Изображения страниц

Mr. HARDY. There is one other aspect of this language that I wondered about. Does the language “or who are senior thereto“ mean that you can—of course, you have the language which prevents skipping over anybody as we talked about in the other section a while ago. But does this mean that you can keep right on considering those who are senior to the zone of consideration without counting that as having passed them over, too?

Major LEROND. Mr. Hardy, what this does, in effect, is that the law requires right now that the Secretary will establish promotion zones. This changes it to say that he may establish consideration zones.

Mr. KILDAY. Until 1964.

MAJOR LEROND. 1964. It says he may establish a zone of consideration. Implementation of this would be that he can establish both a promotion zone for the purposes of passing over officers and can establish a zone of consideration below that for the purposes of selecting other officers.

So to answer your question, those above the zone of consideration can either be placed in a promotion zone or else the zone of consideration can also include them and we can't pass them over again. You can do either course of action.

Mr. Hardy. Actually, every time you consider one of these boys, your are considering everybody who is above this zone of consideration, but if you don't select him, he is still not counted as having been passed over. You can consider those a good many times.

Major LEROND. Yes, sir. That is the same way it is in present law, only he is passed over.

Mr. Hardy. I understand.

Major LEROND. If we place him within a zone of consideration, he will not be passed over again.

Mr. HARDY. So I can be sure I understand, at the present time, he is not in the zone of consideration, he can still be considered if he is above that zone of consideration ?

Major LEROND. Yes, sir.
Mr. HARDY. And not be counted as a passover?
General WELLER. That is correct.
Mr. KILDAY. Mr. Huddleston.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. General, under this section the Secretary can establish these special boards either in addition to the regular boards or in lieu of the regular boards.

Major LEROND. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Up until 1964 wouldn't that give the Secretary the authority to abolish all selection boards where failure of selection would result in a passover!

General WELLER. It would give him that authority, but it wouldn't meet the needs of the service and it would be not the thing that the Secretary should do or really literally could do.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. I agree that he shouldn't do it. But under this section, I am not so sure that he couldn't do it.

General WELLER. Well, if he does not—if we do not have promotion zones on these majors when they reach their 19th year for the first time, then we will have no method of creating vacancies whatsoever, and the whole promotional system would grind to a halt.

So I just can't visualize the Secretary not doing this. It is a method and a procedure which has many advantages for the particular situation in the next 5 years. We wouldn't want this beyond this period. But it does have these significant advantages of lowered attrition, some deferral of vacancies, and not building up your twice-passed-over inventory, before it serves a purpose to do this.

That is so when the officer is twice-passed over he will be retired

that year.

Mr. Kilday. General, what you are asking for is a special selection board for these majors, isn't that it?

General WELLER. Yes, sir; that is it exactly. Mr. KILDAY. And your purpose is to use it in addition to the annual selection board ?

General WELLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. Kilday. Then why don't we write it that way, instead of putting in "in addition to or instead of.” Just leave it in addition to"?

General WELLER. Well, in the implementation of this, we would visualize utilizing this authority for a zone of consideration for fiscal years 1960 and 1961-a zone of consideration only, because we would not have reached majors who were in their 19th year until that time until fiscal year 1963.

So that by establishing a zone of consideration in fiscal year 1960 and in 1961, and then a promotion zone in 1962, we will then have our officers in their 19th year, and it serves a purpose to establish the promotion zone at that time.

So for the first 2 years, 1960 and 1961, we would visualize the Secretary would convene a zone of consideration only.

Mr. KildAY. Mr. Blandford.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Mr. Chairman, actually there is no difference from the viewpoint of the net result here because these officers being majors and having been selected under the Officer Personnel Act are guaranteed 20 years of service anyway.

General WELLER. That is right. Mr. BLANDFORD. What this realy means is that a major today in his 17th year will not be considered as having been passed over or in his 18th year will not be considered as having been passed over. He will not be considered as having been passed over until his 19th and 20th year and then he goes out.

Now, from the viewpoint of the net result, he is going to be there until 20 years anyway.

This is a method by which they can redistribute—you might even call it a readjustment of date-of-rank provision, because it permits you to go down through the year groups and select out the best fitted in a larger group without assessing the morale effect upon the officer who is passed over.

Isn't that what it boils down to? General WELLER. Well, that is one of the purposes. But the other purpose is keeping the attrition at about 30 percent.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Yes. General WELLER. And not building up the inventory, which is important to us.

Mr. BLANDFORD. One thing this continuation board can't do is that they can't select out an officer, is that correct?



General WELLER. That is correct.

Mr. BLANDFORD. So there is that one difference. In the promotion zone, a selection board can select an officer out and a consideration board can't select an officer out.

General WELLER. Right.
Captain WILLIAMS. Yes.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Let's get this straight. This can be very important. The general says they can and you say they can't.

Now, as I understand, a continuation board, a zone of consideration board, could not select out an officer.

Captain WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Secretary JACKSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BLANDFORD. Yes they can, or yes they can't?

Captain WILLIAMS. They are a selection board and a selection board can select out any eligible officer with less than 20 years service.

General WELLER. We are talking about unsatisfactory performance. That is what you are talking about.

Captain WILLIAMS. Yes.

Mr. BLANDFORD. I don't see the authority here to do that. It may not ever be applied, but I think we ought to make it clear.

General WELLER. Well, this would be governed by the precept anyway. It would have to be.

Mr. BLANDFORD. There is authority for selection boards to do it in the law.

General WELLER. That is right.
Captain WILLIAMS. That is right.
Mr. BLANDFORD. I don't see the authority in here.
Captain WILLIAMs. This will be a selection board, Mr. Chairman.
This provides only for a zone and has nothing to do with the selection
board as a selection board.

