ordered, That the following nomination be referred-to the Committee on Armed

Services:
3

Robert Harry Spiro, Jr., of Florida, to be Under Secretary of the Army, vice

Walter Barber LaBerge, resigned.

, 1980.

Reported by Mr. 

recommendation that the nomination be confirmed, subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted

committee of the Senate.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF DR. ROBERT HARRY SPIRO, JR.

Dr. Robert H. Spiro, Jr., was born in Asheville, North Carolina on December 5,

1920. He received a B.S. in History (1941) from Wheaton College, Wheaton,

Illinois; performed graduate studies in American and European History at the

University of North Carolina (1945-1946) and completed graduate studies leading to a Ph. D. in Philosophy (1950) from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland.

During the summers of 1951 and 1952, he engaged in studies at New York's Union

Theological Seminary on Danforth Foundation fellowships. He has held a

Southern Fellowships Fund Grant and also a Faculty Research summer grant

at Duke University. Dr. Spiro's work in the academic community has been continually recognized with awards and honors to include the Palmes Academique,

the highest civilian honor of the French Government.

During World War II, Dr. Spiro served in the United States Navy from 1941

to 1945, including six-months study at the Harvard Graduate School of Business

Administration. From 1943 to 1945, he was Supply and Disbursing Officer aboard

the Navy Destroyer, Morris, which engaged in 16 combat missions in the Pacific.

He remained in the active Naval Reserve after World War II and in 1978 retired

from the Naval Reserve in the rank of Rear Admiral.

A professional historian, Dr. Spiro's first faculty appointment was at King

College, Bristol, Tennessee. From 1950-1957, he was Professor of History at

Mississippi College, Clinton, Mississippi. In 1957, he was appointed President of

the Blue Ridge Assembly, Inc., Black Mountain, North Carolina. From 1960 to

1964, he served as Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Professor of History

at Mercer University, Macon, Georgia. He was appointed President of Jacksonville University, Jacksonville, Florida, in June 1964 and served there for 15

years. During his tenure as President, Jacksonville University experienced considerable growth of the physical plant, a one-hundred percent upgrade in quality

of faculty with advanced degrees, a significant enlargement of undergraduate

and graduate programs, and a fivefold increase of the endowment fund.

Dr. Spiro has membership and has held elected office in numerous educational,

civic, fraternal and religious organizations. Briefly, he has been President,

Florida Association of Colleges and Universities; Chairman, President's Council,

Independent Colleges and Universities of Florida; and Secretary-Treasurer,

Association of Urban Universities. He is a member of the American and Southern

Historical Associations, served on the Florida Historical Society Board of Directors, and trustee of the Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. Also, he has

served on three Florida Governor's Commissions, as a member of the Florida

Council of 100, and as Chairman of the Jacksonville Sesquicentennial Commission.

Dr. Spiro enjoys tennis, swimming, and mountain climbing.

Senator ExoN. Dr. Spiro, we are delighted to have you here this

morning. I welcome you for any statements that you care to make at

this time.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT H. SPIRO, R.

Dr. SPIRO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Chairman Stennis and

Senator Warner.

Chairman Stennis made a comment about usually asking why a

man would undertake such a task and he seemed to imply that it

might sometimes be onerous and difficult and even distasteful. I could

only say in response—perhaps I come from a long line of intractable

and stubborn people but I feel that the opportunity for service to my

country at this time is a great one.
4

After teaching and studying at North Carolina and Mississippi

and Tennessee and various places, and serving as a dean and a president, as the president of a university for 15 years during the Vietnam

period, I have decided that I would like to serve my country and when

it was suggested to me by numerous friends that I 1.night have this

opportunity, I rather eagerly accepted it.

I feel that the times are extremely challenging today for our country, and while maintaining my academic career during the past 30

to 35 years, I have kept a lively interest in things national and international through civic, religious and cultural affairs, and through my

Reserve service and I find it today to be a great challenge.

We are all sorry about the tragic developments in Afghanistan and

Iran and elsewhere. We face tremendous problems and manning the

Army and the other forces, trying to modernize them, seeking to make

our country strong, to provide what is tritely, but very accurately

called, a "credible deterrent" in our day.

Mr. Chairman, I welcome the opportunity of being before you today and, if approved by this committee, I will give my very best time

and attention to the affairs of the Army and the well-being of our

country.

Senator EXON. Thank you, Dr. Spiro. There is a question in this

regard that we ask all witnesses before us. I understand from the staff

that you have complied with the committee practices concerning

avoidance of any possible conflicts of interest, is that correct?

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir.

Senator ExoN. The Democratic Caucus of the Senate has adopted

a policy with respect to every nomination which requires that each

nominee be asked the following question which I will pose to you at

this time: "Do we have your commitment to respond to requests to

appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the

Senate?"

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir. It will be our pleasure to do that.

Senator ExoN. Dr. Spiro, I have a question or two that I may follow, but I will yield to my colleagues at this time.

Senator Stennis, do you have any questions?

Chairman STENNIS. Thank you. I will yield. Thank you.

Senator ExoN. Senator Warner?

Senator WARNER. Mr. Chairman, the nominee is well-known to me.

I first made his acquaintance when I was in the Department of Defense and I can say unequivocably he is one of the most spirited,

energetic individuals that I have known in my lifetime. He comes to

the United States Army at a critical time when this enthusiasm is

needed, and I welcome the opportunity to offer my unqualified approval of this nominee.

Senator ExoN. Thank you, Senator Warner.

Senator WARNER. I might also add that his Naval experience

would be helpful to the Army.

Senator ExoN. I was trying to cut off Senator Warner before he

got to that, but I do not believe that I can really rule him out of

order. It is too late now, anyway.

Dr. Spiro, the President has recently announced that he intends to

reinstate registration under the Selective Service System. As you

know, that is an issue that has concerned this committee for some time.
5

What are your views about registration and, eventually, induction if

necessary?

Dr. SPIRO. Mr. Chairman, I feel that registration of young men and

women, or young men, as may be decreed by the Congress and the

President is vital in the preparation of our country, even as we must

have tanks and airplanes and ships and other items of equipment and

a standing military force. It seems to me that we need to have the

names and addresses, and perhaps the qualifications of our young

people, in the event that we need them to be called up.

So it seems to me, just as a personal view, as one coming into the

Department of the Army at this time, that the President was very

wise in calling for registration. Some people I have noticed in the

press confuse registration with further actions that might subsequently be taken. Your question relates to registration. It seems to

me that it is a vital, significant part of preparedness to have names

in readiness should they be needed.

Senator ExoN. Do you have any views about the effectiveness of the

all-volunteer service generally, or specifically?

Dr. SPIRO. Again, I would have to indicate that I do not feel that

I have a strong reading yet on it, but as a man who has been vitally interested in these things for a long time, I personally am a believer

that the All-Volunteer Force is a desirable type of military force. I

will make it one of my chief purposes working with the Secretary of

the Army and other important and dedicated people assigned to the

task to try to make it work.

This is the official policy today of Congress, the President, and the

Army Department, and my background, as you have noted, has been

for more than 30 years in the field of education and training. I have

been involved in recruiting students for colleges and working on

national and regional commissions in manpower and I have the feeling

that we ought to continue to give it our very best imagination, devising

plans such as the current bonus, educational incentives, utilizing more

senior officers, perhaps, as well as recruiters.

I feel that the all-volunteer concept is a valid one in peacetime in a

democracy. Since it is national policy, it will have my strongest

support.

Senator ExoN. Dr. Spiro, what are your personal views at this

time—and I say at this time because I recognize that everyone has

the right to change—what are your views at this time of, first, registration of both men and women; and second, if later found necessary, the

actual draft or selective service system being put into effect on both

men and women?

Dr. SPIRO. Well, you asked my personal views and I am very happy

to give them, and will always give them to this committee, and to

other authorized bodies and individuals most honestly.

I personally favor the registration of both men and women if that

be the will of Congress. I have had a long history of believing in the

equality of human beings, male and female. With regard to other

superficial distinctions, I think they can be disregarded before the

law. And, in my judgment, personally and privately, the registration

of people should be of all qualified persons within the age groupings

determined by law.

Senator ExoN. What about the draft? Would you follow through

on the draft if necessary also?
6

Dr. SPIRO. My private and personal view would be consistent with

my suggestion about registration, that males and females who share

alike the obligations of citizenship should share in this responsibility

as well.

Senator ExoN. I would hope that you would believe that such

matters should be based on the military interest and security of the

United States rather than any other equal rights amendments, or

anything of that nature.

Dr. SPIRO. I feel that the effective quality of our fighting forces

has to be paramount in building an army and other military forces.

Senator ExoN. I just have one last question. Have you discussed

with Secretary Alexander what will be your primary areas of responsibility or things that you will be primarily assisting him in, or will

you be a general assistant to the Secretary?

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir. I have had such preliminary conversations. I

would be his backup. I would be his chief assistant as Under Secretary.

He wishes me to give particular attention to matters of personnel, recruiting, retention, education, and training. Because of my Reserve

background and other interests, I think logistics is an area he would

like me to give special attention to. Matters of intelligence and counterintelligence as they relate to the Army would be another assignment that he would wish me to undertake.

Those are paramount in our discussions so far.

Senator ExoN. Thank you.

Since we have begun the hearings, Senator Morgan and Senator

Byrd have joined us.

Senator Morgan, do you have any questions or statements or comments? I recognize you at this time.

Senator MORGAN. I have no statement. Is it my turn for questioning?

Senator ExoN. It is your turn for questioning.

Senator MORGAN. Dr. Spiro, I believe you were just talking about

your responsibilities and that the Secretary asked you to deal in a

number of areas in recruiting.

What in your background and experience makes you familiar with

the recruiting problem of the Army now?

Dr. SPIRO. To some limited degree—I have not yet been personally

involved, nor have I had official responsibilities, of course. But I have

been aware of the issues of the peacetime draft in the 1940's, 1950's,

and 1960's. As president of a university for the past 15 years, I have

dealt with many students and talked with many students about their

problems.

I have been involved in the recruiting of college students by some

thousands during the course of years, both in Florida and Georgia

and other places.

Senator MORGAN. I understand that.

Let me be a little more pointed. Do you understand that we, as Congressman, quite often are informed of charges of irregularities or have

complaints against various of the services? -

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir.

Senator MORGAN. Would you feel that it would be a part of your

responsibility as No. 2 man in the Army to be responsive to see if

there are merits to these accusations, or would_ you leave this to the

bureaucracy that normally handles it?
7

What I am saying, would you take a personal interest?

Dr. SPIRO. I expect to take a very active, personal interest. I have

personal convictions about the integrity of the system and believe in

the fact that the civilian authority, through the President and Congress, is exercised through the secretaries and I would take an active

interest and responsibility.

Senator MORGAN. Dr. Spiro, Franklin Roosevelt once said that he

was jealous of the right of every citizen to petition his elected representatives to intervene on his behalf with agencies in Government.

My experience with the Army has not been good.

