Mr. SHEPPARD. What you are telling me is that your policy in general is to utilize existing facilities wherever you find it?

General REEDER. That is right.

Mr. SHEPPARD. I think that is a laudable approach to the problem.

FUNDS REQUESTED FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Now, what would you say in reference to the military share of the $190,000,000?

General REEDER. We requested $55,000,000, roughly, for research and development, which was in two categories.

(Off record discussion.)

DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR DETERMINING BUDGETARY REQUESTS

Mr. SHEPPARD. With reference to the inquiry Chairman Mahon made relative to the composition of the budget: You have within the Department what is called the planning board that is in operation? General REEDER. The research and development board?

Mr. SHEPPARD. I mean the strategic board, Joint Chiefs of Staff. $ General REEDER. Yes.

Mr. SHEPPARD. When an issue of this character prevails, what is the procedure? Are you told by this particular group that you are to have so much manpower and then you start building your requirements for that manpower, or do they hand down an operating plan for the procurement of manpower and all the other adjuncts thereto? General REEDER. You are referring to the Joint Chiefs of Staff? Mr. SHEPPARD. Yes.

General REEDER. The Joint Chiefs of Staff assign the mission and the major forces, and from that point forward we develop from that mission and those forces the lesser things that go with it, the requirements of those troops, the equipment and supplies.

Mr. SHEPPARD. And the conclusion, insofar as the amount of guns, ammunition, tanks, and so forth, is your responsibility.

General REEDER. Is our responsibility.

Mr. SHEPPARD. And in the broad application of manpower and the geographical location of operations is the only plan that emanates from the Chiefs of Staff down to you?

General REEDER. That is right; they make up the plans and we fill in the gap.

Mr. SHEPPARD. With that particular operation in view, as I presently interpret it, your duty is more or less a mathematical, mandatory concept, of so many men, so much equipment, so much food, so much clothing, throughout the entire Department; is that correct? General REEDER. Yes; except that quite a bit of judgment is involved from the standpoint as to what shall be the weapon, what risk to take, here and there, in respect to how much money is available, and what we should put the money into to try to get the plan of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in operation.

Mr. SHEPPARD. Of course, at that time, as I interpret it, that plan lays down the manpower policy which they have established, the geographical aspects of it, and they also lay down the factors as to the total amount?

General REEDER. No.

General DECKER. That comes through the Comptroller's Office of the Secretary of Defense.

Mr. SHEPPARD. The percentage of hazard involved is back on you people, insofar as the type of material that is to be used is concerned, whether this type of tank, this type of gun, or this type of ammunition, and so forth?

General REEDER. That is right.

Mr. SHEPPARD. I think that is all.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Sikes.

General DECKER. Mr. Chairman, may I correct an impression that may have been made with reference to the opening of additional installations? We also plan to open some industrial plants.

Mr. MAHON. We will discuss that more thoroughly under research and development?

General DECKER. Yes.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Sikes.

Mr. SIKES. I would like to commend you, General Decker, upon your helpful and informative statement, and I would like to say for the record that we are glad to have you here before this committee. I recall the very fine work you did at Fort Jackson with the guard. General DECKER. Thank you.

EFFECT OF SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS ON COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

Mr. SIKES. I find myself leaning to the conclusion that a great part of this $10,000,000,000 is for defense as a whole, that you are building for a hypothetical world conflict, without too much regard to the immediate need in Korea, and I hope I am wrong in that respect, because I think the emphasis should be on the immediate need. It seems to me that we have at the moment a military establishment with a broad base, but with comparatively few combat units. For instance, we have only 10 divisions of 630,000 men, and the picture that has just been presented by the Army indirectly reflects no material change that would build up a higher percentage of combat units for early

usefulness.

Am I wrong in my conclusion?

General DECKER. This budget, of course, was designed to carry out the concept of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as to both the needs arising out of the Korean situation, and also generally to improve our military position.

It is true that there are not many additional combat units that immediately become apparent. There is only one division. But in a 10-division Army we lack very much of the combat and service support, to make it effective; most of the military personnel is necessary and being utilized in that area.

We have developed, as this chart shows, the largest proportion of the available funds for the use of procurement and production, which will give you the articles the Army will need if war comes in a larger measure than was expected at the moment.

Mr. SIKES. What can we tell the House about your ability, with this $10,000,000,000 appropriation, to provide additional combat troops in Korea within the near future? Why is it that more combat teams are not being developed for emergency use in Korea and in other areas, should an emergency develop in other areas?

General DECKER. That is exactly what we are trying to do. And, I would like this statement off the record.

(Off record discussion.)

Mr. SIKES. Let me ask you another question.

USE OF NATIONAL GUARD AND OTHER RESERVISTS IN PRESENT EMERGENCY

We have a National Guard and Reserve in being of about 850,000 men in units. Why can we not call those men in, speedily process them, and move them into combat or into combat readiness and thus achieve a saving in time and secure a higher percentage of combat units?

General DUFF. During the last few days we have called into active service 92 units of the National Guard and Organized Reserve. Mr. TABER. How many men are involved?

General DUFF. I have the exact figure. Around ten thousand three hundred some odd men.

Mr. SIKES. Those 10,000 men were composed of what kind of troops in the main? Were they infantry, artillery, quartermaster troops, radar teams, or what?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. SIKES. Is all of that included in the over-all plan which you have just described?

General DUFF. That is right.

Mr. SIKES. But it does not reflect an increasingly large percentage of combat effectiveness; is that correct?

General DECKER. That is correct.

