General STEWART. I would like to put in the record that I have here the kind of document that Mr. Fulton speaks of as to the priorities and what each one costs.

You can draw a line anywhere across there and show what you cut out on these given priorities. It happens to be an Army document. I would be very glad to insert it in the record, if the chairman so desires as an illustration of how we develop those or to show it to any member of the committee individually who cares to see it.

Mr. VORYS. General, is that a classified document?
General STEWART. Yes, sir.

Mr. WOOD. The form in which it is done, with illustrative figures, could be declassified, could it not?

General STEWART. This was a piece of paper that was developed several month ago in connection with the development of this year's

program.

Mr. WOOD. Could we not put in the record, General, the form with either X's or something else to show the form in which this was done! The form itself is not classified; is it?

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Without objection, then, we will put the form in.

(The information referred to follows:)

22. Up to 100 percent (remaining 75 percent) UE deficiencies, 1955 M+30 forces.

.1

2.0

3.3

5.4

Subtotal..

7.1

13.2

34.4

130.0

24.6

12.5

31.4

253.2

23. Up to 30 days ammunition reserve for weapons in priority 22.

Subtotal..

7.1

13.2

34.4

130.0

24.6

12.5

31.4

253.2

24. Up to 30 days additional ammunition reserve, M+15 units, total 60 days..
Subtotal...

25. Up to 30 days additional ammunition reserve, M+30 units, total 60 days..
Subtotal..

27. Up to 30 days additional ammunition reserve, 1954 M-day units, total 90
days....

28. Up to 30 days additional ammunition reserve, 1955 M-day units, total 90
days..

30. Up to 30 days additional ammunition reserve for M+15 and M+30 units, total 90 days for all units.

NOTE. This chart is an illustration of the way in which country ceilings within titles
were geared to the title ceilings recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The illustration indicates a title ceiling of $323.3 million as earmarked for title X in
the 1954 budget. The country ceilings were determined by the heavy cutoff line appear.
ing beneath this figure in the total column on line 25.

As will be noted, this provides for a uniform level of programing toward desired
goals in each country. Should the budget be cut by an amount that would result in a
$50 million cut for title X, a new cutoff line would be drawn below line 22 on the chart.
The reduced country ceilings would then be taken directly from line 22.

The country ceilings thus derived are primarily useful as planning figures, and are
subject to minor changes in the programing process wherein item deficiencies as re-
ported by the United States Military Assistance Advisory Groups are listed in ac-
cordance with the priorities.

Mr. FULTON. If there were a further cut proposed in this program, would the cut be taken by the Department of Defense as an arithmetic or a percentage cut, right across the line, as General Bradley had said the cut was made when it was reduced from the original estimates, or would it be a planned program of cutting away according to the various strategic urgencies.

General STEWART. It would be a planned cut. If you will recall, I believe the percentage cut was explained as made simply because it was the 29th day of April when we were given the figure. We had to come up here and appear before these committees in a matter of about a week.

As a matter of urgency, the Joint Chiefs of Staff gave us their advice in the form of a percentage cut. Whenever we get whatever funds Congress appropriates to us, we shall take those funds to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and ask for their military judgment as to how they shall be divided among the three services, and among the types. On that, if approved by the Secretary of Defense, the services then will develop a refined program within the ceiling of the funds made available.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. General, may I ask a question, please? The other day Governor Stassen testified that the savings that were reflected in the revised figures of $354 million reductions were from the remnants of the last year's program. Has there been any reduction in tanks or end items in this new program because of a reduction of $354 million?

Where did that saving come from?

General STEWART. We work, Mr. Chairman, as you know, on yearly increments and yearly programs. Within a given program, as you carry the program out, you may develop certain savings. You can do 1 of 3 things with those. You can come up here and say, "We have saved out of the planned expenditures of this year, the planned program, this much of the money that you made available.” Or, we can come up and say, "We have got so much to carry over and please let us have it and we will apply it against next year." Or, we can force, at the last minute, a portion of next year's program in the form of a deviation into this year's program and obligate those funds. Chairman CHIPERFIELD. What did you do?

General STEWART. We came out with the exact status on which we stood and said, "At this moment these are funds that we cannot in our opinion properly and efficiently use this year."

The overall requirement still exists, but we have not been able to use these in this period.

Mr. VORYS. Certainly no one will criticize that.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. I am not saying that in a sense of criticism. I am just trying to get information.

Mr. VORYS. No one would criticize that form of candid, accurate reporting. But, it still leaves quite a problem here.

Mr. HALABY. Could we go back, Mr. Chairman, to the savings for just a moment?

Commander Schmeder, would you tell us what the $15.7 million Navy saving is composed of?

Lieutenant Commander SCHMEDER. Yes, sir.

As I mentioned before, it consists of four items. The first item is $8 million savings on flight training costs for France, the United Kingdom, and Italy.