In late 1977, I believe, I had a call from a sergeant in Wilmington,

N.C., that was in recruiting, that he was being required, along .with

others, to meet unrealistic quotas. He, along with others, was giving

copies of the examination to applicants, in advance of giving the test.

They were recruiting too few people.

I asked Mr. Stirk to go down. I did not take it at face value. He

came back with copies of the test. Over a year later, we got a routine

response from the Army that this man had been refused reenlistment.

The colonel had a copy of the exam and claimed some kind of privilege

which I never understood, was promoted, and we heard nothing else

until a year later when we continued to push, with the Charlotte paper.

Now there is a nationwide scandal. I think my response from the

Army was unsatisfactory.

Would you take a personal interest in that sort of thing?

Dr. SPIRO. Senator Morgan, I can say to you categorically that I will

take a personal interest in matters of that sort that relate to the integrity of the Army and its personnel. You will get direct and prompt

responses from me, as will other proper authorities in matters of that

sort.

Senator MORGAN. Now, does it concern you that the Army has eliminated its educational requirements for enlistment? I believe it was

a minimum of the 10th grade. Is that not right?

As I understand it, you do not require them to be a high school

graduate.

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir. That is correct.

Senator MORGAN. Does that bother you, or concern you at all?

Dr. SPIRO. I would like to see the Army filled largely with high

school graduates. The figure for men has been running between 40

and 60 percent in recent years, with a larger percent of women than

men being graduates. I believe the trend has been that those who are

high school graduates stay with their enlistments to a higher percentage and degree than those who are not.

Obviously, again I would have to say that I favor education and

would like to see a large percentage of high school graduates in the

service.

Senator MORGAN. Dr. Spiro, going back to recruiting, Chairman

Stennis of this committee asked Senator Nunn and I to conduct an

investigation of recruiting irregularities. We conducted a hearing in

which the Secretary of the Army testified.

On the following Sunday he was quoted in the paper as having said

that we would conduct this investigation for the purpose of trying to

bring about the draft.

Would you look at the question of motives of the Members of the

Senate in a legitimate investigation of this kind?
8

Dr. SPIRO. No, sir. If there are charges of irregularity, it seems to

me that they _should be treated as such and dealt with on a prima facie

basis.

Senator MORGAN. What is your understanding with regard to the

role that you would play as Under Secretary of the Army, as the No.

2 man with regard to the Corps of Engineers?

Dr. SPIRO. I have not had any particular discussions with the Secretary as to what role he would wish me to play. We have an Assistant

Secretary, as you know, who deals with the corps and I would have

to say that we have had no discussions. I do not know what particular

role I might be called on to play.

Senator MORGAN. As the No. 2 man in the Department, the Assistant

Secretary would be answerable to you and to the Secretary?

Dr. SPIRO. To the Secretary. I, as his No. 2 man, would certainly be

involved.

Senator MORGAN. Would you, as No. 2 man, intend to exercise any

oversight over the Corps of Engineers?

Dr. SPIRO. Indeed, yes, sir.

Senator MORGAN. Are you familiar with some of their activities?

Dr. SPIRO. Some of them.

Senator MORGAN. Now, let me just give you an example of some of

the problems that they have caused us. There is an intracoastal waterway that runs from Maine to Florida, runs through North Carolina.

All of a sudden in my State they say by the way, we have a 1,090-

foot right-of-way on each side of this. In one of the coastal towns, the

town hall is even built on that right-of-way. Nobody apparently in

the corps in years past either knew about it, or decided they did not

care about it, but now all of a sudden, the corps has come back and

said we have to clear the right-of-way.

Do you think that that would require some kind of sensitivity to the

needs of the people?

Dr. SPIRO. Indeed, I would have to say yes. I had not heard of this

problem.

Senator MORGAN. This is just one of many that I am talking about.

I have found a complete lack of sensitivity on the part of the Army

with regard to such matters and I want to know if I vote for your

confirmation, maybe I have been lax in questioning what has gone on

before, but I want to know your feelings about the role that the Corps

of Engineers should play and how they should deal with these problems, a little different from where you have a military base and you are

dealing solely with personnel on the military base.

Would you be concerned about this? Would you take a personal

interest in looking into it?

Dr. SPIRO. Categorically, yes.

Senator MORGAN. I have a great deal of difficulty all of a sudden now

with a lake where, in years past, they permitted mobile home's to be

used and all of a sudden they come up and say "move them." This

causes a great commotion within the area and also a great...deal of concern to me as a Senator, and I have found a complete lack of sensitivity

of the Corps of Engineers in that area.

Would you be interested there? Would you be involved?

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir.
9

Senator MORGAN. With regard to contracts, the Associated General

Contractors have complained for a long time that the practices of the

corps are unnecessarily increasing costs of their projects. Some of the

things they have mentioned that could be done by the corps to reduce

costs would be elimination of duplicative contract and quality control

requirements • use of less restrictive specifications; elimination of

national guide specifications that are not compatible with particular

geographical areas; and elimination of unnecessary delays in settling

contracts.

Now I am concerned about all of these cases and I am going to be

concerned about them as long as I am in the U.S. Senate.

With regard to specifications over bridge-building in North Carolina, they completely disregarded the specifications set out by the

North Carolina Department of Transportation and prepared their own

specifications and the matter has been in dispute.

Apparently the contentions of the contractors and some of the leading experts and scientists contend that the corps' specifications are not

adequate, yet the claim has been lingering on for months and months

and months.

Would you take an interest in looking into these matters?

Dr. SPIRO. I shall, indeed.

Senator MORGAN. I could go on to other matters. Let me ask you

about complaints.

Are you concerned about procurement and acquisition policies of

the Army?

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir.

Senator MORGAN. With small contractors?

Dr. SPIRO. Surely.

Senator MORGAN. We have complaints, from time to time, of inpropriety of acquisition and procurement policies. I sometimes get the feeling that these complaints are considered to be frivilous.

For instance, an undertaker down at Fort Bragg where I live has

complained for years that partiality was shown in the way that that

program was administered. They brought me a copy of a stock cer- tificate where the officer or the employee handling it for the Army

even owned stock in a funeral home.

The last thing I heard was that he had divested himself of it.

Does that present a serious question in your mind as to the propriety

of acquisition and procurement policy?

Dr. SPIRO. Senator Morgan, you will find that I will be supportive

of integrity and sensitivity in dealing with Army problems, engineers, recruiting or other issues as you have described, and I will

personally look into problems of that sort and believe that the sen- sitivity that I think I have shown in 30 years of educational admin- istration will be the same sensitivity that I will show in my new job.

Senator MORGAN. Dr. Spiro, I am being perfectly candid with you. As I mentioned, I probably have been derelict in my responsibilities

in the past in confirmation hearings. I do not intend to be in the future, but I have had little cooperation from the Secretary in several

matters of concern to me, such as recruitment matters. When I have showed concern, I have had my motives impugned in the national

press.
10

Can I be assured of some improvement in the attitude as far as

you are concerned, if you are confirmed?

Dr. SPIRO. I cannot pass judgment on the past for obvious reasons,

but I can simply assure you that I shall be sensitive to your valid,

proper concerns and needs and those of this committee and the

U.S. Congress.

Senator MORGAN. I want to make it clear to you I am not asking

for favorable rulings on matters that I complain of. I am just asking

for attention.

The first recruiting scandal, it was a year hearing from them and

it was a complete whitewash and coverup. We were told it did not

exist. Then, all of a sudden, another year or so later, we find out

that there were over 300 sergeants relieved. I am getting a little

tired of it, and my constituents are getting tired of it.

The Corps of Engineers is a very important agency. It has done

great work for the Army, but it has been a rogue elephant for a long

time. I think it needs some top-level supervision.

They need to do their job, but they need to do it in a way that will

be sensitive to the concerns and needs of the people. They need to

work in cooperation with the State of North Carolina and the other

States of this Union.

If you are confirmed, I hope you will be sensitive to some of these

problems.

Other than your managerial experience as a public administrator

in colleges, what other managerial experiences have you had?

Dr. SPIRO. I have spent my entire professional life in higher education and for the last 15 years have been president, and before that, for

4 years was the dean, of a university. And corollary to this, I have had

a parallel career in the Reserves and have had a great deal of training

and some experience in managerial roles in the Reserves.

Senator MORGAN. Of course, we respect very highly the role higher

education plays, even there it is a little different in the business world.

You come highly recommended, especially since you were born in

North Carolina and attended the University of North Carolina. I did

want to express these concerns to you, and I may have some other questions to which I would like some answers for the record.

Dr. SPIRO. Thank you,sir.

Senator MORGAN. Thank you, Senator Exon.

Senator ExoN. Senator Warner?

Senator WARNER. On behalf of my colleague, Senator Thurmond, I

would like to submit to the Chair questions and ask that they be answered by the witnesses in due course.

Senator ExoN. Dr. Spiro, we will furnish you copies of _these and

they will be made part of the record and we would ask you to make a

written response to those questions.

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir. —

Senator WARNER. Dr. Spiro, I would assume you have not had an

opportunity to begin to study the readiness situation in the Department of the Army. Would that be correct?

Dr. SPIRO. Not in depth such as I hope to do. I am somewhat acquainted with the issues.

Senator WARNER. I would hope that you would make that one of

your highest priorities. As you may know, the Senate would like to
11

consider in the very near future proposals by which compensation

will be augmented for active chit): personnel.

I hope, if your confirmation is approved by the U.S. Senate that

you will work with me

'

and others, in obtaining the facts needed by

Members of the Senate to pass judgment on these questions.

Dr. SPIRO. Thank you very much, Senator.

Senator EXON. Are there any further questions?

Senator MORGAN. I have no further questions.

Senator ExoN. If not, thank you very much, Dr. Spiro. We will excuse you at this time.

Dr. SPIRO. Yes, sir.

Senator ExoN. Before we go to our next witness, I would like to lay

on the table several routine nominations in the military that the committee would like to consider today. As far as we know, there are no

objections to any of these. I will lay that matter on the table, and we

will take that up before we adjourn.

Senator WARNER. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy, while I am

present, to move these nominations at this time.

Senator MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that we look at them. I

have just received it and I would like to take a look at the list. I have

noticed that the first one is Reserve, the next one is Air National Guard

and there may not be any questions, but I would like to look at the

general officers.

Senator ExoN. Without question.

Senator WARNER. For the record, would you have counsel state how

long these nominations have been pending before the committee?

Mr. ROBERTS. For some time.

Senator WARNER. Would you state for how long?

Mr. ROBERTS. At least 7 days.

Senator ExoN. The Chair will second the nomination that was made,

so it is duly and properly before us and we will consider them at a later

time this morning as we see fit.

Our second nominee this morning is Mr. Robert J. Murray who has

been nominated for the position of Under Secretary of the Navy. Mr.

Murray has a long and distinguished career in the Department of Defense, since first joining the Office of the Secretary in 1961 under Secretary McNamara. He served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs from 1975 to 1977 and since

1978 has been Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International

Security Affairs, specializing in the Near East and South Asia region.

