$214,400,000 relates to reductions made by Congress in the appropriation requests last year and duly noted in both the House and Senate reports at that time.

We have representatives of all the services before us at present.

ORIGINAL AND REVISED 1964 STRENGTH PLANS

Will you insert at this point in the record the budgeted personnel strength for fiscal year 1964 as in the original 1964 budget by month and also the actual personnel strength by month through the latest available report with the projection for the balance of the fiscal year. We would want this separately for each of the items requested. (The information referred to follows:)

Strength plans, Active Army, fiscal year 1964

Actual 1 and
projected 2

Strength plans, military personnel, Navy, fiscal year 1964

Actual 1 and
projected

2 Differences between actual/projected column upon which supplemental request was based and President's budget column account for absorption of $18,000,000 of the $62,000,000 congressional reduction.

End of month

Strength plans, Reserve personnel, Navy, fiscal year 1964

President's
budget
(estimated)

Strength plans, military personnel, Marine Corps, fiscal year 1964

2 Includes actuals through December 1963. The supplemental request of $47,000,000 for the appropriation "Military personnel, Marine Corps," was based upon a complete recomputation and updating of the personnel plan which included these "actual and projected" month-end strength with only the following exceptions: the November and December strengths were estimated at 189,698 and 188,872, respectively. The cost of the pay raise for the personnel plan as contained in the 1964 congressional submission would have been $49,000,000.

Strength plans, Reserve personnel, Marine Corps, fiscal year 1964

Actual 1 and
projected

Strength plans, Air Force military personnel, fiscal year 1964

1 Actual strengths through December 1963.

Strength plans, Reserve personnel, Air Force, fiscal year 1964

Department of Defense, retired pay, strength plans, fiscal year 1964

Mr. MAHON. I assume we might begin with you, General Taylor, and then proceed with others.

Who can give us a rough approximation of the percentage increase granted by the Military Pay Act of last year, that is, is it a 7 percent overall figure, 11 percent, or what is the figure?

Colonel HAYMAN. 14.2 percent.

Mr. MAHON. Is that across the board, or is that an average?

Colonel HAYMAN. This is the amount of increase on the average, sir. In other words, not everyone got a pay increase; this is the average increase for basic pay for all those who were authorized higher

pay rates.

General TAYLOR. I have a very brief opening statement.
Mr. MAHON. Will you proceed, please.

GENERAL STATEMENT OF DIRECTOR OF ARMY BUDGET

General TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, On January 21, 1964, the President transmitted for the consideration of the Congress proposed new obligation authority for fiscal year 1964. This is contained in House of Representatives Document 203, 88th Congress. I shall discuss the Army's portion of this proposal, totaling $267.4 million. This amount is required to fund the following: 1. Nine months' cost for the Uniformed Services Pay Act of 1963, $243 million (Public Law 88–132); and

2. Additional requirements to continue the military personnel program in fiscal year 1964, $24.4 million.

Army fiscal year 1964 supplemental budget request

The chart above indicates the total supplemental requirements distributed by Army appropriation: $258.4 million for the military personnel, Army, appropriation; $0.5 million for the Reserve personnel, Army, appropriation; and $8.5 million for the National Guard personnel, Army, appropriation.

I will now outline the method of financing our requirements and will discuss why complete financing within presently available resources is not feasible.

The Uniformed Services Pay Act of 1963 (Public Law 88-132), approved October 2, 1963, provides for an increase in pay, effective October 1, 1963, for all military personnel with more than 2 years' service. The 9 months' cost of this act totals $263.5 million. The MPA portion is $234 million, none of which can be financed within funds available. The cost for RPA is $11.6 million; however, this appropriation can absorb $11.1 million and will require only $0.5 million additional funds. The NGPA total requirement is $17.9 million. This appropriation can absorb $9.4 million, leaving a net requirement of $8.5 million.

Uniformed Services Pay Act of 1963 (Public Law 88-132)

The above chart reflects the total cost of the military pay raise by appropriation, the amount being financed by the Army, and the additional amount required. The Army plans to absorb $20.5 million of the total cost of the pay raise, made possible by savings in the Reserve component personnel appropriations. Savings of $11.1 million in the RPA appropriation result from lower than budgeted paid drill strength and a lesser average training load in the Reserve enlistment program. For comparison purposes, the Army had budgeted for fiscal year 1964 RPA, based on a beginning strength of 274,500, an end strength of 281,000, and an average strength of 277,750. However, the fiscal year 1964 actual beginning strength was only 236,985, and this supplemental request is based upon an estimated end strength for fiscal year 1964 of 264,000. The average strength is 251,856.

Savings of $9.4 million in the NGPA appropriation also result from lower than budgeted paid drill strength and a lesser average training load in the Reserve enlistment program. For comparison purposes, we had budgeted for fiscal year 1964 NGPA, based on a beginning strength of 375,500, an end strength of 384,400 and an average strength of 379,950. However, the fiscal year 1964 actual beginning strength was only 360,714, and this supplemental request is based upon an estimated end strength for fiscal year 1964 of 376,000. The average strength is 367,663.

At this time, I should like to point out that at the recent Reserve component appropriation hearings we indicated the possibility of attaining higher end strengths than initially contemplated. However, in light of the savings generated during the first part of fiscal year 1964, we now estimate the funds requested in this supplemental appropriation will be adequate for this fiscal year, for both the Army Reserve and the National Guard personnel appropriations.

This next chart shows the Army's additional requirement of $24.4 million, needed to support the Active Army military personnel pro

You will recall that the Army fiscal year 1964 budget was reduced $100 million by the Congress, with the understanding, however, that the proposed military personnel program would be maintained. The Army has estimated that it can finance $75.6 million of the $100 million congressional reduction. This action is possible primarily because of decreases in requirements for longevity pay and the realization of lower than anticipated average strengths in fiscal year 1964.