4

1 Except when the President of the United States determines 2 that the application of these ceilings will seriously jeopardize 3 the national security interests of the United States and in4 forms the Congress of the basis for such determination.

5

TITLE IV-RESERVE FORCES

6 SEC. 401. For the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1972, 7 and ending June 30, 1973, the Selected Reserve of each 8 Reserve component of the Armed Forces will be programed 9 to attain an average strength of not less than the following: (1) The Army National Guard of the United States,

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

402,333;

(2) The Army Reserve, 261,300;

(3) The Naval Reserve, 129,000;

(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 45,016;

(5) The Air National Guard of the United States,

87,614;

(6) The Air Force Reserve, 51,296;

(7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 11,800.

SEC. 402. The average strength prescribed by section

20 401 of this title for the Selected Reserve of any Reserve 21 component shall be proportionately reduced by (1) the 22 total authorized strength of units organized to serve as units 23 of the Selected Reserve of such component which are on 24 active duty (other than for training) at any time during the 25 fiscal year, and (2) the total number of individual members

5

1 not in units organized to serve as units of the Selected 2 Reserve of such component who are on active duty (other 3 than for training or for unsatisfactory participation in train4 ing) without their consent at any time during the fiscal 5 year. Whenever such units or such individual members are 6 released from active duty during any fiscal year, the average 7 strength for such fiscal year for the Selected Reserve of 8 such Reserve component shall be proportionately increased 9 by the total authorized strength of such units and by the 10 total number of such individual members.

11

12

TITLE V-GENERAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 501. Subsection (a) (1) of section 401 of Public

13 Law 89-367 approved March 15, 1966 (80 Stat. 37), as 14 amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:

15

"(a) (1) Not to exceed $2,500,000,000 of the funds 16 authorized for appropriation for the use of the Armed Forces 17 of the United States under this or any other Act are author18 ized to be made available for their stated purposes to sup19 port: (A) Vietnamese and other free world forces in sup20 port of Vietnamese forces, (B) local forces in Laos; and 21 for related costs, during the fiscal year 1973 on such terms 22 and conditions as the Secretary of Defense may determine. 23 None of the funds appropriated to or for the use of the Armed Forces of the United States may be used for the

24

6

1 purpose of paying any overseas allowance, per diem allow

3

ance, or any other addition to the regular base pay of any

person serving with the free world forces in South Vietnam 4 if the amount of such payment would be greater than the 5 amount of special pay authorized to be paid, for an equiv6 alent period of service, to members of the Armed Forces 7 of the United States (under section 310 of title 37, United 8 States Code) serving in Vietnam or in any other hostile fire

9

area, except for continuation of payments of such additions 10 to regular base pay provided in agreements executed prior

11

to July 1, 1970. Nothing in clause (A) of the first sentence 12 of this paragraph shall be construed as authorizing the use of any such funds to support Vietnamese or other free world. 14 forces in actions designed to provide military support and 15 assistance to the Government of Cambodia or Laos: Pro16 vided, That nothing contained in this section shall be con17 strued to prohibit support of actions required to insure the 18 safe and orderly withdrawal or disengagement of United

19

States forces from Southeast Asia, or to aid in the release of 20 Americans held as prisoners of war."

OPENING STATEMENT

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have you with us this morning. With us is Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, Hon. Roger T. Kelley, to testify on the manpower portion of this year's authorization bill. Mr. Kelley is accompanied by Lt. Gen. William E. DePuy of the Army, Rear Adm. John G. Finneran of the Navy, Maj. Gen. William W. Berg of the Air Force, and Maj. Gen. E. B. Wheeler of the U.S. Marine Corps.

I want to say at the outset that we also appreciate the backup and support materials which have been prepared and assembled from a number of sources by Mr. Sullivan and his staff in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. We received most of this material in a timely fashion. More will be required on specific issues which we will get into later.

I will take just a moment to say that generally my feelings on military manpower are that we must maintain a very high quality of men in our Armed Forces because of the requirements of complex weapon systems and for many other reasons. I do not know of any time in history when we have had a greater demand for dedication than this period we are going through.