He served on active duty with the Marine Corps earlier in his career,

and thus brings a great variety of experience in national security issues to this new job.

Gentleman, without objection, I would like to insert his nomination

reference and report in the record and also his biographical information.

[The nomination reference and report and biographical sketch

follow:]

NOMINATION REFERENCE AND REPORT

AS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION,

SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES,

January 22, 1980.

Ordered, That the following nomination be referred to the Committee on Armed Services:
12

Robert J. Murray, of Virginia, to be Under Secretary of the Navy, vice R. James

Woolsey, resigned.

, 1980.

Reported by Mr. with the recommendation that the nomination be

confirmed, subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear

and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF ROBERT J. MURRAY

Mr. Robert J. Murray was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense

(International Security Affairs) on March 11,1978.

Mr. Murray previously served in ISA as Deputy Director, Near East and South

Asia Region, and as a member of the Policy Planning Staff, from 1963 to 1969.

He was the Political-Military Attache at the American Embassy in London from

1969-1972.

Mr. Murray served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower

and Reserve Affairs from 1975 to 1977, and as Assistant to the Secretary and

Deputy Secretary of Defense from 1973 to 1975. Mr. Murray first joined the

Office of the Secretary of Defense in 1961 under Defense Secretary Robert

McNamara.

He is the recipient of two Distinguished Service Awards and a Meritorious

Service Award. He is a Fellow, National Institute of Public Affairs and Member,

International Institute for Strategic Studies, London.

Mr. Murray is a graduate of Suffolk College and Harvard University. His

military service was with the U.S. Marine Corps.

He is married to the former Betty Evans. They have two daughters, Susan and

Victoria.

Senator EXON. We welcome you here this morning, Mr. Murray.

First, a standard question. I understand from the staff that you

have complied with the committee practice concerning avoidance of

any possible conflicts of interest. Is that correct?

STATEMENT OF ROBERT J. MURRAY

Mr. MURRAY. Yes; that is so, Mr. Chairman.

Senator EXON. The Democratic Caucus of the Senate has adopted

a policy with respect to every nomination which requires that each

nominee be asked the following question. I ask that of you now.

Do we have your commitment to respond to requests to appear and

testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate?

Mr. MURRAY. With great pleasure you do, Senator.

Senator EXON. Thank you.

I would yield to my colleagues for questions at this time. Senator

Morgan?

Senator WARNER. Mr. Chairman, if I might make a statement on

behalf of the nominee 

Senator EXON. Senator Warner, I did not see you move down to

that end of the table.

Senator WARNER. I recall very vividly 11 years ago I sat in the

very chair that the nominee now occupies and my colleague-and dear

friend, Senator Byrd of Virginia, although of a different political

affiliation, very thoughtfully rose from his seat and came and sat next

to me, since I was his constituent, as Mr. Murray is my' Con_stituent.

I appear not only as Mr. Murray's Senator but as a friend and professional colleague of many years. We have been acquainted, I think,

almost throughout a period of 11 years since I first went to the Department of Defense, and I know him to be a man of extraordinary knowledge and background which will enable him to fulfill the duties of his

office, admirably in my judgment.
13

He was known, however, in the Department of Defense as one of

the sternest critics of the services and I anticipate that he will take

that same enthusiasm now and turn it into the reverse so that he can

represent the Department of Navy and fend off the members of the

Office of the Secretary of Defense and see that the Department meets

its needs.

He has given me that assurance, Mr. Chairman, and therefore I

am happy to give my unequivocal endorsement to this candidate.

Senator EXON. Thank you, Senator Warner. It has been the Chair's

observations in several hearings of this type that either you or Senator Byrd has sat next to an individual and said they were constituents

of yours. The Chair wonders if everyone who works for the Department of Defense is from Virginia ?

I suspect that that is not the case, but certainly many of the key

people are. If we could get into the questions, I appreciate very much

your fine statement, Senator Warner.

Mr. Murray, I had an opportunity to visit with you earlier this

week. I was very much impressed with your background.

I think we can open the questioning based on any statement that

you care to make to the committee and I suspect that we are particularly concerned about our difficulties in the Indian Ocean area now

and certainly your background and expertise should be helpful to

the Department as you assume these new duties.

With that implied question, would you care to make any opening

statement and generally, if you could, give us some suggestions along

the areas that I have indicated.

Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir. Thank you.

First, I would like to thank you for hearing me this morning. I

know you have a very busy schedule as the Defense budget comes before you. I thank particularly Senator Warner for his kind opening

remarks and assure him that I believe that Murphy's law applies, that

where you stand depends on where you sit, and now I am fully prepared to defend the Navy as a vigorous advocate of the Navy and the

Marine Corps with OSD.

I do not have a written statement, Mr. Chairman, but I would like

to say also, in answer to Senator Stennis' observation earlier, that

service for the Navy I see is of the highest order. It is something that

I consider a great opportunity, particularly in this moment of history.

I think the 1980's will be a Navy and Marine Corps decade. I think

the Indian Ocean, to which you so clearly alluded, is indeed the most

recent example of the importance of the Navy and the Marine Corps

to American national security, and I think that we have seen there

the very clear necessity of the naval deployments and the flexibility of

that deployment to operate in an area that is politically very tense

and unstable and in which we have some very substantial national

interests.

So I am delighted, Mr. Chairman, to have the opportunity to bring

to the Navy my own experiences in that difficult part of the world and

help make a contribution to the Navy and to some of the tough decisions I see in the Navy over the next couple of years.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ExoN. Thank you very much, Mr. Murray. We will just

go to general questions now.

59-460 0 - 80
14

I call on Senator Morgan.

Senator MORGAN. Mr. Murray, you have a very distinguished career in the Defense Department. I noticed that you received a number of awards. Have you been involved at any time in your life in the private

sector?

Mr. MURRAY. Not very extensively, sir. Just as a young man work- ing part time in businesses, while I was going to school, mostly.

Senator MORGAN. Has all of your public career after you graduated

from school been involved in the Defense Department?

Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir, except for the years off back to the university

and the year that my wife and I took leave from the Government to do volunteer work for the church.

Senator MORGAN. As Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, what have been your responsibilities?

Mr. MURRAY. The main responsibility, sir, has been for defense policy toward the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia, from

Morocco in the west to India in the east; and to be principal adviser

to the Secretary of Defense on those matters.

Senator MORGAN. Were you a member of the policy and planning

staff earlier from 1963 to 1969 ?—

Mr. MURRAY. Yes, sir, I had a number of jobs during that period,

one of which was as a member of the policy planning staff during which time I dealt mainly with nuclear policy issues that were before the Department in the mid-1960's.

Senator MORGAN. What is your feeling with regard to the policy

as it relates to Navy ships?

Mr. MURRAY. I think if you mean by that the strategic forces, sir,

I think that it is quite clear that naval ships, naval submarines are the most invulnerable part of the American deterrent force. And that the difficulties that are arising with regard to the ICBM force

are not applicable now, for technological reasons if no other, to the naval forces and that they are absolutely crucial to the deterrent capacity of the United States.

Senator MORGAN. What is your feeling with regard to the nuclear carriers?

Mr. MURRAY. I am a supporter of carrier forces, Senator. I think that the carrier in the Indian Ocean, if I may come to that, is another example of the importance of carrier forces. I feel strongly about carriers.

I am not sufficiently well-informed of the merits of nuclear versus conventional power to venture a judgment now, but it is something obviously that I shall have a very keen interest in.

Senator MORGAN. Have you had any experience at all with acquisi- tion and procurement in the Navy in any of the Defense positions that you have held?

Mr. MURRAY. No, sir, I have not.

Senator MORGAN. There has been an awful lot said publicly about the position of our Navy. How do you characterize the strength of our

Navy as compared to the Navy in the Soviet Union ?" _

Mr. MURRAY. I think there is no question in my mind that the U.S.

Navy is the strongest Navy in the world. I think that we have a dif- ferent mission from the mission of the Soviet Navy—that is, we
15

depend much more on the seas and long lines of communications, and

the areas of our vital interest are quite far-flung and therefore we

must travel quite a ways to assure the safety of those areas.

That is not so in the case of the Soviet Union. Also, I think in the

case of the Soviet Union they are proceeding from basically different

premises than does the United States. Therefore, I think, Senator, we

need a different kind of Navy.

I think we have many problems in the Navy. I think one of those

problems is the growth of the Soviet Navy and the growth of the capabilities of the Soviet Navy. I think also some of the problems of obsolescence in the ships, the need to maintain high readiness, the strains on

equipment and people from long deployments. Again, the Indian

Ocean example is a perfect one.

I think those are difficult decisions that are going to cost us some

considerable amounts of money over the next 4 or 5 years and they are

going to be hard to face.

Senator MORGAN. We will come back to the Indian Ocean in a minute.

How would you characterize the strength of our Navy today compared

to what it was 4 years ago?

Mr. MURPHY. I am not sure I can make a very good judgment about

the last 4 years as such. I think what we have done in the last decade is

to trade off numbers for quality in the Navy. I think that that has provided some strengths to the force. You cannot keep operating—except

at great cost—very old ships.

But I think it also has reduced the number substantially. A Navy

that has gone from 1,000 to less than 500 ships is a Navy that has

greatly shrunk in opportunities for deployments and the deployments

themselves become more strained. We are spread very thinly now in

our deployments, and I think numbers are important and we need to

work very hard to get the size of the Navy at a sufficient level to support significant overseas deployments.

I think that is going to be something, Senator, that I want to spend

some time on.

Senator MORGAN. Are you saying in your judgment that it is the

improvement in quality not the decrease in quantity in the last few

years?

Mr. MURPHY. I am saying that you have to do both. I am not sufficiently knowledgeable about the Navy at the moment to make a fine

judgment that the quality has not been good. I think the quality of the

Navy has been exceedingly high. In a number of most important areas,

we have maintained very high quality. That has given us a naval edge

over the Soviet Union in the way that the quality of our airplanes has

given us an edge on the Air Force side.

I think, however, that we have been in a position of shrinking numbers and you cannot keep shrinking numbers. You have to make sure

that you have an adequate balance of forces to meet the circumstances

we have in the world, like the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf area.

So that were it necessary to do, say, another Cuban blockade today—

as I recollect the numbers, something like 200 ships were involved in

the Cuban blockade in 1962—I may have the wrong number I think

that is about right—this would be a much greater percentage of today's

force than it was in 1962, when we had a force of over 1,000 ships.
16

So doing new things today presents a greater strain when you have

a smaller number of ships.

Senator MORGAN. I guess it would be argumentative to ask whether

you think we can improve the quality referred to—whether you need

200 ships?

I will not press that.

Someone in the Navy has said that they were concerned about your

attention to midlevel personnel, petty officers, and so forth. They

would be willing to trade some hardware for some concessions to be

able to retain these people.

What is the problem?

Mr. MURRAY. I am not personally familiar with the problem in detail

yet, Senator. I think clearly, from my conversations with people iji

the Navy Department, they have had serious competition from private

industry for the senior skilled people in the 8- to 12-year service

category, people that are very difficult to train. It takes a lot of time,

a lot of money.

If service to them is not attractive for reasons of family or hardship

or greater opportunity elsewhere, if they choose to leave the Navy,

that is a great hardship on the Navy, particularly on a Navy where

quality is important and technology is high and therefore the demands

for skilled people are great.

So we have to work very hard to retain those people in the Navy. I

cannot speak to the trade-off of hardware for people. Obviously if we

do not have those kinds of skilled people, we are going to be in deep

trouble. Ships will not sail. The Navy cannot operate that way.

Senator MORGAN. It has been said to me by some high-ranking, or

relatively high-ranking, enlisted personnel as well as officer personnel,

that the question of retention is not so much of benefits and salaries as

it is of the quality of the men that they have working for them.

Do you have any information or comment on this allegation?

Mr. MURRAY. I have not heard that, Senator, but I intend to spend

some time talking with enlisted men in the Navy and the Marine Corps

and to come to a view about it and make some recommendations, if

there are ways we can do something about that.

Senator MORGAN. All right, sir.

Thank you, Senator Exon.

Senator ExoN. Senator Morgan.

Senator Jepsen ?

Senator JEPSEN. I do not 'have anything. If I had anything other

than something complimentary, which I do not—I visited with him

the other day and I have never faced him on this side of the table. I

was very impressed and I wish him Godspeed.

We have all got ta big job ahead of us now that we are getting the

facts finally, on the table, and the American public is now going to be,

I hope informed factually of just what our situation, our military

capacitY is.

Then we can all go 'about our business.

As someone admonished me the other day, we have to Shut up and

go to work. We have some serious problems before us.

But once the American public is given the facts, they will do anything that is needed to support. We will have our consensus. We need
17

to show and exercise a little leadership and be honest with them and

tell them where we are.

Mr. MURRAY. I believe that is right, Senator, the way the American

people react. I will do my best to make a contribution to the information.

Senator JEPSEN. I believe that.

Senator ExoN. Thank you, Senator Jepsen.

One final question I have, Mr. Murray. Most of the questions that I

wanted to ask you have been covered in the general questioning.

I think it is generally agreed that we are going to have to build

more Navy ships in the future to meet our needs. From your background and experience in this area, do you think we should do more in

the future, or maybe the question would be better phrased, how well do

you think we are equipped today with the facilities and companies

that can build the ever-increasing Navy which most of us think is

necessary?

How do we rate in the capacity to do what we want to do in the foreseeable future?

Mr. MURRAY. Mr. Chairman, I am not familiar in detail with our

shipyards. I am going to become familiar. The Secretary of the Navy

is much more familiar than I with these, so I am sure that he will be

able to give me very good advice and direction.

I am confident that, as Senator Jepsen says, if you tell the American people what we need to do, and you provide the leadership, then

we can do it. I know that we can build ships. There is no problem in

our building ships.

• In one sense, I think it is very important that we understand what

our capacities are, understand what the efficiencies of the yards are,

and to build our ships with the least possible cost to the Government,

and I think we can do that, Senator.

Senator ExoN. Thank you, Mr. Murray.

Are there any further questions?

Senator Morgan?

Senator MORGAN. With regard to shipbuilding, may I ask another

question?

Mr. Murray, are you familiar with the claims of the various shipyards against the Navy that we finally resolved last year?

Mr. MURRAY. I am certainly familiar with the problems in general

terms. I know Secretary Hidalgo worked very hard with the Congress

to resolve those claims.

I am not familiar with the particular details that are concerned.

Senator MORGAN. Mr. Murray, those claims were resolved. While

I voted for them, I do not think the resolution was altogether satisfactory because I am not sure that we corrected the ills that brought

them about.

The chairman has asked about our shipbuilding program. I am

concerned about it. I am concerned about the management of our

shipbuilding program.

I assume it would be also one of your concerns as Under Secretary

of the Navy.

Mr. MURRAY. Yes, indeed, sir.
18

Senator MORGAN. Thank you.

Senator ExoN. Mr. Murray, we appreciate very much your coining

and responding to our questions, and, with that, you are excused.

Mr. MURRAY. Thank you very much, Senator.

Senator ExoN. Thank you.

Our final nominee this morning is Mr. Joseph C. Zengerle III, who

has been selected for the position of Assistant Secretary of the Air

Force for Manpower, Reserve Affairs and Installations.

Mr. Zengerle is a graduate of Michigan Law School and is, at

present, a practicing lawyer here in Washington. He has served as a

law clerk for Judge McGowan of the court of appeals in Washington

and for Chief Justice Burger on the Supreme Court.

During his military service in the Army, Mr. Zengerle was an

Infantry Company Commander in Germany and also served in

Vietnam.

Gentlemen, without objection, I would like to insert his nomination reference and report in the record and also his biographical

information.

[The nomination reference and report and biographical sketch

follow:]

NOMINATION REFERENCE AND REPORT

As IN EXECUTIVE SESSION,

SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES,

December 20, 1979.

Ordered, That the following nomination be referred to the Committee on

Armed Services:

Joseph Charles Zengerle III, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant

Secretary of the Air Force, vice Antonia Handler Chayes, elevated.

, 1980.

Reported by Mr. , with the recommendation that the nomination

be confirmed, subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to

appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF MR. JOSEPH C. ZENGERLE III

PERSONAL

Born: August 16, 1942; Jamaica, New York; address: Washington, D.C. ; bar

membership: District of Columbia (all local and federal courts).

LEGAL

1974 to present: Associate, Shea & Gardner, Washington, D.C. ; 1973-74: Law

Clerk, Chief Justice Warren Burger, U.S. Supreme Court; 1972-73: Law Clerk,

Judge Carl McGowan, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit;

1972: Associate, Arnold & Porter, Washington, D.C.

MILITARY

1969: Office, Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Department of the Army,

Pentagon; 1968: Special Assistant, U.S. Commander, Vietnam; Unit Commander,

I Corps; 1967: American Chief, Allied Intelligence Center, Nuremberg, Germany;

1964-66: Infantry Company Commander and Battalion Adjutant, Munich and

Berlin, Germany; 1964: Airborne and Ranger Schools, Fort Beinaing, Georgia.

POLITICAL

January, 1976 to end: President Carter's Washington Finance Committee;

January, 1972 to end: Senator Muskies Domestic Task Force.
19

EDUCATION

Law School: University of Michigan (J.D. magna cum laude 1971) ; Note and Comment Editor, Michigan Law Review; Order of the Coif; undergraduate: U.S. Military Academy (B.S. 1964) ; high school: Pitman, New Jersey (1956-60).

Senator ExoN. Mr. Zengerle, I understand from the staff that you have complied with the committee practices concerning avoidance of

any possible conflicts of interest.

Is this correct?

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH C. ZENGERLE III

Mr. ZENGERLE. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ExoN. Can we have your commitment to respond to requests

to appear and testimony before any duly constituted committee of the

U.S. Senate?

Mr. ZENGERLE. You have that commitment, Senator, and I would also add that I would be glad to respond to individual inquiries from

any members of this committee.

Senator ExoN. I have just been handed a note. I am pleased to say that Mr. Zengerle's wife and son are in attendance today, and we cer- tainly welcome your family as well.

With that, I would just ask you to make any opening statement on

behalf of your nomination that you care to make at this time and will

throw it open to general questions.

Mr. ZENGERLE. Let me respond first by saying that I appreciate very

much your sensitivity to my family's being present, Mr. Chairman.

My wife Lynda, my son Jason and my son Tucker, who is at home

now, are central to my life and I am very glad that they were recognized this morning.

Chairman Stennis earlier said that the committee often asked people why they undertake responsibilities of this sort. My response to

that would be to describe a bit of my activities in my professional life.

Half of my professional life has been devoted to military service in

one form or another and half in the legal profession. But during the

latter part of my legal career, I became preoccupied in a very substantial way with the concern of our Nation's veterans of the Vietnam

War. That concern was bottomed on my belief that those who serve

their country in uniform, especially in time of war, fulfill the highest

duty of citizenship.

When people undertake those obligations to serve on behalf of their

country's national interest, I believe that that service creates on the

part of the Nation an obligation at the minimum that those persons

who so served shall not be diminished by their service.

I think that any other treatment of those who serve, especially in

time of war, debases the character of the state which is defined, in part,

by the value it places upon fulfilling the requirements of citizenship.

I also believe that any loss obligation upon the state for those.who

serve have a negative impact on the manpower needs of the military

establishment and so, when I was asked to undertake the responsibility

of Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, whose principal statutory

obligation is manpower, I felt that it would be a natural continuation

of my commitment in the private sector to work on behalf of Vietnam

veterans.
20

I have, over the past several weeks been seeking to learn more and

more about Air Force manpower problems, in particular, and I have

traveled around to some of our bases and I have seen some of our

Air Force personnel and I am reaffirmed in my commitment to serve

on behalf of those who dedicate their lives in the profession of arms

and particularly those in the Air Force.

I am persuaded by my travels and by my early education that we

have an excellent, highly capable and highly dedicated force, and I

am proud to serve on their behalf and in this administration at this

critical time when our country must contend with the Soviet Union

in Afghanistan and American hostages in Iran.

Senator ExoN. Thank you very much, Mr. Zengerle. The Air Force

has been the service which has had the least difficulty, certainly with

regard to the All-Volunteer Force. Do you have any preconceived notions as you are about to assume your new duties as to the success

or failure of the All-Volunteer Force and, to follow up, I would ask

you the question that I asked earlier: What is your personal view

with regard to registration of both men and women and if, at a later

time, the drafting of both men and women?

Mr. ZENGERLE. To respond to your question, Mr. Chairman, regarding the All-Volunteer Force, I have no preconceived notions. I have,

in my attempts to learn about the Air Force manpower situation,

become acquainted with the status of Air Force manpower needs.

And even though, at the end of fiscal year 1979, there was a minimal

shortfall in recruitment in the Air Force-.---around 1,300 or 1,400 personnel—at the same time, the Air Force is doing very well under the

All-Volunteer Force.

I cannot say that is the same for the other services but at the present time, the Air Force manpower needs in terms of recruitment are

being satisfied by the All-Volunteer Force.

There are other problems the Air Force faces, however, that have

emerged in my mind as significant. They are retention problems, and

those retention problems are centered around rated personnel in the

Air Force—that is to say, pilots and navigators.

That is a serious problem that I would like, if the Senate and the

committee here agree, to devote a substantial amount of attention to.

To move to your next question on the issue of registration, I wholeheartedly support the President's decision to commence registration.

I think that revitalization of the Selective Service System is a very

important step at this time. I think it serves to enhance the readiness

of our military forces in a mobilization sense. I think it will increase

the perceptions of all Americans about the concerns that they should

rightly have about our national security and our posture in pusentday circumstances. Finally, I think that registration will serve to

enhance the viability of our Active Force.

