Question No. 7. How much PEMA money has actually been expended on behalf of the Reserve Forces in for PEMA during the past 4 years, by year? Answer. The answer to question 6 applies. Separate expenditure records are not maintained for the Active Army and the Army Reserve Forces.

Question No. 8. How much PEMA equipment was actually received by the Reserve Forces by type and quantity, in the past 4 years, by year, from PEMA appropriations?

Answer. Congressional appropriations for Reserve Forces in the PEMA area do not specify separable dollar totals for the Reserve Forces. The PEMA budget is developed on an item basis to meet the total Army requirements. In view of the above separation of PEMA items delivered to the Reserve Forces from that delivered to Active Army Forces cannot be made.

In an attempt to present an indication of PEMA items delivered to Reserve Forces, the table inclosed indicates those major items of new equipment received by the Reserve components during fiscal year 1964 and fiscal year 1965 to date. Overall dollar value of PEMA major items of equipment provided Reserve components approximate $88 million in fiscal year 1964 and to date in fiscal year 1965, $55 million.

Question No. 9. How much fallout equipment was actually received by the Reserve (1) immediate, (2) reinforcing, by type and quantity, in the past 4 years, by year? What was the condition of this equipment when it was received by the Reserve?

Answer. The only records available for a full reply as to fallout equipment furnished the Reserve components in the last 4 years are in the hands of units of the National Guard and Reserve. It would take considerable time and effort to collect such a large amount of detailed data. Figures are available for a few selected items for fiscal year 1964 only, of which the following are typical:

Priority goes to Immediate Reserve for all equipment to include fallout. The condition (operability) of fallout equipment as received by Reserve components is generally good and suitable for training or better.

It is Army policy to issue equipment only in a safe-fire and/or operable condition.

Question No. 10. Give the schedule by type and quantity of equipment from 1964 PEMA buy that:

(a) Has been delivered as of March 1, 1965.

(b) Is scheduled for delivery.

What specific changes will be made in the schedules under the merger? Answer. Complete data is not available nor maintained that would isolate specific deliveries and schedules from the total fiscal year 1964 PEMA buy. Reports which are maintained include those quantities and schedules which cover fiscal year 1964 and prior as a single entry on numerous items. Attached is a representative sampling of items that were susceptible to isolation and identifica

tion with the fiscal year 1964 PEMA buy. Distribution of these items will be made to the total approved Army forces in accordance with operational priorities based on their worldwide requirements.

Specific changes to current distribution schedules to accommodate the reorganization of the Reserves cannot be determined at this time. Adjustment of distribution will be made, however, based on the readiness objectives mission urgency, and reaction times assigned to Reserve components units.

[Deleted.]

Question No. 11. How much equipment has been withdrawn, if any, from the Reserve forces to support (1) the active Army; (2) for other uses, particularly MAP, in the past 3 years? Was this withdrawal the result of priority of the Active Army or other uses over the Reserves? Identify the other uses, if any. Answer. The two items which were withdrawn from Reserve forces to support the Active Army are 22-ton trucks [deleted] and tactical radios [deleted]. Equipment has not been withdrawn for other purposes.

In the case of the withdrawal of the 22-ton trucks, the action was a result of the priority of Active Army units over the Reserves. AR 220-1 requires that units assigned readiness categories of 1, 2, or 3 be equipped with standard A or B assets only. At the time of this withdrawal action, [deleted], CONARC was short approximately [deleted] 22-ton cargo trucks of the acceptable classification (standard B). Under DOD policy the Army is not authorized to buy for the low priority elements of the Reserve components. Further, assets in the hands of such units under DOD policy are considered available for equipping the 22-division force.

The [deleted] tactical command radios withdrawn from the lower priority units of the Reserve components during the 2d quarter of fiscal year 1965 were issued to support the Active Army. At that time shortages of these radios in the Active Army totaled approximately [deleted]. The withdrawal was made on the same priority basis as for the trucks with no radios going to other uses.

Question No. 12. Will the equipment, (a) assigned for use in Vietnam, or (b) scheduled for assignment in Vietnam, affect procurement or distribution of either new or old equipment to the Reserve Forces to any degree, and, if so, please specify by types of equipment and to what extent.

Answer. [Deleted.]

