The funding request will support an average strength of 105,500 Reservists in paid status, including 11,500 active duty TAR personnel previously funded in the Military Personnel, Navy (MPN) appropriation. The Budget Activity Two request includes $238.4 million transferred from the MPN appropriation to support the cost of active duty TAR personnel. The Budget submission requests an increase of $24.0 million for program growth. This includes $9.5 million for full year funding of the 94,000 FY 1982 End Strength (93,440 Selected Reserve, 352 IMA's and 208 full-time active duty) which was incrementally funded (90,700 man year average) in FY 1982. Cost escalation is $4.0 million.

Travel funding included in the FY 1983 RPN request is all mission essential travel and is based upon actual costs experienced in FY 1981 with a modest allowance for inflation. The requested funding appears adequate to execute Naval Reserve Training programs for Fiscal Year 1983.

Operations and Maintenance, Navy Reserve

The other major appropriation which supports the Naval Reserve is the Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve (O&MNR) appropriation. The Naval Reserve is dependent upon funds in this appropriation for support of mission forces, depot level maintenance, and other support. This includes funds for fuel, intermediate maintenance, repair parts and related support for the operation of the aircraft in both the Naval and Marine Corps Reserve; operating funds and maintenance for Naval Reserve ships; depot level maintenance, and rework of aircraft, engines, and components for Naval Reserve activities under command of the Chief of Naval Reserve.

The funding requested for the O&MNR appropriation for FY 1983 is $653.0 million which is a $81.9 million net increase over the FY 1982 funding level of $571.1 million. The overall program reflects a real program growth of $64.8 million or 11.2% and a price growth of $17.1 million. Program growth is primarily for increases in Ship's Maintenance incurred with the introduction of the FF-1052 class frigates and six additional ship overhauls.

In addition, we will not be able to meet the Congressional Containment Policy of no further growth above the Fiscal Year 1978 year-end level of the backlog of nondeferrable Maintenance and Repair which was $20.7 million. Accelerated deterioration of the physical plant will drive our nondeferrable maintenance and repair backlog for FY 83 to a projected level of $38 million, or about $17 million above the containment level.

The NRF ship steaming time of 14 days per ship per quarter remains at parity with previous years. The FY 1983 flying hour program funds 83 percent of Primary Mission Readiness (PMR) level.

SUMMARY

During the past four years we have seen remarkable progress in the Naval Reserve. Not only have the past proposals for reductions in Selected Reserve strength been reversed and the on board strengh stabilized permitting increases in quality, we have also made substantial improvements in readiness and mobilization capabilities.

The Navy has developed and implemented an integrated mobilization manpower requirements determination system (NAMMOS) which generates our Selected Reserve requirements. This system has just recently been endorsed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

We have been able to use this period of stability in strength to organize our structure at the unit level and to steadily improve the match of individual Reservists and their qualifications with the specific requirements of their mobilization billet.

We have greatly improved the quality of training through direct involvement of the active force command to which the individual Reservist or Reserve unit would mobilize. This involvement of active force units in Reserve training has had the additional benefit of direct support to the fleet as a by-product of Reserve training. This Mutual Support program has been warmly received by both the active and Reserve forces.

The Naval Reserve has just embarked on a growth and modernization program to increase our capability to support an expanding Navy. We are:

Increasing the number of qualified Selected Reservists, Modernizing and expanding our surface warfare capability with the NRF Frigate program,

Actively seeking replacement aircraft for our C-118s, and Adopting a new policy of horizontal integration of our tactical air forces which will place new aircraft directly into the Naval Air Reserve.

The Naval Reserve is anxious to accept these new and challenging assignments.

I shall be happy to respond to any questions or provide any additional information you may desire.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

REAR ADMIRAL WILLIAM D. DANIELS, USNR

DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL RESERVE

Rear Admiral William D. Daniels began his career in 1944 when he enlisted in Birmingham, Alabama, his home of record. After completing Recruit Training and Signal School, he served in the Pacific during the latter part of World War II. Assignments with the Service Force and with the Royal Australian Navy were completed in the New Guinea and Philippine areas. Following World War II, he served with the Atlantic Fleet Mine Force and at the Charleston Naval Base.

