Mr. BROOKS. That is possible, isn't it? Mr. BROOKS. But not probably. Colonel ZEHALA. Right, sir. Mr. BROOKS. So they will get retirement benefits under 810, is that it? Colonel ZEHALA. Public Law 810. That is the old Mr. BROOKS. Public Law 810, and they will get commissary privileges. Colonel ZEHALA. Right, sir. Mr. BROOKS. And Colonel ZEHALA. Post exchange. Mr. BROOKS. Post exchange privileges, and what else will they get? Colonel ZEHALA. Post theater. Mr. BROOKS. Post theater? Mr. BROOKS. And that is all? Mr. BROOKS. Excepting if there is any case at all where a man served 8 years prior active duty before Korea. Colonel ZEHALA. Then he could get hospitalization. Mr. BROOKS. Then he could get hospitalization. Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Chairman Mr. BROOKS. Let me ask you: Are you going to try to reach those individuals or are you going to depend on them coming to the service and requesting it? Colonel ZEHALA. Sir, we have no immediate way of identifying them. However, through the normal publications and the normal publicity given a thing of this kind, I think it will reach them. Mr. BROOKS. You might depend on men like Miles Kennedy we have back there, with the American Legion, to reach out and locate these veterans-I mean all patriotic organizations. Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. BROOKS. You might depend on them. Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Van Zandt Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Chairman. Could you tell us how many would be affected? Colonel ZEHALA. It is estimated about 200. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Two hundred? Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. VAN ZANDT. How many of them are merchant marine or with the merchant marine? Colonel ZEHALA. I wouldn't know, sir. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Isn't it true that while they were in the merchant marine that they could have collected a handsome monthly pay plus a bonus for being in the war zone? Colonel ZEHALA. I am not positive of that,sir. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I think we should look into it. And then the Federal Bureau of Investigation. They were on the Government payroll, and I think they are entitled to some kind of retirement benefits from their civilian employment. Have we a report on the bill? Mr. BROOKS. I think the main thing is that they were serving in Korea. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Are you talking about Federal Bureau of Investigation? Mr. BROOKS. No; I mean the fact that they served in Korea and therefore they wouldn't be--although they served in Korea. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I am thinking about World War II, Mr. Chairman. My experiences with members of the merchant marine in the far Pacific during World War II were not good. They were collecting a bonus. Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman, as I understand this legislation, though, they would have to participate in the Korean war, would they not? Colonel ZEHALA. Definitely; ves, sir. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I understand that, but during the course of World War II they were not in the military. They were in the merchant marine. Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. VAN ZANDT. And now we are giving them credit under Public Law 810 for the time they were in the Reserve during the course of World War II. Mr. PRICE. Jim, I think the difference here is that the provision of the other act was to make certain that they had participated in a wartime activity. At the time of the passage of the act we didn't anticipate Korea. Colonel ZEHALA. That is correct. Mr. PRICE. So, if-they met their qualification a little later on. Mr. BROOKS. For instance-Colonel, if I may interrupt my distinguished colleague, one of these men could have left the merchant marine and sent to Korea and had his arm shot off or his leg shot off over there and come back and he would not be entitled to retirement privileges under 810. Colonel ZEHALA. Not under 810, no, sir. Mr. BROOKS. No; he would have to get it somewhere else. As I understand it, Colonel, to make an individual, we will say Mr. X. eligible for benefits under Public Law 810 and in view of the fact that he was not on active duy during World War II, but he was on active duty in Korea, it is necessary to amend the law? Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Now comes the question. In arriving at the 20 or 30 years of satisfactory service, which would include Korea, will you include in those 20 or 30 years of satisfactory service the time he was on inactive duty as a reservist in World War II if he was in the merchant marine during World War II? Colonel ZEHALA. All of his service would be included during the period in which he held an active or, let me say, current reserve appointment. If during World War II he held a current appointment in the Reserve or National Guard, that service would be creditable. Mr. BROOKS. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. PRICE. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. VAN ZANDT. Yes, surely. Mr. PRICE. I think what the gentleman from Pennsylvania is getting at is something that naturally occurred. You are thinking of a man who sat out World War II. But the fellow who served in World War II may have sat out the Korean war. And if this legislation had been enacted after the Korean war, it would have automatically included the Korean war. Is that the situation? Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. The proviso is that the original bill says that an individual who was appointed prior to August 16, 1945, must have served in either World War I or World War II. Mr. PRICE. Yes. And the act was enacted in about 1948. Mr. PRICE. So if it had been enacted in 1953 the Korean war would have been included. Colonel ZEHALA. More than likely; yes, sir. Mr. BROOKS. Colonel, if I may ask this question in reference to the matter that Mr. Van Zandt was following: that applies to a requirement in 810 which makes eligible those people who prior to the enactment of the act were in the service 10 years? Isn't there some stipulation like that I mean have been in the Reserves for 10 years, and in the event they had been, then they must have served in World War I or World War II? Colonel ZEHALA. Well, the requirement, sir, is 20 years' satisfactory service. Mr. BROOKS. I understand that is the normal requirement. Mr. BROOKS. Twenty years' satisfactory service. Colonel ZEHALA. Now, it is possible that an individual who was appointed prior to August 16, 1945 Mr. BROOKS. That is the date the act was passed? Colonel ZEHALA. No, sir. Mr. DUCANDER. No. Colonel ZEHALA. The act was passed in June 1948, but it specifies if he were appointed prior to August 16, 1945, he must have served in World War I or World War II in order to be eligible for the benefits. Now Mr. BROOKS. Isn't that the stipulation that this seeks to amend? Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. BROOKS. So, it wouldn't in effect be giving credit, generally speaking, to those who served in the Reserve but who did not take part in an active conflict. It wouldn't be establishing that precedent, but would simply apply to that group that had been in the Reserve appointed prior to the enactment of this statute. Colonel ZEHALA. Prior to August 16, 1945. That is the only group that would be affected by this legislation. If they were appointed prior to August 16, 1945, and did not serve in World War I or II but did serve on extended active duty during the Korean war, then they would be eligible. Mr. BROOKS. That was the clause-that was the only way, as I remember, that we dated the bill back to cover groups that has been in the Reserves and on active duty; isn't that correct? Colonel ZEHALA. I am sorry, I didn't quite follow that, sir. (Further statement off the record.) Mr. BROOKS. Isn't that right? Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. WINSTEAD. Mr. Chairman. If I understand this correctly I am sorry, I didn't get here for Mr. Marshall's testimony. We always find him very sound on all measures. If I understand this correctly, this applies only to the man who may have served in the merchant marine or been in the Active Reserve components, that were called up or either enlisted or served during the Korean war, and no one else; is that right? Just that one particular group, that this bill covers? This bill covers only those that served in the Korean war or in the service during that war who had not had prior service in World War I and World War II? Mr. DUCANDER. That is right. Colonel ZEHALA. Yes, sir. Mr. WINSTEAD. Now, if I recall correctly, we had a great amount of clamor here to exempt those fellows from the draft, who served in the merchant marine. And I opposed that for the reason that I had a nephew who talked to me before he went into the merchant marine. He had a wife and two children. He had a small business. He went into the merchant marine because he could draw more pay. And because you could come home every 6 months or so and he could look after his business. But there was some confusion the best I can remember, and it has been some time, that those fellows who served in the merchant marine were still subject to being called, some of them. Mr. BROOKS. These are Reserves. Mr. WINSTEAD. That is right. Mr. BROOKS. These are reservists and not drafted people. They could have been called at any time. Colonel ZEHALA. That is right. Mr. WINSTEAD. One point: Are we opening the door here where we will have another dozen groups under several different circumstances? If so, let's cover them all at one time. I know in the past we have legislated on piecemeal legislation and nobody seemed to know what we were doing in opening the door, and later on here would come another half dozen groups with just as much credit as this group. Do you know of any other group of people? I think these we are dealing with are entitled to what we are trying to give them. But do you know at this time any other group who would have similar claim if we pass this legislation? Colonel ZEHALA. Not specifically in reference to war service, but there are other groups that could be affected by other legislation which is being proposed but which has not yet been submitted. Mr. WINSTEAD. I know. But what are those? I would like to know before we start how far we are going and what all we will get involved in. Colonel ZEHALA. Well, that has reference to National Guard United States service, AUS service, Army nurse service-those are the three. Mr. DUCANDER. Naval aviation cadets. Colonel ZEHALA. Naval aviation cadets. Colonel ZEHALA. Those are the general features of the other proposed legislation. • Mr. BROOKS. Will the gentleman yield? But none of those other cases apply to contract veterans; I mean veterans that served in a war, do they? Colonel ZEHALA. They could, sir. Mr. DUCANDER. Mr. Chairman, take the case of aviation cadets. At the present time, a person who was a naval aviation cadet can't compute the time he was a naval aviation cadet toward a total retirement under Public Law 810. That is one of the cases. Mr. BROOKS. Of course, a man can take the time he served in West Point or Annapolis and compute that on his retirement benefits. Mr. DUCANDER. The Department has an omnibus bill which they are preparing which would group all those people together and they are intending to submit it to Congress, so my information goes. Mr. BRAY. Mr. Chairman, I believe I can say something that will clarify this situation. I think there are being very many extraneous matters that are being brought in here that have nothing to do with this legislation. First, when was Public Law 810 passed-what year? Mr. DUCANDER. 1948. Mr. BRAY. And at the time that bill was passed, there was already many who at that time would be eligible immediately for retirement. Mr. DUCANDER. Yes, sir. Mr. BRAY. That bill was passed in 1948. Correct me if I am wrong, Colonel. It allowed anyone with 20 years satisfactory Federal service who had participated, been a member of the Armed Forces during World War I or II, to retire. That was one of the titles to it. Mr. DUCANDER. Mr. BRAY. There was another title that allowed anyone with 20 years of active Federal service to retire immediately. Mr. DUCANDER. Yes. Mr. BRAY. The other retirement took place at 60. That is correct, isn't it? Colonel ZEHALA. That is correct; yes, sir. Mr. BRAY. Now, all this bill proposes to do-correct me if I am wrong is to give that same privilege to members of the Korean war, who were in the active Armed Forces during the Korean war, giving them the same right as those in World War II. Colonel ZEHALA. That is right. Mr. BRAY. For instance, I don't believe the idea of merchant marine or any of that really enters into this at all. For instance, let's assume a person graduated from ROTC and was commissioned 1 day prior to the effective date, of the date that you name here in this bill-August 15. Let's say he was commissioned on August 14, 1945, in ROTC, but for physical reasons he was not accepted. Let's say an operation was necessary. Then, he did have that operation, and then did become a member of the Armed Forces, and then did participate as an active participant in the Korean war. He would be entitled to this retirement. Colonel ZEHALA. With this amendment, yes, sir. Mr. DUCANDER. Under this bill. Mr. BRAY. That is what I mean. Mr. BRAY. All it does: It extends to 3 wars instead of 2 the right of participation? |