Regarding the registration of women as well as men, I believe that

it would be appropriate for the President, if he should so decide, to

register women as well as men. I think there would be serious constitutional questions were the decision made not to register women as well

as men. As I understand it, the Air Force has provided this committee

with its position on this question.

I believe also that women are no less patriotic than men and, to some

degree, no less -hardy. I went to law school with my wife Lynda and
21

she sat beside me, and I can attest not only to her skill as a lawyer,

but to her stamina in living under the rigors of law school demands,

especially with me.

Finally, with regard to the draft, I think that any views about the

draft that I might have would be premature at this time because, so

far as the Air Force in concerned, we see no need to move to peacetime

induction, but were we to, I think some of the same problems regarding exclusion of women from the draft would be present.

As the chairman and members of this committee know, there are

presently certain statutory restrictions that prevent women Air Force

personnel from serving in certain combat-related positions. I do believe that those statutory restrictions, as the Department has stated to

this committee, should be removed so that the service Secretaries,

particularly the Secretary of the Air Force, can exercise discretion

as to how best to use all the personnel they have.

Senator ExoN. One final question. This might be a little unfair to

ask you but I would just like to get your perception of this.

We know, as I said earlier, that the Air Force has been the most

successful all-volunteer service. Are you convinced, from your knowledge, that not only is the Air Force generally meeting their goal as to

numbers

'

but what about the quality of those numbers? Do you feel

that the Air Force generally has had the right quality of individuals

coming in to meet their various needs?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I am impressed with the quality of the men and

women serving in our Air Force today. I think under the All-Volunteer Force, the Air Force has recruited high-quality individuals, and

I think that it will continue to do so.

The Air Force offers opportunities to the young men and women in

this country with regard to technological and other responsibilities

which will allow us in the future, I believe, to continue to maintain

that high quality.

I would repeat my concern that, as I begin to learn more about the

status of manpower matters in the Air Force, I become increasingly

concerned about retention of those high-quality personnel, particularly in midcareer science and technology positions, and pilots and

navigators.

Senator ExoN. Thank you.

I will yield to Senator Morgan at this time for questions.

Senator MORGAN. Mr. Zengerle, where is your legal residence?

Mr. ZENGERLE. My legal residence is in Washington, D.C., Senator.

Senator MORGAN. How long has that been?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I have been in the Washington, D.C., area for approximately 8 years. I have lived in Washington, D.C. for over 3

years.

Senator MORGAN. Are you a member or an associate of the law firm

of Shea and Gardner?

Mr. ZENGERLE. That is correct.

Senator MORGAN. Have there been any political appointments out

of that office since President Carter came into office?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes there have been.

Senator MORGAN. Who were they?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Mr. Jim Woolsey, R. James Woolsey.

Senator MORGAN. How do you spell his last name?
22

Mr. ZENGERLE. W-o-o-l-s-e-y.

Senator MORGAN. To what position?

Mr. ZENGERLE. He was a former Under Secretary of the Navy.

Senator MORGAN. You say former. Did he serve under President

Carter?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes; he did, Mr. Robert Murray, who just testified,

will be succeeding Mr. Woolsey.

Senator MORGAN. Were there others?

Mr. ZENGERLE. To my knowledge, no.

Senator MORGAN. Will he be going back to that law firm?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes, he will.

Senator MORGAN. At one time you were associated with Arnold

and Porter. To your knowledge, have there been any political appointments out of the members of the staff of that office?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I have continuing friendships with those at Arnold

and Porter, but I have no specific knowledge about appointments to

this administration.

Senator MORGAN. You spoke about the Vietnam veterans. What

areas of concern do you now have that we should do for these veterans

that we are not now doing?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Principally speaking, I think over the past 5 years

the attitudes of the American people have been directed toward reaction to the war in Vietnam and it has made it difficult for them to

separate those who served their country during the war from the

policies that many Americans felt troubled by.

I believe that we are now leaving that period of time when our preoccupation was about the war policy, and the sensitivity of all Americans toward those who served in our last war has substantially increased in the last year or two.

There have clearly been problems suffered by veterans today in some

numbers that warrant the attention of the Veterans' Administration

particularly. For example, last year, a psychological readjustment

counseling program was authorized by the Congress, and outreach programs are being undertaken by the Veterans Administration to deal

with some of the problems suffered by our Vietnam veterans.

In addition, there are educational problems that many of them have

because of the fact that the GI bill has not been adequate in some respects. There is legislation presently pending to deal with that.

In addition, there are certain health-care problems apart. from those

emotional problems that the outreach program I just referred to are

designed to address. There is also legislation now pending to deal with

that problem.

Senator MORGAN. What are the areas that Congress should address?

You said we did address the psychological counseling problem. Have

we not provided the Vietnam veterans with full GI bill benefits that

we provide to all other veterans? • -.

Mr. ZENGERLE. One of the specific areas of concern, Senator Morgan,

has been that there has been no tuition equalizer between different

States. That is to say, some States provide for a very low tuition rate

for residents of that State and some States provide for a very high

tuition rate.
23

I think, for example, if you will examine the difference in tuition

rates between New York and California, you will find it to be quite

substantial.

Senator MORGAN. Was there any such differential for Korean veterans or World War II veterans?

Mr. ZENGERLE. As I understand it, the GI bill in those times paid for

tuition and books where as now the GI bill provides the veterans a flat

sum, so there is not an opportunity to offset this differential.

Senator MORGAN. Are adequate health-care facilities provided?

I am asking because this is the thing that we read about. I think I

have voted for most of the veterans programs. I am not sure just what

else to do.

Would you tell us what else the Congress should do for the health

care of the Vietnam veterans?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I think, although I do not hold myself out to be as

knowledgeable about these matters as others who have worked on the

legislation, as the organizations that stand behind them and have

helped draft this legislation, that one of the aspects troubling veterans

has been their reluctance to seek help.

Many of the veterans who have returned from the war have receded into society and have not actively sought the support of the

institutions available to them. So, for example, the hope would be

that as the Veterans' Administration continues in its outreach program, they would reach the veterans who have not sought the help

of their Government and bring them in and cause them to enhance

their trust of governmental institutions and to bring them into a

relationship with their Government in a more effective way in the

future.

I might add that, although we now focus on the problems of the

Vietnam veterans in some substantial part, at the same time, it is my

view that Vietnam veterans, veterans of military service generally,

veterans of all wars, are a critical resource for the United States.

With respect, for example, to the Air Force, about 25 percent of

our officer and enlisted personnel served in Vietnam and I consider

that to be a strength that the Nation can confidently rely on, and I

think that is true, too, in the civilian sector.

Senator MORGAN. I am a veteran of Korea and a veteran of World

War II, and I am trying to find where we have fallen short. What

do you think we can do, if we have fallen short in caring for our

veterans?

I think we should rectify it. It concerns me when you talk about it.

It leaves the impression that somehow or another we have treated the

Vietnam veterans unfairly. I am not quite sure I understand where

you think we have treated them unfairly.

You say we did go into the psychological outreach program. You

mentioned some other health matters. I am not able to grasp just what

it is you think the Congress should do.

Mr. ZENGERLE. I would prefer to defer those questions to the organizations and individuals that are taking the initiative now, to include the caucus of Vietnam-era veterans in the Congress who are

trying to address those problems. I can tell you that I have an interest
24

in continuing to inform our Government about my views on the subject

and I have spoken to Max Cleland, the VA Administrator, about

these matters. Max and I have had, in fact, several meetings and

conversations.

I hope, in the future, we will continue our discussion on the subjects

that concern you, Senator.

Senator MORGAN. If you talk to Mr. Cleland and express your views,

would you also give me more specifically, in writing later on, some

of the things you are concerned about and what we can do and should

do and how we can reach these people if we have not reached them.

You are also going to be concerned with other than veterans, are

you not?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes.

Senator MORGAN. This is a part of the Veterans' Administration?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes.

Senator MORGAN. What role do you think the Reserves should play

in the Air Force?

Mr. ZENGERLE. The Air Force, so far as I now understand it, has

an extremely effective program for the Reserve Forces. The Air Force

has a total force policy. That total force policy is done which, in using

a proper mix of the Air Reserve and the Air Guard, integrates them

fully into the operation of the Active Air Force.

The Reserve Forces, for example, discharge a substantial part of

our military airlift responsibilities. I would hope this policy Would

not only be continued, but enhanced, as we proceed.

Senator MORGAN. Do you think that the nianpower in the Air Force

is sufficient at the present time?

Mr. ZENGERLE. In what sense, Senator?

Senator MORGAN. Total numbers, total numbers.

Mr. ZENGERLE. Total numbers of Reserve Forces?

Senator MORGAN. The entire manpower force of the Air Force. Is it adequate?

Mr. ZENGERLE. At the present time, I think that there is a significant problem regarding filling the spaces that I referred to earlier

in the rated officer areas. The retention of those personnel is critical

to the Air Force and the degree to which they are leaving the service

at midcareer points is of concern to me.

I also believe this problem exists at the midcareer point in time for technical enlisted personnel. The Air Force is there, too, suffering

difficulties.

Senator MORGAN. Do you have any opinions as to what we can do

to improve retention of these groups?

Mr. ZENGERLE. So far as I understand the pattern of the past several years, there has been a substantial reduction in the spending

power of compensation provided to our military personnel-.

The Air Force supported an OSD compensation package to the

Office of Management and Budget this year but in the competition

for other funding, the package was not fully funded: I think in the

area of pay and compensation there is room forimproving the retention problems that the Air Force suffers today.

Senator MORGAN. You think part of the problem is just pay?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I think that is correct. The pay caps that Air Force

people have had to live with over the past several years in addition
2.5

to the high rate of inflation have caused their real spending power,

comparatively, to be reduced.

I think that has an adverse effect on retention.

Senator MORGAN. My time is up.

Let me just say that I am concerned about the high percentage of

personnel costs of our total military budget. How high can we go and

still acquire the hardware, the necessary hardware? These are some

questions that we will want to address later.

Thank you.

Senator ExoN. Thank you, Senator.

Before I recognize Senator Jepsen, two matters. Senator Long

wishes to insert in the record a statement in support of Mr. Zengerle's

nomination. Without objection, it will be inserted.

[The prepared statement of Senator Russell B. Long follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT BY SENATOR RUSSELL B. LONG

I appreciate this opportunity to make a statement on behalf of Mr. Joseph C.

Zengerle, III. I have known Joe Zengerle personally for a number of years. Even

before this nomination to the office of Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, I felt

that his experience and outlook have prepared him for public service. With the

Committee's permission, I would like to briefly highlight Joe Zengerle's career.

Mr. Zengerle has been active in leading the fight for fair treatment of Vietnam veterans for the last two years, and in that connection co-founded a unique

national membership organization, the Vietnam Veterans of America. His numerous articles and nationwide television and radio appearances have helped

create public awareness of and consequent improvement in the status of all veterans of the Vietnam era.

