It is his job, in other words, as I said a moment ago, to get at these things before they get under way.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, now, if the charge was made that some of the inspection services were tempering the wind to favor a certain concern, something of that sort, he would be the trouble shooter?

Mr. FINLETTER. Yes; and Senator, by your questions, you are pointing out what a really difficult job this is, because that is not an easy thing to do, what you have just mentioned.

The CHAIRMAN. The reason I asked the question is over my period of chairmanship of this committee, people have come in my office and made assertions of the kind that I have just mentioned to you about this company or that company, and so on, and, of course, I refer them to the Department, but I often wonder how it is handled, and this Mr. Carroll would be the man who would make the investigation and say whether the charges are true or false.

Mr. FINLETTER. Yes; and even more than that, Senator, he would be responsible for having made the investigation before the letter came from you. I think that if we got a letter of that kind from you now, according to the information I have, we would feel reasonably assured in giving you an answer which would be quite accurate, but if we lose this man, it will be a very long time before we

The CHAIRMAN. There are so many answers I have gotten before. The reason I asked the question is, over a period of 4 or 5 years, I would say, these have come from the very people who it seemed to me were the people who were being attacked, and you have got to have somebody who is not being attacked to make the investigation. Otherwise, your investigation does not carry any conviction.

Mr. FINLETTER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So I can see why you would want someone as a sort of a Scotland Yard head, you might say, to go into these things and say whether there is anything in them or whether there is not.

Mr. FINLETTER. Yes. I may say, Senator, that I am very grateful to you for pointing that out, because I feel I have not communicated to the committee my sense of urgency on this matter.

We will be up against trouble if we do not have this man. We will not be able to guarantee to you proper security measures of this type. Then there is also the question which I will ask you to consider without my going into it, which is the importance of the sabotage side of the thing.

May I just say one further thing about the question of precedent. I realize that precedents of this kind should be very rare. We oppose a general act on this subject. We do not think it is possible to have a general act which would say that men who have special qualifications in investigations or in Polar activity should be authorized to do this, that, and the other.

We think it is up to us to make a case to you in each instance, and in the past that has been done.

For example, I am informed that in, 1946, private legislation was introduced and passed, commissioning two officers into the Regular Army in the permanent grade of brigadier general. We are asking for the grade of colonel in both these instances. Those were Lt. Gen. Raymond S. McLain-the law was Public Law 326 of the Seventy-ninth Congress, and he was 56 years of age, at integrationand the other case was that of Maj. Gen. Robert S. Beightler, who

was. commissioned under Public Law 681 of the Seventy-ninth Congress, and his age at integration was 54 years.

These two gentlemen were distinguished National Guard officers with fine war records. I am informed also that at a previous hearing Senator Byrd referred to a case of the Navy, that of Capt. Charles G. McCormack. I merely mention those to show that there have been rare exceptions.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask you, What would be the degree of favorable receptivity by the officers of the Air Force in the event that this legislation is passed?

Mr. FINLETTER. Well, sir, the answer I have gotten from the Air Force officers when I have asked that question, has been this: That the qualifications of these two men are so outstanding that there would be almost total acceptance.

There would, of course, be some nonacceptance; but I am informed on some examination that it would be slight.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions by the committee?
Senator Cain?

Senator CAIN. Mr. Chairman, I do not like to say that I am not going to support this legislation, because it has been recommended by the Secretary and by other very distinguished armed services personnel, but I am disturbed by it. I have the impression that too much of the strength of a particular service revolves around two men, and I should like to think that in the future there will be developed within the Air Force men qualified as officers to fill any post, any capacity, and I merely wanted to state my willingness to go along and my concern with the future.

Mr. FINLETTER. I think, if I may say one word in comment on what Senator Cain has said, I quite agree that we must try to get qualified officers in the Regular service; but the truth of the matter is that things are moving very fast and this is exceptional, and I repeat, Senator, we regard this as exceptional.