Rear Admiral Daniels entered the Naval Academy in 1950 and graduated with the class of 1954 remaining on duty at the Academy after graduation. Following an assignment as First Lieutenant in USS LAFFEY (DD-724), he entered Submarine School at New London, Connecticut, and upon completion had tours on the USS BURRFISH, USS SEA CAT and USS CORPORAL.

Rear Admiral Daniels completed a tour of Amphibious Force Duty in 1968 after serving as First Lieutena in USS

PRINCETON for two and one-half years. Three Western Pacific deployments and nine amphibious assaults in Vietnam were conducted by PRINCETON during this period.

Additional shore duty assignments have included; Commanding Officer, Naval Reserve Training Center, Omaha, Nebraska; staff of Commander, Naval Reserve Training Command; Officer Distribution Section of the Bureau of Naval Personnel; Executive Officer, USS PONCE (LP D-15); Commanding Officer, USS VOGELGESANG (DD-862); Director of the Reserve

Plans and Policy Division, BUPERS; Commander, Destroyer Squadron 34; Special Assistant for Naval Reserve on the staff of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Manpower, Personnel and Training; and Assistant Chief of Naval Personnel for Naval Reserve/Assistant Commander for Naval Reserve in the Naval Military Personnel Command. In July of 1981, Rear Admiral Daniels was ordered to New Orleans as Deputy Chief of Naval Reserve.

His decorations include the Legion of Merit, Meritorious Service Medal, two awards of the Navy Commendation Medal and various campaign medals.

Rear Admiral Daniels and his wife, the former Joan Harvey of San Antonio, Texas, have three children. Their son, Bill, is a member of the Class of 1977 at the Naval Academy. Daughter, Jane, is a graduate of Mary Washington College, Fredericksburg, Virginia. Their other daughter, Kim, is a student at Florida State University.

MARINE CORPS RESERVE

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. GEORGE B. CRIST, U.S. MARINE CORPS, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR RESERVE AFFAIRS

POSTURE OF CORPS

Senator STEVENS. General Crist.

General CRIST. Mr. Chairman, it is a privilege to appear before the committee today to discuss the posture of the Marine Corps Re

serve.

The year 1981 was another great year. For the second straight year our Selected Reserve strength ended up over plan. Attrition continued to decline, while retention went up. As strength increased, so did quality; more high school graduates, fewer mental group IV's.

Training was rigorous and vigorous. Units were subjected to mobilization and combat readiness testing. Reservists trained alongside their active counterparts from CONUS to Korea. More units got out of their training centers and into the field.

New management initiatives were introduced, and mobilization planning was both intensified and accelerated.

All in all, 1981 was indeed a good year.

But I must admit there were also problems. Personnel readiness continues to be degraded by skill shortages. Aviation readiness was limited by aging aircraft, shortfalls, incompatibility and near obsolescence. Materiel readiness was plagued by serious shortages, and training readiness suffers from a backlog in home center construction.

The most critical aircraft shortages exist in the KC-130-that is, the refueler/transport-and the AH-1 attack helicopter communities. With the addition of the 4 KC-130's which were appropriated through congressional foresight in fiscal year 1982, there still remains a shortfall of 17 aircraft to complete the squadron in Glenview, Ill., and stand up a second squadron at Stewart Airfield in New York. The single Marine Corps Reserve attack helicopter squadron in Atlanta only has 8 of the 24 aircraft it is authorized. There is an urgent need to increase the helicopter antitank capability in the Marine Corps, and this is an ideal mission for the Re

serve.

With regard to our materiel readiness, the Marine Corps Reserve is currently short $546 million in equipment and $138 million short in secondary items. The latter includes repair parts, individual equipment, engines, transmissions and the like. The fiscal year 1983 budget provides for a 5.2-percent reduction in the equipment shortages and a 30-percent reduction in the secondary item shortfall.

In summary, Mr. Chairman, the Marine Corps Reserve is alive. and well, but it is obvious that we must pick up the cadence if the Marine Corps Reserve is to be a fully capable adjunct to the Active Force.

Thanks in no small part to congressional backing, we are moving out to meet that challenge.

That completes my statement, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Maj. Gen. G. B. Crist follows:]