Question No. 13. As of January 1, 1965, what was the amount of PEMA funds contemplated to be requested of Congress under the 5-year program from fiscal year 1965 through fiscal year 1970, by year designated for the Reserve Forces? Answer. For reasons given in the opening statement, the Army's 5-year program does not identify, nor does the Army contemplate requesting of Congress, PEMA funds solely for support of the Reserve Forces. It does identify those PEMA funds the Army contemplates requesting of the Congress for the total approved force, including the Reserve Forces.

Question No. 14. What subsequent changes have been made, if any in the Reserve and National Guard PEMA account, by year, for fiscal year 1965 through fiscal year 1970? Were these changes directed by DA or OSD and, if so, what was the basis therefor?

Answer. As previously indicated, the Army does not maintain a separate National Guard or Reserve PEMA account.

However, prior to the realinement of the Reserve Forces, the Army budgeted for 22 divisions and their supporting units. The net effect of the realinement, from the standpoint of PEMA procurement, is to add to this base the requirements for two divisions and their supporting units and five separate brigades. The effect of this increased requirement is estimated to be [deleted] million. Of this total, [deleted] million requires procurement through the 1966-70 time period. The remaining [deleted] million represents available assets, available applicable substitute items which will be replaced through long-range modernization programs, or items which are forecast to become available from other unit reorganizations.

The [deleted] million requiring procurement, as proposed by DA and approved by OSD, is planned for inclusion in future Army budget requests as follows: [Deleted.]

The $40 million has been included in the fiscal year 1966 budget request. [Deleted.]

Question No. 15. What was the fiscal year 1964 PEMA appropriation for the Army Reserve and Army National Guard? State whether or not this money (a) has been specifically obligated, (b) on behalf of the Reserves, and (c) if they

have received or will receive new equipment for this amount of money. If not, why not? If so, state the schedule.

Answer. The PEMA appropriation does not separately identify funds required for expenditure in behalf of the National Guard and Reserve. The Army's records do not identify obligations separately, but rather identify obligations for the total approved Army force, including the National Guard and Reserve. Question No. 16. What is the PEMA amount appropriated for the Reserves in fiscal year 1965? Was this money obligated for equipment for Reserves, and if so, can there be any assurance that the Reserve Forces will receive new equipment in this amount when it is received from the contractor? Specify by major items of equipment what is represented by the total amount expended, and the schedule of distribution.

Answer. The answer given to question 15 applies.

Question No. 17. Is it contemplated that an additional request for funds will be made for the Reserves over the next 5 years? If so, in what amount, by year? Will this amount fully equip the units remaining after the merger? What amount of this money will be contained in the fiscal year 1966 budget, if any? Answer. The answer given to question 14 is applicable. Funds requested dur ing the next 5 years will provide sufficient material, when delivered, to adequately equip the entire approved force, including Reserves, in accordance with current logistics guidance. It must be recognized, however, that the Army will never at any one point in time have 100 percent of its authorized equipment. Previously discussed implications of production delivery times, modernization programs, force changes, and economical procurement practices preclude this.

Question No. 18. What specific assurance can you give us that equipment acquired with these additional funds, if appropriated, will be issued to Reserve components?

Answer. The equipment acquired with additional funds based on the reorganization of the Reserve Forces will be applied to the entire 24-division-force requirements. Application of the resources will be made in accordance with priorities based on readiness requirements established by reaction criteria. The Army plans to maintain Reserve component units in a rapid reaction posture based on approved war plans and missions, and will integrate their material requirements based on the mission assigned.

Question No. 19. Is it not possible and more probable that if the Active Army has shortages of equipment in any of the major areas of equipment, that the equipment would be issued to the Active Army units rather than the Reserve units?

Answer. It is possible that the equipment procured as a result of the proposed reorganization of the Reserve structure would be applied against Active Army shortages created by urgent unprogramed requirements, in the interest of national security. With the realinement of the Reserves, however, Reserve units will receive mission assignments requiring more rapid reaction and deployment. They will be issued materiel from the entire 24-division-force procurement in accordance with their mission urgency and readiness objectives.

Question No. 20. Are there equipment shortages in the Active Army divisions? If so, state type and amount of major items.

Answer. [Deleted.]

Question No. 21. (a) If the proposed merger is implemented, state total number of personnel, officers and enlisted, by each grade and for each State who will be excess to the program for lack of a TOE position, under the merger, disregarding the provision to carry excess personnel for 1 year.