General WELLER. Well, this board, I mean this zone of consideration will not constitute a pass-over. Therefore, it is not the same as a promotion zone at all, because if you establish a legal promotion zone and you fail to select an officer--if you select someone junior to somebody, then it is not in fact a board.

Major LEROND. It is a selection board.
General WELLER. It is not a promotion board in the full sense.
Mr. KILDAY. Mr. Stratton.

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, could I ask a couple of questions, just to clarify my own thought. In the first place this differs from the Navy in that you are taking in majors whereas the Navy goes only to commander; is that correct?

Captain WILLIAMS. No, sir, Mr. Stratton, this has no application to the Navy.

Mr. STRATTON. No, what I am saying is with regard to the Marine Corps you are asking this special legislation to dip down into the rank of major, whereas the Navy is solving its hump problem only by using this procedure with regard to commanders, I mean a similar continuation procedure.

General WELLER. No, the Navy is not using this procedure at all.
Mr. STRATTON. I understand.
General W'ELLER. In any aspects.

Mr. STRATTON. I understand they are not using exactly the similar procedure. But I am saying that you are asking special consideration to solve the hump problem to deal with majors.

General WELLER. Exactly, Mr. STRATTON. Whereas the Navy is not asking any legislation with regard to lieutenant commanders. Mr. BLANDFORD. That is right.

Mr. STRATTON. Now my question is why can't the Marine Corps solve its hump problem in the same way that the Navy is solving it, by creating vacancies in the grade of captain and commander, and then moving the lieutenant commanders up?

Is it because you just don't have enough vacancies that will be created by using the general provisions, so you have to create additional vacancies in the grade of major?

General WELLER. This group of majors has had already the attrition which the OPA, that is the Officer Personnel Act, visualized. That is somewhat of a difference right there between the Navy and the Marine Corps.

Point 2, the Navy's problem is different, significantly different from ours in this grade. So you don't for that reason, because the two characteristics of the lieutenant commander-major group are different. A different solution is indicated.

Now going back to the fact that they have had attrition equal to the OPA norm—we could solve all of this by upping the attrition. But if we hold at 30 percent attrition, we will retard the promotion of these people beyond the 18th year point. The tail end of it will be in their 19th and some of them in their 20th year.

Now you can deal with that because this matter is a formula. You can deal with attrition up here or—we don't think we should take any more attrition.

This will permit us to defer some of the officers in this group to their 20th year and permit us to take others at their 17th year, as well as keep the normal average at the 18th year point, and, therefore, will allow us to hold the attrition that we feel is right for this group.

Mr. STRATTON. What I am saying is: In other words, your hump is a slightly lower hump gradewise than the Navy; is that correct? General WELLER. The characteristics of the two humps are different. Mr. STRATTON. Yes. O.K.

General WELLER. And this is the reason why we have this feature and the Navy doesn't.

Mr. STRATTON. My second point, General, is with regard to this. As I understand it, these zones of consideration--the only thing that they are considering is promotion, is that right? These are zones of consideration for promotion, in the way that we have discussed ?

General WELLER. The board who meets will consider officers, X number of officers in the zone of consideration, and will select from that group the numbers specified by the Secretary of the Navy.

Mr. STRATTON. They aren't going to consider the question of continuation, though?

General WELLER. No.

Mr. STRATTON. Now, how do you distinguish—your last sentence in this section says that an officer who is included within the zone of consideration but is not within a promotion zone is not considered as having been passed over.

Now, how do you define the promotion zone as distinct from the consideration zone?

General WELLER. The Secretary of the Navy would promulgate a precept which said the zone of consideration was here to here and the promotion zone was from here to here [indicating by hands].

Mr. STRATTON. That isn't spelled out, but that is within the Secretary's province.

Mr. BLANDFORD. That is spelled out in the Officer Personnel Act, which is referred to.

Mr. STRATTON. And the third question, which I think you discussed before, but I am not sure that I understood it, is that as far as this particular subsection is concerned there is no attrition, is there, no authority for dropping anybody?

General WELLER. There is no pass-over feature in this, which is the first point.

Now, as to the authority

Mr. BLANDFORD. I think the next section would clarify this situation.

General WELLER. I frankly am not sure about this point, as to whether this zone of consideration could remove officers for unsatisfactory performance. That is the point we are talking about.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Well, (b), Mr. Chairman, the next section-
Mr. KILDAY. Let's read (b).
Mr. BLANDFORD. Can supply this. [Reading:]

(b) Whenever a zone of consideration is established for the grade of major pursuant to this section, the term “promotion zone" as used in section 5759(b) of title 10, United States Code, is synonymous with the term "zone of consideration."

Now, the question would be appropriate, Mr. Stratton, as to whether that is sufficient language to let a continuation board select out an individual. Personally, I don't think it is, but

Mr. STRATTON. This would seem to contradict what the general has just said, that you have a consideration zone that is this big but a promotion zone that is that big.

Major LEROND. I think the point at issue, sir, is whether a selection board convened for the purposes of selecting officers from within a zone of consideration has the authority to remove officers for unsatisfactory performance of duty who have less than 20 years' service.

This section specifies that the provisions of a promotion zone in reference to those type matters are also equally applicable to the provisions of a zone of consideration.

In other words, this is a selection board formed under the existing provisions of title 10. The only thing they do not do is pass officers over when they have failed of selection within the zone of consideration.

Mr. STRATTON. Now, in answer to my previous question, General Weller said that the Secretary would have the right to define a promotion zone as being less extensive than a zone of consideration.

Then you have two types-as this section applies, you have two types of promotion zone. One is a promotion zone defined by the Secretary of the Navy and one the promotion as used in section 5759 (b), is that correct?

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »