[No. 66] SUBCOMMITTEE NO. 2 CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 421, H.R. 2450, H.R. 3313, H.R. 5256, H.R. 5293, H.R. 5297, H.R. 9916, H.R. 12616, H.R. 14741, H.R. 14875, H.R. 15005 (SEE INDEX FOR TITLES OF BILLS) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE No. 2, Washington, D.C., Thursday, May 5, 1966. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, in room 2212, at 10 a.m., Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. F. Edward Hébert (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. H.R. 14741 Mr. HÉBERT. The committee will be in order. This morning we begin hearings on H.R. 14741, a bill which would authorize an increase in the number of Marine Corps officers who may serve in the combined grades of brigadier general and major general. (The bill is as follows:) [H.R. 14741, 89th Cong., 2d sess.] A BILL To authorize an increase in the number of Marine Corps officers who may serve in the combined grades of brigadier general and major general Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 5443 (a), title 10, United States Code, is amended by deleting in the table contained therein all tabulated numbers under the heading "Brigadier general and major general" and substituting in place thereof the following numbers: "69 73 77 81 85 90 92 94 96 98 100". SEC. 2. Section 2 of the Act of August 3, 1961, Public Law 87-123 (75 Stat. 263), is repealed so far as it applies to the readjustment of authorized numbers of brigadier generals and major generals in the Marine Corps. The subcommittee has been advised that this legislative recommendation is a part of the Department of Defense's legislative program for the 89th Congress and, therefore, has the blessing of the Bureau of the Budget. The Department of Defense advises that this proposal to increase general officer grade limitations presently applicable to the Marine (9293) Corps is necessary to meet significantly increased requirements for general officers in that service. The increased requirements have stemmed in part from the required assignment of general officers to joint staffs and to headquarters of the U.S. Marine Corps, coupled with the significantly increased commitment of Marine Corps combat forces in Vietnam. I understand that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has a comprehensive statement which will review the requirements for this change in the statutes. The subcommittee must, of necessity, be interested not only in the present problem confronting the Marine Corps, but possible future requirements for similar changes affecting the other military departments. In order to explore this latter question, the subcommittee has also requested that a representative of the Department of Defense appear before the subcommittee. If there are no objections, we will now proceed to receive the testimony from our distinguished friend and Commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. Wallace Greene. General, you may proceed with any prepared statement you have. STATEMENT OF GEN. WALLACE GREENE, COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS General GREENE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to express my appreciation for the opportunity to appear before you this morning to discuss a matter which is of major concern to me. In recent years the requirement for Marine Corps general officers has steadily increased. With the establishment of unified commands with their extensive responsibilities in planning and in the maintenance of a high state of readiness to respond in accordance with commitments of our Government, we have found it necessary to participate more actively around the globe. Our Marine forces are no longer poised to support a single command in a limited area. The forces on the east coast, for example, might be committed under the Atlantic Command, the European Command, the Strike Command-in fact, anywhere in the world should an emergency dictate the need. This concept of worldwide deployment has made it necessary to position appropriate representation on staffs of unified and other senior commands. A more recent example of changing requirements is in the Western Pacific, where Marine Corps forces are growing fourfold. Unlike Korea, where our forces were of smaller size and were closely integrated with the Army and Air Force Commands, the Marine commander in South Vietnam is assigned a large area in which he conducts operations, provides advisers for the Vietnamese forces, and coordinates the overall U.S. efforts. This has required the establishment of two general officer billets; one for a Marine amphibious force commander and one as his chief of staff. In addition, a separate logistics commander is required to coordinate the logistic support of the deployed marines in the Western Pacific. One further billet requiring a general officer in the Western Pacific is a brigade commander on Okinawa. This brigade is part of the uncommitted Ready Reserve of the commander in chief, Pacific. In addition, these commitments have also increased the scope and complexity of general officer responsibilities at field installations and at the headquarters. In this connection, I should like to point out here that there is a very direct relationship between increased operational commitments in the field and the increase in duties and responsibilities in the headquarters. The administration and management of the Marine Corps is centralized at headquarters here in Washington. There is no intervening command level which is responsible for the management of those major program areas which support our operating forces. For example, in 1967 the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-1, who is the manpower coordinator for the Marine Corps, will be responsible for the management of a $1.2 billion manpower budget and for the management of approximately 300,000 marines and civilians. Every aspect of the welfare, training, pay, promotion, and utilization of marines is programed by the manpower coordinator. Further, the detailed management of all Marine Corps personnel, which will total some 278,000 officers and enlisted men by the end of fiscal year 1967, is the direct responsibility of the director of personnel, who is a member of my staff at headquarters. Similarly, the entire Marine Corps supply system, which encompasses 4,500 major end items directly managed at headquarters and 300,000 secondary items managed throughout the Marine Corps, is directly controlled by the quartermaster general of the Marine Corps, who is also located at headquarters. Similar examples could be cited for all the major program areas in the Marine Corps which serve as backup for our operating forces. The point I make is simply that there is a very real and direct involvement of the headquarters in the operational commitments of the Marine Corps. As these commitments become greater and more complex, a corresponding increase is reflected in requirements for the senior officers at the headquarters who manage supporting program areas. To date we have met our general officer requirements on a minimal basis in our most urgent areas by leaving other important billets for general officers unfilled, or by filling them with colonels. While this situation was not unworkable, it was, nonetheless, far from satisfactory even in a stable personnel situation. It did, I might add, continue to present the Marine Corps with a great challenge to its resourcefulness and ingenuity in attempting to "make do" with what we had. Consequently, there was considerable reluctance to attempt to remedy the situation by requesting new legislation in this area. In this connection, let me say that the present law has served the Marine Corps well. At the time it was drafted, in 1954, and for several years afterward, the general officer authorizations stemming from the present law provided the Marine Corps with the necessary flexibility to effectively meet its general officer requirements. However, the changes in the military posture of our Nation over the last 10 years and the expanded role of the Marine Corps within that posture have brought us to the point where the current statutory authorizations no longer provide the necessary flexibility to meet expanded general officer requirements. More important, I have become convinced that it is no longer in the best interests of our country in these critical times for the Marine Corps to attempt to "make do" with the requirements for its top military commanders and managers. An example of the extent to which our flexibility in meeting general officer requirements has been diminished may be seen by comparing the situation during the peak of the Korean crisis with that which faces the Marine Corps under the planned strength buildup during the next fiscal year. At the height of the Korean conflict, the Marine Corps had 57 general officers. Of these, only 6 were committed to combined combat operations or to outside Marine Corps staffs, leaving 51 general officers available for assignment to positions directly concerned with meeting internal Marine Corps needs. By comparison, we anticipate that, without the requested legislation, we will be permitted by present law to have only 64 general officers on active duty at the end of the next fiscal year. Of these, 17 will be committed to combat operations in Vietnam or to outside Marine Corps staffs, leaving only 47 generals available for assignment to meet internal Marine Corps needs. This increasing inability to meet its internal requirements for general officers has also prevented the Marine Corps from actively seeking greater representation on joint and combined staffs, as well as within the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Since we must place great dependence and reliance on these activities in the development and support of our plans and programs, we have attempted to maintain some representation of these staffs. However, in the present environment, where major Marine Corps forces are committed to combat, it is vital to the interests of the national defense as well as the Marine Corps that we have increased high-level representation on these staffs where major decisions on deployment and commitment of Marine Corps forces are made daily. The general officer authorizations which we are proposing in the revised grade table are designed to reinstate the flexibility which was originally incorporated in the present table. This flexibility is essential if we are to respond effectively to the creation of general officer requirements, particularly those which are not related to increases in total officer strength. In the past several years this has been the type of general officer requirement we have had to meet. Thus, while the proposed table continues to use officer strength as the base for determining general officer authorizations, it also takes into consideration the additional general officer requirements which are generated, independent of variations in officer strength. Again, let me thank you for the opportunity to personally present my views to you on this very important problem. I want to assure you that the decision to seek legislative relief in this matter was not casually considered, nor lightly made. I believe that our request is both reasonable and realistic, and I know that you will consider it in the same light. That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I will be happy to attempt to answer any questions you or the members of the committee may have. Mr. HÉBERT. Thank you very much, General Greene. I think in order that we may have the full and complete picture we would like to hear from General Berg, representing the Secretary of Defense, the Assistant Secretary for Manpower, so we will have both statements and may consider them both at the same time. General Berg, you may proceed. STATEMENT OF BRIG. GEN. WILLIAM W. BERG, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE General BERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Brig. Gen. William W. Berg, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy. The Department of Defense strongly recommends the increase in general officer strength provided by H.R. 14741. This recommendation applies both to the immediate and urgent needs today and to the permanent adjustment for the entire table of general officer authorizations for the Marine Corps. The commitments of the Marine Corps today speak for themselves, both in terms of physical expansion and intensified stress. However, recent years clearly have shown a pattern of military problems in which Marine Corps contributions to broad defense planning and leadership are essential. Even without the current special strains, the statutory authorizations for general officers at best provide for the needs of the Marine Corps itself, on an austere basis. They effectively preclude full participation in matters in which corps expertise is sorely needed. We believe that the revised table in H.R. 14741 is in the best interests of national defense. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. General Greene, there are just one or two questions I would like to ask in order that we have the whole record clear on this subject matter. As I listened to you reading your statement you kept referring to the internal mission of the Marines. What exactly do you mean-do you mean the headquarters mission as related to the combat or field mission or as to the entire structure of the Marine Corps? General GREENE. I refer to the entire structure of the Marine Corps. The internal requirements for general officers. As a specific example, our quartermaster general, a major general, now has no deputy at this point, and he rates a brigadier general. We have not been able to fill that billet. This is an example of the sort of problem that I have in many places not only in headquarters but in the major supporting activities, the Joint and Defense staff, and also in the Reserve. Another specific example would be in the Strike Command-well, that is not an internal requirement. Mr. HÉBERT. That is a coordinated requirement. General GREENE. A coordinated requirement, but in the case of the director of personnel, here we have a major general who is going to be responsible for handling 279,000 officers and men and he has no assistant, and I haven't been able to make one available to him because I have had so many other demands for general officers. Mr. HÉBERT. Well, now, in this area-and you refer to Reserves, too-in your Marine Corps structure, what rank heads that division or section? |