Senator CAIN. And that is why I am perfectly willing to support this, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. The thing that impresses me about it and I think it is of transcending importance is that more and more and more a large part of our defense moneys are going for the procurement of planes, and that you are not dealing with a standard product like a tank or a gun.

You are dealing with something that is evolving all the time, with all sorts of equipment and instrumentation on it, and that sooner or later the Air Force must develop an inspection branch that will insure nonrepetition of some unpleasant episodes of the past, and I think with all this money and all the novelty of this particular branch, we might be justified for the time being in making an exception, but, like Senator Cain, I do believe we have got to look to the Air Force to develop its own inspection service without this sort of a thing becoming a standard procedure.

Senator JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, I strongly favor this bill. I think the civilian and military leadership of the Air Force ought to be congratulated on ferreting out a leader like General Carroll.

We realize that you cannot develop the type of inspection service you want unless you have the type of leadership that General Carroll is providing, and we have got a half dozen congressional committees

going into employee practices in various departments right now that we would not have to have operating if we had a few more General Carrolls to set up adequate checks.

I realize it is somewhat of a departure, but I think in this instance it is a good departure, and I would like to see the bill reported. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Byrd?

Senator BYRD. Mr. Chairman, on May 11 in your absence, as acting chairman, we submitted certain questions to General Vandenberg, and I would like to make them a part of the record.

The CHAIRMAN. They will all be inserted in the record, Mr. Reporter, at this point.

(The material above referred to is as follows:)

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RELATING TO APPOINTMENT OF GENERAL CARROLL AND COLONEL BALCHEN AS PERMANENT COLONELS

1. Question. Why were these officers not integrated into the Regular service prior to December 31, 1947, under Public Law 281, Seventy-ninth Congress, which authorized the commissioning in the Regular services of officers having outstanding World War II service?

Answer. General Carroll entered on extended active duty in the Air Force in May 1948. In view of the dead line of December 31, 1947, which was fixed with respect to the appointment of Regular officers under Public Law 281, Seventy-ninth Congress, General Carroll was not and is not now eligible to apply for permanent commission under this act. Further, General Carroll was born on March 19, 1910. He is above the maximum age limitation of 27 years for appointment as a Regular officer under the provisions of section 506 (e) of Public Law 381, Eightieth Congress, the Officer Personnel Act of 1947. Inasmuch as General Carroll did not serve in the armed forces prior to September 2, 1945, he does not come within the exception to this age limitation which is authorized by the cited section of the Officer Personnel Act. Accordingly, the appointment of General Carroll as a colonel in the Regular Air Force can be accomplished only by special legislation.

Colonel Balchen served on extended active duty as a Reserve officer in the United States Air Force from September 5, 1941, to April 21, 1946, inclusive, on which latter date he was relieved of active duty. He was subsequently recalled to active duty as a colonel, United States Air Force Reserve, on October 11, 1948, and he has continued on active service since that date. In view of the fact that Colonel Balchen was born on October 23, 1899, and served as a Reserve officer with the United States Air Force during World War II, he was eligible for appointment in the Regular Air Force as a permanent major under the provisions of Public Law 281, Seventy-ninth Congress. However, the need for his services was not anticipated and no efforts were made to pursue his integration. The sequence of events since that date have now culminated in a critical world situation which imposes upon the various armed services grave responsibilities. For the Department of the Air Force the advent of polar operations imposes a critical need for specially qualified technicians. Recognizing this need, it is our desire to make permanently available to us an officer of wide experience and special fitness in this line of work. The special fitness, experience, and qualifications of Colonel Balchen in this respect are unique. He is eminently qualified for this task. Although Colonel Balchen is eligible for appointment as a Regular officer under the provisions of section 506 (e) of Public Law 381, Eightieth Congress, the Officer Personnel Act of 1947, it appears unrealistic to appoint an officer of such maturity and experience in the stipulated grade of second lieutenant.

2. Question. Has a thorough canvass of all available Regular officers been made to determine that no officer having these special qualifications is now available in the Regular Air Force? (NOTE.-In event a canvass has been made, it might be appropriate to ask for the record, what were the general mechanics of this canvass?)