Answer. Until State reorganization plans and stationing lists have been received in and approved by the Department of Army, it is not possible to estimate accurately the number of personnel by grade and by State who will be excess to the requirements of the units in the proposed structure. Two different order of magnitude estimates may be made, however, as follows:

(a) Current projections indicate that the combined total of the strengths of the units of the National Guard and the U.S. Army Reserve will be 655,000 at end fiscal year 1965, of which 74,000 will be officers and 581,000 will be enlisted. The proposed troop structure requires 62,300 officers and 487,700 enlisted for a total of 550,000. Thus, at the beginning of fiscal year 1966, if all members of the U.S. Army Reserve elect to continue to serve in units of the Army National Guard, approximately 11,700 officers and 93,300 enlisted men, for a total of 105,000, would be excess to the actual requirements of the unit structure and would necessarily be carried as an overstrength.

(b) Based on an analysis of the troop lists which were forwarded to the State adjutants general on March 1 for the approval of their respective Governors, a tabulation by State has been prepared of the officer and enlisted positions in those units of both the National Guard and the U.S. Army Reserve which will not be continued, under present plans, in the proposed troop structure. This tabulation, which is enclosed, also shows a total of approximately 105,000.

It should be emphasized, however, that the combined total of approximately 105,000 officers and enlisted men should not be construed as being completely excess to the requirements of the proposed structure. Some of these individuals will be assigned to fill vacancies in other units being continued, or created, in the proposed troop structure. Others will be used to fill vacancies in units as they occur throughout the first year after reorganization. In this regard, the actual personnel turnover rate is approximately 30 percent in the units of both the Guard and the Reserve; it is anticipated, therefore, that attrition within the first year after reorganization will permit the absorption of the bulk of the overstrength created as a result of the diminishment in paid drill strength. As has been noted in the question, where an appropriate vacancy for an individual is not available in a unit in the proposed structure, personnel made excess by the realinement may be carried overstrength for a period of 1 year from the date of the reorganization.

In any case, Reserve personnel with a remaining Reserve obligation who do not elect to become members of the Army National Guard unit structure will be required to complete their obligation in the Ready Reserve mobilization reinforcement pool. Those Reserve personnel who do not have a remaining Reserve obligation and who do not elect Guard membership may, and will be encouraged, to affiliate themselves with the Ready Reserve pool. Thus, only a portion of those personnel who do not voluntarily join the Guard and who do not have a remaining obligation will be lost to the Reserve program. The number who will elect to join the Guard cannot, at present, be estimated with any degree of validity since the decision is a personal one on the part of each individual and is influenced by his attitude toward the Guard, the manner in which his transfer to the Guard is presented to him by his unit commander, and the geographical proximity of Army National Guard units to his residence.

Question No. 21. (b) If the proposed merger is implemented, how many personnel, enlisted, by grade and by State, will have to take a reduction in grade to remain in the program?

Answer. No enlisted personnel will be required to take a reduction in grade in order to remain active in the Army's Reserve program. Members of U.S.

Army Reserve units being transferred to the Guard will continue to hold their present grade if they elect to transfer with their unit or as units to the Army National Guard.

The present grade of those personnel desiring to affiliate themselves with the U.S. Army Ready Reserve or Standby Reserve as a nonunit member will likewise be unaffected.

Question No. 21. (c) If the proposed merger is implemented, how many officers will have to change branches in order to remain in the program, under the troop alinement proposed to the States?

Answer. It is not possible to determine accurately the number of officers who will have to change branches until the State stationing lists are received in, and approved by, the Department of the Army. At that time, an analysis of these plans and troop lists will be made in order to determine retraining requirements. It is anticipated that this analysis will be completed by approximately July 30, 1965.

In this regard, the Department of the Army estimates that approximately 75 percent of the existing units will either be unaffected by the reorganization or will undergo only minor organizational modifications which do not involve a change in basic branch. Approximately 10 percent will undergo relatively major reorganizations which will involve a change in basic branch. Approximately 15 percent of the existing units will not be continued in the proposed troop structure. In view of the probable availability of a number of officers with the required skills in units to be inactivated, it is not anticipated that the officer retraining problem will be excessive.

Question No. 21. (d) If the proposed merger is implemented. how many enlisted personnel will have to change MOS in order to remain in the program under the troop alinement proposed to the States?

Answer. It is not possible to determine accurately the number of enlisted personnel who will have to change MOS (military occupational specialty) in order to remain in the program until State stationing lists are received in and approved by the Department of Army. It is anticipated that an analysis of these lists will be completed by July 30, 1965. As stated in (c) above, the Department of Army estimates that 75 percent of the existing units will either be unaffected by the