Colonel DALEY. Mr. Sikes, may I go off the record?

Mr. SIKES. Surely.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. SIKES. Now you have given us a better picture than we have had heretofore. In other words, in the men that are being called in there is a higher percentage of combat troops than there has been heretofore?

Colonel DALEY. That is right, sir.

Mr. SIKES. However, it still appears low. Is that as high a percentage as you feel you can achieve in combat units?

Colonel DALEY. Yes, sir, Mr. Sikes, because we will still have a few deficiencies in our general reserve in terms of combat-service support.

I would like to go a little further. We are using our recruiting stations as the induction stations for the selectees coming in. We had to increase them to handle the big load. They were staffed for an ordinary flow. Their workload will be increased over 100 percent,

sir.

The pipeline includes the detachment of patients, those people who will be hospitalized for over 120 days, the combat casualties coming in from Korea. It includes trainees in the replacement training centers required to maintain the Army.

We have to keep that pipe full, just like we do the food and clothing, all the time. The pipe is full from the ZI to overseas commands.

This pipe is, of course, attributable to the increase in the Army. It is a little above normal because of having to provide for combat losses included.

SUFFICIENCY OF PRESENT PREPARATORY PROGRAM

Mr. SIKES. The information you are giving is very helpful. That gives a better picture than I first anticipated.

I am not sure that you are still going as fast in the direction of defense now as the Congress and the country would want you to. I think the job of coping with Korea and of coping with any other emergency that might arise and doing it immediately is much more impressive on other people throughout the world than the process of building up a big military organization which is going to be ready for use sometime in the future.

I realize that time is getting short.

General REEDER. May I say this in partial answer to your statement, off the record?

(Discussion off the record.)

EFFECT OF KOREAN WAR ON CONCEPT OF WARFARE

Mr. SIKES. Let me ask you whether there has been any change in your concept of warfare as a result of the lessons in Korea, for instance, the fact that Korean ground troops are operating successfully without air cover. Have we learned anything from the Korean operation? Is it reflected in the request for funds here?

General DUFF. In my opinion I think it is a little bit too early to draw any conclusions along that line.

Mr. SIKES. General, are we going to have to be kicked out of Korea before we can learn why the enemy has been able to operate so effectively?

General DUFF. General MacArthur is well satisfied with the tactical air support that he is getting from the Air Force.

Mr. SIKES. I am not complaining about the air support, although I think it has been very costly support, but the fact remains that the North Koreans have operated very effectively without air cover and despite the fact that we do have vigorous air support.

General DUFF. I just want to add that the weather has hampered air operations somewhat in Korea. The North Koreans launched this offensive at the height of the rainy season in Korea. It has hampered operations somewhat.

Mr. SIKES. They have kept tanks rolling, and it certainly appears that fuel and supplies are moving virtually as rapidly as needed, even though the North Koreans are now far from their known bases of supply.

General DUFF. That is true.

Mr. SIKES. Again, General, they are still operating tanks and continuing to roll over most of Korea.

General BOLLING. That is correct, sir.

HOUSING IN ALASKA

Mr. SIKES. May I ask General Decker why it is not contemplated to place additional troops in Alaska, which seems to us to be one of the key points?

Mr. MAHON. That is probably off the record.

Mr. SIKES. Yes.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. SIKES. That problem has been in existence for several years. Why is it that housing has not been provided?

General REEDER. Well, sir, we have tried to put our money in public-works construction into Alaska and Okinawa essentially, and we have under construction housing up there right now. The best news we ever got was when the bids for housing around Fort Richardson and up around Ladd Field came down from an estimated $27,000 to about $14,000.

Mr. ENGEL. Wait a minute. Up at Fairbanks your officers' houses were costing $74,000 apiece, when I studied it. They came down to $34,000 up at Fairbanks.

General REEDER. Yes. Now they have dropped again.

Mr. ENGEL. You have dropped down to how much?
General REEDER. At Anchorage it is $14,700.

Mr. ENGEL. What is it at Fairbanks?

General REEDER. I do not remember the exact figure, but there is the usual differential.

Mr. SIKES. I know that is a hard question to ask you, General, but I want to get in the record the fact that this committee has approved all the Alaska housing and other military housing that has been asked of it.

Mr. ENGEL. That is right.

Mr. MAHON. Congress has been a little slow in authorizing housing, Mr. Sikes.

General REEDER. We did miss 1 year because of a legislative jam. Mr. SIKES. You missed 1 year because of the legislative jam, but not because of appropriations.

General REEDER. No, sir. The President's budget for housing has been very well treated as presented.

Colonel DALEY. Mr. Sikes, I could go further on the Alaska situation, but I think it should be off the record.

Mr. SIKES. Let me ask one question first.

Just how closely are we tied to the weather in the defense of Alaska? Are we prepared to move troops in should an emergency develop, regardless of housing? I don't think the enemy will wait for good weather.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. SIKES. Is it not your belief that Alaska will be one of the principal danger points in the event of world conflict?

General DUFF. It is a possibility; yes, sir.

Mr. SIKES. I believe you wanted to add something, Colonel. Colonel DALEY. Mr. Sikes, I would like to go off the record, sir. (Discussion off the record.)

FUNDS REQUESTED FOR INDUSTRIAL MOBILIZATION AND RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT

Mr. SIKES. Did I understand that there is no step-up in research and development funds in this proposed budget?

General REEDER. No, sir; you did not so understand. We are bidding against the Secretary of Defense kitty which I understand in that regard to be $120,000,000. The Army is bidding for $55,000,000. Mr. ŠIKES. In new funds?