Answer. A canvass has been made of all available Regular Air Force officers to determine whether or not officers of comparable experience and maturity possessing these unique qualifications are available. None has been revealed. In this respect, the general mechanics employed in this canvass constituted a review of all Regular officers for the purpose of determining whether or not one or

more evidenced these peculiar qualifications and possessed the level of experience and maturity desired.

3. Question. Has investigation been made to determine whether qualified officers from the Reserve or National Guard are available for extended active duty for these billets?

Answer. This investigation has not been made. Such officers may be recalled for extended active duty during peacetime only with their consent, and upon termination of contract the Air Force, if so requested, must release them. This is the situation which the Air Force faces with respect to General Carroll and Colonel Balchen and is the precise circumstance which would exist should we recall any other Reserve or National Guard officer to extended active duty. Appointment as Regular officers is the only assurance of continuity and stability.

4. Question. Has the possibility of securing qualified officers by detail from the Army and Navy been considered?

Answer. Yes; this action has been considered but rejected. First, it is doubtfull whether the Army or the Navy have in their services Regular officers with the outstanding special qualifications possessed by General Carroll or Colonel Balchen as outlined by Mr. Symington. If the other armed services do have such personnel, it is highly questionable that they could afford to release them to the Air Force. In the absence of legislation providing for the interservice transfer of Regular officers among all Armed Services (there is temporary authority provided in the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, for interservice transfers between the Army and Air Force until July 26, 1950), satisfactory arrangements could not be contracted, even if properly qualified Regular officers were made available by these services.

5. Question. Has the bill been coordinated with the other departments to find out whether they have similar requests, so that all requests can be handled in one package if there are additional cases in either the Army or Navy?

Answer. Formal coordination has not been accomplished with the Army or Navy inasmuch as a directive from the Secretary of Defense dated October 29, 1948, does not require formal coordination of proposed private relief bills with the other departments or the Secretary of Defense. However, prior to submission of this bill to the Congress, the Air Force secured the approval of the Secretary of Defense and the Bureau of the Budget. Subsequent to introduction of the bill, the Air Force contacted Maj. Gen. C. E. Byers, Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff (G-1) of the Army, and Vice Adm. J. W. Roper, Chief of the Bureau of Personnel of the Navy, and has been advised that those departments have no similar legislation which they desire to introduce at this time.

6. Question. Has consideration been given as to whether general legislation in the form of an amendment to the Officer Personnel Act of 1947, to provide a statutory vehicle for appointments of this type, would not be preferable to submitting private bills in each case?

Answer. General legislation in the form of an amendment has been considered, but is not favored by the Air Force. We are anxious to avoid any action which might lead to unwarranted Regular appointment of senior officers. In the instance of General Carroll and Colonel Balchen their qualifications are so singular and the need for their services by the Air Force so great that exception in their cases appears justifiable. We do not foresee a similarly urgent need for Regular appointments in high permanent grades. If the standards for future direct Regular appointments are maintained as high for all exceptions to general provisions of law, the incidence of such appointments will be extremely low for the entire Military Establishment.

7. Question. Is the need for these officers so great as to warrant any possible adverse morale effect it may have?

Answer. Yes. The need for the continued services of these officers is exceptional and no adverse morale effects are anticipated as a result of their permanent appointment in the Air Force. The eminent qualifications of both General Carroll and Colonel Balchen are well known and it is believed that their permanent appointment in the Regular service would be generally favored by the officer

corps.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that covers the point, Mr. Finletter. Are you ready to vote on the Carroll-Balchen bill? If you are, I would like to say that Senator Knowland has made a request that even though we want to approve it, that it not be approved until he has a chance to look into one or two matters, so if it is voted favorably I will

withhold it from actually reporting it until Senator Knowland gives me the green light.

All those in favor of reporting the bill favorably, signify by saying "Aye."

(A chorus of "ayes.")

The CHAIRMAN. Opposed?

(No response.)

The CHAIRMAN. The bill will be reported favorably, but I am to wait until Senator Knowland gives me clearance. He wants to look up one or two matters.