Born August 16, 1942, in Jamaica, New York, Mr. Zengerle attended elementary

and high schools in Pitman, New Jersey. Upon graduating from the U.S. Military

Academy in 1964, Mr. Zengerle was commissioned as an infantry officer and

trained at the U.S. Army's Airborne and Ranger Schools at Fort Benning,

Georgia, where he received an award as the outstanding leader of his class.

Mr. Zengerle's military service continued with several assignments in Germany: command of an infantry platoon and company and adjutant of an infantry

battalion in Augsburg and Berlin, and a tour of duty as the American chief of an

allied intelligence organization in Nuremberg.

As a special assistant to the U.S. Commander, Vietnam, in 1968, Mr. Zengerle

was an advisor to General William Westmoreland during the Tet Offensive

and later served in the same capacity for General Creighton Abrams. He completed his Vietnam tour as a unit commander in I Corps.

Mr. Zengerle's last military assignment was with the Office of the Assistant

Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Department of the Army, at the Pentagon in

1969. He is a recipient of the Bronze Star medal.

Married in 1966, Mr. Zengerle and his wife, Lynda, attended law school together

at the University of Michigan, from which they both graduated with honors in

December 1971. In 1972, Mr. Zengerle became associated with the Washington,

D.C. law firm of Arnold & Porter. During this time he served on the Domestic

Task Force of Senator Edmund Muskie's 1972 presidential campaign.

Mr. Zengerle next served as law clerk to the Honorable Carl McGowan, Circuit Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

In the following year, Mr. Zengerle was law clerk to the Honorable Warren

Burger, Chief Justice of the United States. His service in this position occurred

during the term when the Supreme Court decided the case of United States v.

Nixon.

Since 1974, Mr. Zengerle has been associated with Shea & Gardner. In 1976,

Mr. Zengerle helped to form and was Acting Chairman of the Washington

Finance Committee for President Carter's election campaign, and in 1977 converted an occasional involvement on behalf of Vietnam veterans into a fullscale undertaking, pro bono publico.

Mr. Zengerle and his wife, a partner working part-time in the Washington,

D.C. law firm of Leighton, Conklin, Lemov & Jacobs, live in Washington with

their two young sons, Jason and Tucker.
26

In closing, I recommend Joe Zengerle without qualification or hesitancy to

my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee and in the Senate at large.

Senator ExoN. Before we close down—we seem to be getting down

toward the end—others will be recognized for questioning.

There has been a motion made, and duly seconded, before the committee to report out the routine nominations. If there is no objection, I

will ask that that be passed at this time.

Senator WARNER. Mr. Chairman, I think Senator Morgan asked that

there be some further consideration.

Senator MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, these have just been laid before me

this morning, even though they have been here 7 days. I have no objection to the committee's acting on them. I will suggest we hold them

until I can take a closer look at them.

Then of course, if they are reported out, I can deal with it on the floor.

Senator ExoN. As a courtesy to Senator Morgan, we will agree to

that, then.

Senator Jepsen?

Senator WARNER. Could we leave it in the posture that, subject to

any positions that the Senator wishes to take, that they be approved by

the committee and be reported on the floor?

Senator ExoN. Is that satisfactory to you, Senator Morgan?

Senator MORGAN. Yes.

Senator ExoN. I am advised by counsel that that is not the proper

way to do it. We should act, or not act today, to report these , out. I

don't think that it is critical to act upon them.

We are going to have another meeting. We could do this with our

budget meetings later on this week.

Senator JEPSEN. When do we next meet?

Senator ExoN. Thursday.

Without objection, then, we will just hold off and, Senator Warner,

you can have an opportunity to make that recommendation again

and the Chair will rule that the motion that is previously before us

is, therefore, declared null and void.

I recognize Senator Jepsen.

Senator JEPSEN. Mr. Zengerle, I really have no questions of you.

Most that I would have had, and many others, I am sure, will be

asked. We had a good visit with General Blanton in my office the

other day. I want to express to Lynda that we think your husband

is most qualified in addition to being very refreshing in his candor and

his expertise, and Jason, we think your dad is a great guy and we are

looking forward to working with him.

That is all I have. Thank you.

Senator ExoN. Thank you Senator Jepsen.

Senator MORGAN. Could I just ask one question, what defense contractors does your law firm represent, if any?

Mr. ZENGERLE. It may be responsive to your concern, Senator, for

me to say that even if we did represent defense contractors, I can

recollect none at the present time.

Senator MORGAN. Would you furnish for the record any contractors that your law firm may be associated with? -

Mr. ZENGERLE. I will indeed, Senator.

Senator ExoN. Senator Warner?
27

Senator WARNER. Senator, I like what I have seen. I have had an

opportunity to visit with the nominee. I believe that he brings to the

Department of Defense and public service one of the more extraordinary records of achievement, and I think that the American public

should be grateful that this man and wife are willing to make this

sacrifice.

I wish you well. I think you will go far.

If I might just give you a little friendly advice, with a lovely

wife and a young child, do try to get home. There is an effort in the

Pentagon to solve too many problems after 7:30 and very few are resolved. I learned that over 51/2 years.

Do listen to the pleas and work at it. Get home. Particularly with

a young family.

Also with you today is General Blanton and I would heed his

advice with respect to the Department and I would like to have you

put on the record, do you approach your duties, as does Mr. Murray,

that this is the decade of the Air Force. Is that correct?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I am glad you asked a leading question, Senator.

Let me respond precisely as you anticipated, that I think the respon- sibility of the Air Force to project the power of the Defense Estab- lishment suggests that no less than the Navy and perhaps slightly more than the Navy, if I might add, will make it a decade for the Air

Force. Let me add one further note, Senator Warner. We in the Air

Force are aware of your blue-suit background and we would only hope that, as time proceeds, you will not become too blue.

Senator WARNER. A little more discolored, is that right?

I think that the competition between the three military departments is one of the great strengths of the overall Deparment of Defense and that a good strong competitive spirit among, not only the civilian Presidential appointees, but the senior officers contributes to the overall strength of the Armed Forces.

For the record, would you be the first Vietnam veteran to serve as a

Presidential appointee in the Department of Defense?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I do not think it is accurate to say I would be the first Vietnam veteran. I believe, for example, that Mr. Chase, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, is a Presidential

appointee. He was a Marine officer who served in Vietnam.

It may be accurate to say that I would be the first Presidential appointee of my generation who served in combat in Vietnam.

Senator WARNER. I think that your interest in that group of veterans

is to be commended and I hope that you do find time to devote some attention to them.

Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions. This nominee has my

unequivocal support.

Senator ExoN. Thank you.

I was delighted that the Chair has the floor back. I was afraid that

the meeting was going to get out of hand. When attorneys start

asking leading questions and other attorneys respond, we could be here

all day and all day tomorrow.

If not, I wish to thank very much all three of the excellent nominees

who appeared here.

[Questions with answers supplied follow:]
28

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR J. JAMES EXON, ANSWERS SUPPLIED BY

JOSEPH C. ZENGERLE III

Senator ExoN. Mr. Zengerle, the Air Force has been the last service to miss

its recruiting goals under the All Volunteer Force, but finally did so during the

last fiscal year. What problems do you see ahead in the all volunteer environment for the Air Force?

Mr. ZENGERLE. With respect to recruitment, the shortfalls of enlisted accessions in FY 79 in addition to the engineer and physician deficits are indicative

of the increasingly difficult recruiting environment. This situation is further

complicated by alarming retention patterns in our career force which produce

additional recruitment requirements to fill the vacancies caused by the separation of experienced personnel. Also, our recruiters are confronted with a shrinking youth market whose documented propensity to enlist has declined over 50

percent since 1975 and is still declining. I do, however, believe that the Air Force

will be able to meet its recruiting objectives by judicious use of internal Air

Force programs and resources, legislative initiatives and, most importantly, the

dedication and hard work of the Air Force recruiter.

Regardless of whether the means to secure new people for the Air Force is

through volunteers or conscription, however, after the first enlistment the environment has always been and will always be volunteers. As I just mentioned,

we have recently been experiencing declines in our second-term and career reenlistment rates and alarming losses in mid-career officers, particularly in our

rated force. Although there are many interrelated factors that are contributing

to these serious trends, it has become increasingly clear that the adequacy of

military compensation is the pivotal issue. In this regard, I fully support and

believe an urgent need exists to restore the relative pay comparability levels

which existed in 1972 with the beginning of the all-volunteer concept. Recognizing that fiscal constraints may preclude correction of all pay inadequacies in

a single year, I believe at minimum that a long-term plan and commitment for

the required funds to solve these problems over the next several years is needed.

Senator ExoN. Can the Air Force get the quantity and quality it needs without

the draft?

Mr. ZENGERLE. In addition to the observations I just made in response to your

earlier, similar question, I would note that we have initiated a number of recruiting incentives to attract a broader cross-section of young people to the Air

Force. We also plan to continue our efforts to expand the role of women and

reduce our attrition rates. However, there is a limit to the attrition reduction

possible through positive management initiatives without relaxing quality and

discipline standards. I think we are about at that level unless additional resources are provided.

In summary, while the task will not be without difficulty, with adequate resources and good management the Air Force expects to continue to meet its

manpower requirements with volunteers.

Senator ExoN. Mr. Zengerle, the President has now called for registration of

young people in order to improve our readiness capability in the event of

mobilization. As perhaps the only Presidentially-appointed civilian in the Department who served on active duty in Vietnam, what are your feelings about

reinstitution of the draft?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I completely agree with the President's decision regarding registration for the several reasons I have stated. My views about the draft, however, are controlled by the current Air Force manpower situation, which is

marked by serious mid-career retention problems that cannot be cured by resuming induction. Of course, the situation in the other military departments may

differ.

Senator ExoN. Should you come to the view that such a step is necessary

for our security, would you hesitate to recommend it to your superiors in the

Department or to the President?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I would not hesitate to recommend resumption of conscription if such a step became necessary for the security of the natitm.-

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR STROM THURMOND, ANWERS SUPPLIED BY

ROBERT H. SPIRO, JR.

Senator THURMOND. Dr. Spiro, what do you feel you can bring to the position

for which you have been nominated?
29

Dr. SPIRO. First, Senator Thurmond, let me say that I consider it an honor and

a privilege to have been nominated for this position. I bring to this position over

30 years of experience, principally in the academic field. During these 30 years,

I have studied, researched, written, and taught; and for the past 20 years I have

administered—four years as Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Mercer

University and more than 15 years as President of Jacksonville University, an

independent, non-sectarian university. Also, during that time, I have followed a

parallel career in the Naval Reserve, since World War II, retiring from the Reserves in May 1978. I have attempted to maintain a broad perspective through

the years by active interest in professional, community, social, civic, and religious

organizations, and have served in positions of decisionmaking and managerial

responsibility in those organizations, as well as in the University and the Reserve forces. I have had to deal with the problems, though on a much smaller

scale, of recruiting, managing limited resources, and taking innovative actions

through the mother of necessity. I believe I have an understanding of the working mechanisms of our government, and more specifically, of our military services.