I do feel, however, that it will be necessary for us to continue the reductions in the quantity of military manpower. The pressures which are produced by the cost of modern weaponry and by climbing manpower costs due to pay increases mean that we really have no other

choice.

In this coming budget year, fiscal year 1973, the Department of Defense has requested authorization for 2,358,000 men as the fiscal year 1973 end strength. This is only 33,000 men below the end strength for fiscal year 1972: 2,391,000.

During the course of these hearings we expect to receive a detailed justification for the military manpower requested by the Department of Defense. It is not enough to state the threat and then a requirement for a certain number of divisions, air wings, or ships. The costs of defense are so high it is essential that the structure be justified in detail the link must be shown between the threat and the forces which are requested. Military manpower costs are edging toward 60 percent of the defense budget; manpower is not a free resource, it is our most expensive commodity.

We also expect during these hearings to receive detailed material on the manpower policies of our NATO allies, the force improvements which they may have made, and the contributions which they are making to help defray the large costs which we incur in helping to defend them.

I think we will have a rather lively, but very difficult debate on this subject on the Senate floor where amendments are filed. These amendments come very close to passing. We must have all the justifications we can to back up whatever the committee does with reference to

manpower.

It is important that, in making reductions, we do not reduce our combat capability unnecessarily. I was extremely interested to see that considerably over 1 million men in uniform-1,116,000 to be exactare involved in general support. It is not that the tasks performed by

these men are unimportant-far from it--but we must be particularly sure that the large support structure which we have built up for Vietnam does not continue to drift on and on because of inertia. The question of the numbers of men devoted to support, intelligence, and similar missions, has not been dealt with as thoroughly as it might have been in many cases. Our analysis and our attention, both within the executive and legislative branches, is often focused on the big weapon system issues and on questions having great political importance, such as the number of troops in Europe. But the vast numbers of men involved in these supporting missions absolutely requires the careful attention of the Congress. We will carefully analyze other manpower issues as well this year, of course.

I hope that in our discussions here today and in later testimony during the hearings we can establish a tradition of frankness and candor about these matters. We, in the Congress, fully realize that some of the military manpower problems facing the Department of Defense are not of your making. In part, some of them can be attributed to implicit and explicit policy decisions made by the administration, the Congress, and ultimately by the people themselves. We look forward to exploring these issues with you today, and in following days.

I do not want any tone of complaint about what I say, Mr. Secretary, but I have been on this committee a long time and I have been on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, and I do not remember ever having heard or considered a real in-depth analysis of the actual manpower needs. I do not know who is to blame for that any more than I am. So, I will put myself first. We just have not been into this in depth to my knowledge, but now manpower is getting such a large part of the money each year, billions of dollars, which I do not think is going to be easy to get this year, or next year either.

I think the military itself wants more of a quality product than they have in many ways, not only the uniformed personnel but the civilian employees. Frankly, I do not know what is being done these days to see that civilian employees actually do a day's work. I know I come in contact with the letdown, the slowdown all over this country, for even a minor repair on your automobile. So, I hope all your civilian employees are exceptions to that general trend.

That is really not before us today, but it is a part of the manpower-I mean, the money part of the bill.

As I understand, plans have been worked out for Secretary Kelley, to take 40 minutes to read a portion of his statement, after which the Army will take 30 minutes to talk from the charts in the books, the Navy 20 minutes, the Marine Corps 10 to 15 minutes, and the Air Force 20 minutes. The services have no prepared statements but will speak to the charts in the backup books.

All right. We have these 2 days now; we are not going to rush anyone, but at the same time, we want to get right down to the questions. We have already had a briefing on the threat from the CIA. We are going to have another one from Mr. Laird and then we are going to have the Secretaries of the services in and the Chiefs of Staff. So, we do not have to go to the threat and matters of that kind.

Mr. Secretary, you are recognized. I am not going to limit you the 40 minutes.