I think I have some understanding of the challenges we currently face in trying

to field and maintain a viable force in an all-volunteer environment. I know and

recognize that those challenges are enormous, and require the best from us. I hope

that the experience and background that I bring to this office will complement the

Army leadership. I look forward to the challenge and I intend to be fully devoted

to the responsibilities of the Under Secretary of the Army, and to the well-being

of the United States. •

Senator THURMOND. Mr. Spiro, do you favor a selective service registration

system that enforces registration as was the case the last time registration was

the law?

Dr. SPIRO. I believe that if the registration system is reinstituted, it should be

a fair and equitable system applying to and enforced on all who are required to

register. I have no comment at this time on how that system should be run, for

that is a decision that should be made by the President and the Congress through

the Selective Service System.

Senator THURMOND. What are your views on registration of women?

Dr. SPIRO. I personally favor the registration of all American citizens within

the designated age range. However, I readily acknowledge that the decision to

register women under the military Selective Service Act is a matter of national

policy to be decided by the President and by the Congress. I shall wholeheartedly

support that decision.

Senator THURMOND. What are your views on military unions?

Dr. SPIRO. I do not believe that military unions are necessary or desirable

for the Army or any of our other military services. The basis for my position

is that the Army of the United States occupies a unique position in our society.

Its mission is to provide for the defense of the nation, the protection of our national interests, and the preservation of our freedom of action within the international community. It must discharge that mission primarily by providing

an effective deterrence to aggression and resort to force of arms, when necessary. This basic mission demands of our soldiers a degree of discipline, duty,

responsiveness, and self-sacrifice virtually without parallel in the civilian sector.

Arbitration, collective bargaining, and shared decisionmaking, which are all

common aims of organized labor, have no place in this setting. The responsibility

to represent our soldiers rests with the senior leaders, both uniformed and civilian. Concerned, dedicated, knowledgeable and involved leaders at all levels in the chain of command provide the mechanism through which the needs and

concerns of our service people can be heard and resolved. Each of us privileged

to serve our nation must ensure that we possess and display the compassion,

care, empathy, and sincere concern for our soldiers, so that they will and can depend upon us to train them to meet high standards, assist them when needed, and be their representative and spokesman, both within and outside the military service.

Senator THURMOND. Do you support the total force concept to the point that

you favor direct procurement of military hardware for the Reserves and Guard when equipment needs cannot be met through fallout of old equipment from the active forces?

Dr. SPIRO. I am a strong supporter of the total force concept, having been a

member of the Naval Reserve for many years and thus recognizing the impor- tance of the readiness of our Reserve Component forces. I certainly favor the direct procurement of military hardware whenever possible to meet the needs
30

of our Reserve Component forces. I believe that we should take every opportunity to modernize the reserve forces and make those forces compatible with

the active forces. I think that as a matter of policy we should not turn antiquated equipment over to the Reserve Component forces, but prefer to procure

equipment for those forces, when economically feasible.

In summary, I think that we must use both methods of equipping our Reserve Components. We must transfer equipment from the active forces to the

Reserves, but we must also update our Reserve Component forces with modern

equipment to the extent that is fiscally responsible.

Senator THURMOND. What do you see as the major problems facing :the Army

today?

Dr. SPIRO. Quite obviously, I have not yet had sufficient opportunity to assess

in great detail the problems facing the Army today. I have a general understanding of some of the major challenges that the Army faces, and those challenges, I believe, have a great deal of bearing on how well the Army can perform

its mission now and in the future.

Generally, four areas come into focus at this point. (1) The most immediate

challenge facing the Army is the ability to man the force at the required level.

The Army, as well as every other Service, is facing a difficult recruiting and retaining challenge. This is a problem that I intend to become fully familiar with

and believe I may be peculiarly suited to help resolve. Recruiting and retention

are vitally important problems I can help to solve. (2) I am told that our efforts

in modernization were hampered greatly during the Vietnam era and that we

are currently in the midst of a tremendous modernization program. We must

successfully take these programs through the research and development process,

integrate these new equipments into the Army's force structure, and effectively

train our soldiers to operate them. I see this as no small feat in the next few

years. (3) As we key on modernization, we cannot forget about near-term readiness. I want to focus considerable emphasis on near-term readiness to insure

that we are providing the resources to procure sufficient quantities of equipment

that we already have in the inventory and provide enough operation and maintenance funds for adequate training, maintenance and logistics. I believe that

near-term readiness will be the key to our success or failure in any crisis that

might occur in the next one to five years. (4) I believe that we all share a great

concern about our ability to mobilize. We need to establish an effective system

to effect mobilization in a timely manner. We need to look at our capability for

strategic mobility, that capability to move our troops and equipment from the

continental United States to some troubled spot in the world. The whole mobilization problem needs to be worked on very carefully and needs considerable attention by all levels of leadership in the Department of Defense.

And in meeting all these problems, and in solving them, I strongly believe

that we must scrutinize every expenditure, effect every reasonable economy,

control rigorously manpower resources, and in general exercise financial restraint and responsibility. I have spent my life to date in the private sector,

mainly administering two private universities with limited financial resources.

I pledge to utilize every lesson learned in 20 years of rigorous administration

for the benefit of national defense and the American taxpayers.

Senator THURMOND. What are your views on the All-Volunteer Army?

Dr. SPIRO. First, let me say that I am a supporter of the All-Volunteer Army,

which has been established as national policy by the President and the Congress.

At this point, I believe that the All-Volunteer Army, or in a larger sense, the AllVolunteer Forces concept, is working fairly well. I realize that there are problems, and thus there is criticism from various sectors about the effectiveness of

the All-Volunteer Force. I believe that in a peacetime environment it is incumbent upon all of us to assist in making the All-Volunteer Army work. I understand

that we have some continued hurdles to get over. We would like to increase the

number of high school graduates that we are taking into the Army and are very

desirous of retaining a higher number of middle grade non-commissioned officers.

We are concerned about the effectiveness of our training programs. We are also

concerned about the continuous improvement of our Reserve Component strength.

I think that we must continue to make the All-Volunteer Ariny work by applying

the necessary monetary and non-monetary incentives to enlist the force. We must

provide the type of service environment in terms of leadership and quality of life

to retain our trained professionals. We must promote-a sense of obligation and

community service at all levels throughout the country to increase the commit-
31

ment of our young people to the purposes and the intent of our Reserve Component

forces. We must also use the necessary monetary and non-monetary incentives in

the Reserve Components area to bolster those forces as well.

§enator THURMOND. Would you support the draft if the All-Volunteer Force

results in a30 percent manning from minority races?

Dr. SPIRO. It is my understanding that currently more than 30 percent of the

Army's enlisted force come from minority races. I do not attach any major imporlance to the racial profile of our Service content as a basis for reinstitution of the

draft. I believe that any citizen who qualifies to join our Armed Forces should be

allowed to do so and that opportunity should not be restricted in any way by some

type of racial percentage formula. I have long opposed mechanical quotas, and

do not favor instituting a quota system in seeking to regulate the Army's racial,

ethnic, or religious composition. The important issues are, in my judgment, the

following: intellect, literacy, trainability, loyalty, and dedication to this Nation

and its ideals.

Senator THURMOND. Do you feel our military combat forces should be peopled

with large percentages of the poor and disadvantaged youth of the nation?

Dr. SPIRO. I do not believe that any segment of our society should have to bear

a disproportionate share of the responsibility to defend this Nation. On the other

hand, I believe that anyone who is desirous of serving and is qualified to do so

should be allowed to do so. The Army's recruiting efforts, as in the past, should

continue to be directed to every segment of our society, and that in recruiting (or

drafting, in that eventuality), equity, quality, and patriotism are the important

criteria.

Senator THURMOND. What do you feel are the major equipment needs of

the Army?

Dr. SPIRO. First, I should very candidly state that I am not a military equipment expert at this point. I certainly hope to be able to contribute to the

management process that will successfully get the necessary equipment procured and into the hands of our soldiers. I believe that we have a pressing

need to complete the XM-1 tank development to get this modern, highly capable

tank into the hands of our soldiers. It seems apparent that we currently lag

behind the Soviets in both quantity and quality of our tank fleet. Secondly, our

Infantry Fighting Vehicle will provide a tremendous capability when fielded

and it is a great improvement over the present armored personnel carrier. The

Infantry Fighting Vehicle appears to be a fine piece of equipment that is much

needed by our forces. Thirdly, the Army seems to need a modern, highly capable

attack helicopter. We should proceed with our developments in that area. There

are a number of developments that are currently ongoing to improve the Army's

air defense artillery posture. My understanding is that we have neglected to

keep our air defense developments up to date. We should push ahead with those

programs that will field the Stinger, the Division Air Defense Gun, the Roland,

and the Patriot missile system. I have not been briefed on all the possible

scenarios that might be deployed against us in a European war or otherwise,

but I do have a clear understanding that there is a great need to continue to

improve our intelligence-gathering capability. Those systems that will allow

us to improve our intelligence-gathering capability and also our electronic warfare capability are of considerable importance to the Army and their development should certainly be sustained and improved upon, if necessary.

Lastly, we must provide for adequate command and control of our forces. We

should not spend billions to buy new items of equipment and then not spend

sufficiently to provide the up-to-date command and control mechanisms that

give the linkage between the commander and his forces in the field. We need to

provide to all levels of command those necessary elements of information about

the enemy and our own forces to allow timely and militarily intelligent decisions to win the battle. So, the command and control programs for new communications systems, and the processing and display of information are certainly important developments for the Army.

Senator THURMOND. Is it your view that recent defense budgets were sufficient?

Do you favor higher levels of defense spending?

Dr. SPIRO. Initially, I would have to state that recent defense budget requests

and subsequent approval by the Congress have represented the collective judgment of both the Administration and the Congress. Those 'budgets have been

representative of national priorities as they have been viewed by our .decisionmakers. I have been able to note that the US has been spending less in terms of
32

real growth for national defense than the Soviet Union. I believe we have fallen

behind. It is apparent from the FY 81 budget that we are now on a course to

increase our defense spending and it appears that we will remain on that course

for the foreseeable future. It would be reasonable to maintain a pattern of increased defense spending if we are to modernize the force, honor our commitments in NATO, support our rapid deployment forces, develop an adequate

capability in strategic mobility, and recruit and retain our force.

The answer to the second part of your question is that I do favor higher levels

of defense spending where necessary to meet the commitments of this nation.

At the same time, I know we cannot buy every system proposed, not even every

viable weapons system. I strongly favor a balanced defense posture, developed

with two views in mind: (1) a strong and viable military force, sufficient to

meet and defeat every likely threat, and (2) a balanced defense effort, characterized by efficiency, economy, and fiscal responsibility.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR STROM THURMOND, ANSWERS SUPPLIED BY

ROBERT J. MURRAY

Senator THURMOND. Mr. Murray, what do you feel you can offer in serving in

this capacity in the Navy?

Mr. MURRAY. Senator Thurmond, I bring to this office a determination to help

improve our defense posture, a conviction that the Navy and Marine Corps are

essential to the scrutiny of the country and protection of our national interests,

and over 20 years of military and civilian government experience. I also bring

current knowledge of the Middle East-Indian Ocean region, an area of rapidly

growing importance for our naval and Marine forces. I believe my background

and experience will allow me to make a constructive contribution to the management of the Navy Department.

Senator THURMOND. What are your views on mandatory and enforced registration of our youth?

Mr. MURRAY. I think the AVF has worked for the Navy and Marines, and can

continue to do so in peacetima provided we stem the loss of mid-career officers

and enlisted members. If the AVF proves unsatisfactory at some point, or in the

event of mobilization, we will need a draft. Registration now will enable us to

execute the draft quickly if need be, and as such adds to our wartime readiness

posture. I favor mandatory registration.

Senator THURMOND. Mr. Murray, the Navy is losing skilled personnel and Admiral Hayward has said he would rather have pay raises than more ships. Do you

favor increased pay for skilled personnel who are in short supply in the Navy?

Mr. MURRAY. Yes, Senator. I favor sufficient pay and benefit to retain the needed

number of high quality people in the Armed Forces.

Senator THURMOND. Do you feel the present number of ships in the Navy is

adequate for the Navy to meet its defense commitments?

Mr. MURRAY. I feel the Navy is capable now of meeting its most important defense commitments, but I think it is very thinly stretched. We have moved, in the

past 15 years, from a Navy of over 1000 ships to a Navy of about 500 ships, and

this has clearly restricted our flexibility. I prefer a Navy of larger size.

Senator THURMOND. What size Navy would you favor as opposed to the present force of around 475 ships?

Mr. MURRAY. I believe we must seek a sensible balance between numbers and

capability. Clearly, a very few, however highly capable, ships would not be

adequate to help look after our interests in the world. Conversely, a great many

ships having minimum capabilities would be unlikely to have enough fighting

credibility to function as a deterrent in crises or to survive in a major war. I

favor pursuing the technologies which will yield the largest force of the greatest capability which, I believe, ought to result in a force structure-greater than

475 combatants.

Senator THURMOND. Do you support the concept of large aircraft carriers as a

valid requirement over the next 20 years? _

Mr. MURRAY. Yes. On current plans, 12 deployable large deck aircraft-carriers

will form the nuclei of our battle groups over the next 20 years. That is the

force we will be capable of supporting as the result of what we now have operational or authorized and assuming the carrier service life extensions are funded

as required. The large deck carrier provides the major conventional offensive
33

power in our fleet, and that will remain largely the case throughout the century.

It is important to note that as a result of the investment in cruise missile technology we are close to being able to add offensive power to other types of ships, and in this way we wilt create a force multiplier effect.

Senator THURMOND. Do you favor nuclear power for the larger size Navy

combatant ships?

Mr. MURRAY. Senator, 1 am not yet sufficiently knowledgeable to give you a firm

answer to your question. For some types of ships such as submarines, the capabilities of nuclear power so enhance their performance that the nuclear versions

are clearly superior and are preferred over conventionally powered versions. A

nuclear propelled battle group has an advantage in that it can react quickly to a

crisis, steaming at high speed over great distances to bring large amounts of

force to bear more quickly than conventionally powered forces. But the greater

costs of nuclear ships will probably continue to dictate a judicious mix of nuclear and conventionally powered ships.

Senator THURMOND. Do you support the current 87,000 manning level for the

Naval Reserve or do you feel a higher level would be required?

Mr. MURRAY. Senator, I have not yet had the opportunity to make a judgment on the adequacy of Naval Reserve strength. I certainly am a strong supporter of Reserve forces, and the size and responsibilities of the Naval Reserve

will be a matter to which I give close attention.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR STROM THURMOND, ANSWERS SUPPLIED BY

JOSEPH C. ZENGERLE III

Senator THURMOND. What special abilities do you feel you can bring to the

position to which you have been nominated?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Three aspects of my background give me particular qualifications

for this post. First, I am a West Point graduate with 5 years military service as

an Army officer. That time includes a year in Vietnam during the Tet Offensive

as both a special assistant to the U.S. Commander and as a commander of my own

unit in I Corps, and about a year on the Army Staff in the Pentagon. I believe this

experience enables me to understand the needs of the military in both peace and

war, at headquarters and in the field. Second, my legal training, which includes

two years as a law clerk to judges on a federal appellate court and the U.S. Supreme Court, not only provides me with analytical skills which should prove

helpful in dealing with the complicated questions I will have to address. It also

enables me to understand the legal (including constitutional) dimensions of

issues important to the Air Force, such as registration, the draft and the participation of women therein. Finally, during the most recent years of my legal career

I like to think that I have provided some leadership in securing for Vietnam

veterans the respect, recognition and assistance they deserve for their services

during our last war. This undertaking reflects my personal commitment to the

welfare of all those who serve our country in uniform, and I am grateful for the

opportunity to pursue this commitment as a sub-cabinet officer with policy

responsibilities in this area.

Senator THURMOND. Do you favor a registration program which is enforced and

required by law?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes, I do favor a registration program such as has been proposed by President Carter. I take this position for several reasons. Our readiness

to respond to any military contingency will be enhanced if we have at hand

certain minimum information concerning our national manpower pool. In addition, I believe registration will send an unmistakable signal to our allies and adversaries alike that the United States has both the will and the conviction to

take whatever action is required to deter aggression and protect our national

interests. Moreover, I expect that commencement of registration may serve to

stimulate additional volunteers to join the Air Force. Finally, I believe that registration of our nation's youth must be administered so as to insure that the system

is, and is perceived by all Americans to be, fair and equitable to all those who are

subject to it.

Senator THURMOND. Why did you terminate your military career?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I submitted the resignation of my commission in the spring of

1968, when I was serving in Vietnam. I was then working as a special assistant

to the U.S. Commander in Vietnam, and you may recall that in the immediately
34

preceding four-month period, there occurred: The Tet Offensive; the North

Korean capture of the Pueblo; the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King; President Johnson's refusal to seek re-nomination; the My Lai massacre; and the assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy, all to be followed shortly by the

Democratic National Convention in Chicago. During that period, machine guns

were emplaced on the White House lawn, and ray calls from Saigon to my wife in

Washington were laced with apprehension about the conflagration raging in both

national capitals and our concern for each other's personal safety. I was 25

years old, an Army captain deeply dedicated to public service and overwhelmed

by a sense of powerlessness and sadness. I left the Army to pursue a career in

law because I thought law school to be the best training ground for civil leadership, as I had believed the military academies to be the best training ground for

military leadership when I entered West Point in 1960. The opportunities I

have since had to make some contribution to important national issues through

my public service in the judicial branch, participation in two President campaigns and substantial pro bono publico activities on behalf of Vietnam veterans

would never have been available to me as a military officer and bear out the

validity of my judgment that to undertake such matters required me to resign

my commission and go to law school with my wife, Lynda.

Senator THURMOND. What do you see as the major problems facing the Air

Force today?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Because of my brief experience with the Air Force to date, I

hesitate to answer this question in a way that would indicate a comprehensive

understanding of these problems. I am aware that we need to modernize our

strategic nuclear forces to counter an increasing threat. I know that shortages

of airlift aircraft dictate a need to develop and enhance our capabilities in that

area. And I believe that we must improve our ability to operate in the space

environment. These three missions (strategic nuclear, airlift, and space) are

outside my primary areas of responsibility. I see the principal problem within

my functional domain to be retention of military personnel in key specialities.

Retention rates among pilots, engineers, scientists, physicians, and enlisted personnel with technical skills are critically low. The loss of experience represented by these trends is not only detrimental to our combat readiness, but also very expensive in terms of training and replacement costs.

Senator THURMOND. What are your views on the Total Force Concept?

Mr. ZENGERLE. I am a strong advocate of the total force policy and I intend to

use the full powers of my new office to strengthen that ,concept. The present con- tribution of the Air Reserve Forces (ARF) toward accomplishment of the Air

Force mission is very significant even in peacetime, and grows even more sub- stantial during a conflict. I have discussed this policy with key officials of the active force, the Air Force Reserve and the Air National Guard and am convinced

that the role of the ARF will increase rather than diminish in the coming decade.

Senator THURMOND. Would you support direct procurement of military equipment for the Air Guard or Reserve if necessary to maintain current force levels?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes, provided that a proper balance of weapons systems between

the active force and air reserve components is maintained. The Air Force continues to support the modernization of both the active and air reserve forces,

but neither the Air National Guard nor the Air Force Reserve is assigned a

major R&D or procurement function. The Air Force has, therefore, found it

most cost effective to charge Air Force Systems Command and Air Force Logistics Command with the responsibility for the R&D, procurement, and continued

support of all Air Force equipment whether it be destined for the active or air

reserve forces. Historically, the active force has provided the air reserve forces

with a mixture of air frames, new and old, as modernization and mission dictate. In recent years, factory aircraft such as the A-37B, A-7D and A-7K, A-10,

and C-130H have been provided directly to the air reserve forces. However, this

modernization must include the proper logistical support for the air frames such

as support equipment, war readiness material, and spare parts. I plan to continue support of this program.

Senator THURMOND. Do you have any views on policy regarding the phasing

out of Air Force installations as regards maintaining rights for the military_ to

regain their use in a national emergency?

Mr. ZENGERLE. First of all, I believe that we have just about reached a minimum level of major installations required to support our force structure for the

foreseeable future. Except for some ongoing realignment actions, I therefore do
35

not anticipate any new complete phase outs of major installations in the near

future. Our recent experience with phase outs has shown that the retention of

recapture rights has hindered local community development of reuse plans for

economic readjustment. Thus, although we have had excellent cooperative experience with affected local communities, we probably would have to rely on recapture by condemnation in the event of a national emergency.

Senator THURMOND. Do you favor increased military construction programs

for the Air Force?

Mr. ZENGERLE. Yes. Much of our physical plant dates back to World War II and

the early fifties. These older facilities are in many cases badly deteriorated,

expensive to maintain and inefficient from the standpoint of energy and the

operation of our modern weapons systems. Much of our airfield pavement inventory is also in need of major renovation. An increased program for replacement

of old facilities would have a positive impact on our backlog of essential maintenance and repair and would provide badly needed improvements in the working

and living environment of our people, especially our single personnel. Overseas,

we still need to construct ammunition storage, aircraft fuel storage and dispersed aircraft parking to support our rapid deployment forces. We also need to

provide chemical and biological protection in critical facilities, particularly in

Europe.

Senator ExoN. Thank you very much.

This meeting is adjourned.

[Thereupon, at 11 :25 a.m. the committee adjourned to reconvene at

the call of the Chair.]

[ Subsequently the nominations of Robert J. Murray to be Under

Secretary of the Navy, and Joseph C. Zengerle III, to be Assistant

Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower Reserve Affairs and Installations, were approved by the committee and confirmed by the

Senate on February 6,1980.]

[Mr. Robert H. Spiro, Jr., nominated to be Under Secretary of the

Army, was approved by the committee and confirmed by the Senate

on February 28, 1980.]

0