APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THE CHILDREN ARE AGE 6 AND UNDER.

APPROXIMATELY 34% OF OUR ARMY FAMILIES ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE THE

CONTINENTAL US. ALL OF THESE FACTS POINT TO UNIQUE PROBLEMS A

CONCERNS WHICH MUST BE ADDRESSED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A FORCE

READY FOR DEPLOYMENT.

CONTINUED REDUCTION OF RESOURCES TO FUND NEEDED PHYSICAL

FITNESS CENTERS, CHILD DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES, BARRACKS
IMPROVEMENTS, FAMILY HOUSING AND MEDICAL CARE FACILITIES AS WE
AS ESSENTIAL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES WILL HALT THE MOMENTUM THUS

FAR GAINED. IN FY88 THE ARMY WAS FORCED TO CANCEL THE VOLUNTE
COORDINATOR PROGRAM, YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, OUTREACH SERVI

AND NEW GROWTH IN OTHER COMMUNITY PROGRAMS.

FURTHER REDUCTIONS WILL MANDATE ADDITIONAL CUTS INTO OUR

CORE FAMILY PROGRAMS AS WELL AS SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE OUR ABILI

TO PROVIDE SOLDIERS AND THEIR FAMILIES WITH THE FACILITIES

NECESSARY TO MEET THEIR NEEDS. THIS WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT

NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO RETAIN OUR QUALITY SOLDIERS.

THIS WILL IN TURN REDUCE READINESS.

WHAT IS NEEDED? WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO TAKE CARE OF OU

AS

SOLDIERS AND THEIR FAMILIES. FROM MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCES,
WELL AS REPORTS FROM COMMANDERS IN THE FIELD, SOLDIERS MAKE
DECISIONS TO REMAIN IN THE ARMY BASED ON FAMILY CONSIDERATIONS

THEREFORE, IF WE TAKE CARE OF OUR SOLDIERS AN

OUR FAMILIES WILL REINFORCE THE EFFORTS OF OUR SOLDIERS WHO WI

THEN BE BETTER ABLE TO ENDURE THE HARDSHIPS,

STRESSES AND TURM

ASSOCIATED WITH MOVEMENTS, FAMILY SEPARATIONS, AND THE ALWAYS

PRESENT POTENTIAL FOR COMBAT. IN THIS WAY THE SOLDIER AND FAM

SUPPORTS THE ARMY'S MISSION.

THEREFORE, WITH YOUR SUPPORT, WE NEED TO CONTINUE THE
MOMENTUM THUS FAR GAINED AND BUILD ON IT. I SEEK YOUR SUPPOR

PROVIDE THE LEVEL OF APPROPRIATIONS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE
ARMY'S QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAMS.

PCS

I WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE PERM CHANGE OF STATION (PCS) ISSUE. THIS IS A DELICATE AND F ISSUE THAT MUST BE MANAGED WITH SOME SENSITIVITY AND BE

ON THE EFFORTS NECESSARY TO ADDRESS OVERSEAS DEPLOYED FO

FORCES.

IT IS ALL TO OFTEN A TEMPTING PROGRAM TO CUT B

ITS NOT SO OBVIOUS ROLE IN TRAINING AND IN FORCE READINE AT THE DIRECTION OF CONGRESS AND SUBSEQUENT PCS BUD REDUCTIONS, THE ARMY HAS IMPOSED STRINGENT CONTROLS OVER PROGRAM. THE NUMBER OF MOVES MADE SINCE 1980 HAS BEEN R 17%, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, NEW ENTITLEMENTS AND COSTS GROWN BY 43%. THE GROWTH FROM FY 1988 TO FY 1989 IS PRI

DUE TO RISING COSTS. THE ARMY HAS IMPLEMENTED SEVERAL P CHANGES DURING 1986 AND 1987. THE MAJOR CHANGES WERE:

--FROM AN 36-MONTH TO A 48-MONTH TOUR IN CONUS, ALA

HAWAII;

--FROM AN 18-MONTH TO A 24-MONTH TOUR FOR FIRST TER

--AUTHORIZED A PERMISSIVE MOVE FOR JOINT DOMICILE S

ONLY IF BETWEEN 12 AND 24 MONTH TIME ON STATION; --PLACED A RESTRICTION ON SENIOR OFFICER/NCO'S IN E AN ADMINISTRATIVE WEIGHT ALLOWANCE;

--DELETED THE HOMEBASED ADVANCED ASSIGNMENT PROGRAM MOVE OPTIONS EXCEPT FOR ADVANCE ASSIGNMENTS; CONTINUED REDUCTIONS OF PCS FUNDS WILL HAVE SIGNIFI NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO MAINTAIN THE DESIRED I READINESS. WE HAVE BASED OUR PCS POLICIES ON THE FOLLOW

PRINCIPLES:

--TO IMPROVE READINESS;

--TO PROVIDE INCENTIVES FOR VOLUNTARY ACTIONS;

--TO ENSURE THAT ALL GRADES AND ALL COMMANDS SHARE

CHANGES;

--TO PROTECT PROFESSIONAL TRAINING;

ANENT

RAGILE

FOCUSSED

RWARD

ECAUSE OF

SS.

GET

THE PCS

EDUCED BY

HAVE

MARILY

CS POLICY

KA AND

LDIERS

ROPE TO

(HAAP)

ANT

VEL OF

NG

--TO ACCOMMODATE FAMILIES;

--TO SYNCHRONIZE CLOSELY WITH RECRUITING AND RETENTION;
--TO MARKET CHANGES WITH EMPHASIS ON THE POSITIVE ASPECT

WHY? THOUGH THERE HAVE BEEN POSITIVE OUTCOMES FROM FEW

IN ORDER TO

PCS'S, COMMANDERS ARE FINDING IT MORE DIFFICULT TO MOVE SOLDI
CROSS-LEVEL THEIR UNITS OR TO PROVIDE THEM
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE DESIRED LI
OF READINESS IN OUR FORWARD DEPLOYED UNITS. IN ORDER TO SUS

THE FORCE AND TO MANAGE OUR TROOP STRENGTH, WE MUST EXECUTE
OF OUR TOTAL PCS MOVES FOR SUSTAINMENT AND 59.7% FOR MAINTEN
OF STRENGTH LEVELS. THESE PERCENTAGES INCLUDE PCS MOVES THA
ESSENTIAL FOR OPERATIONS, TRAINING AND UNIT ROTATION.

WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES FACING US? THE ARMY MUST OVER
THE ADVERSE PERCEPTION OF A "BREACH-OF-FAITH" AND PCS "TINKE
CAUSED BY LONGER TOURS, PCS DELAYS/FREEZES AND UNCERTAINTIES

THE FUTURE.

IN ADDITION, WE MUST MANAGE THE TIMELY DISTRIBUTION CHALLENGES OF FORCE MODERNIZATION AND AND THE FILLING OF KEY BILLETS AND CRITICAL SKILLS. WE ARE ALSO CHALLENGED WITH TH PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT HURDLES ASSOCIATED WITH DELAYS IN K ASSIGNMENTS, TRAINING. AND PROFESSIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION.

WHAT IS NEEDED? THE ARMY WILL ACTIVELY MONITOR THIS PR
TO INSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF CONGRESS.
HOWEVER, WE NEED CONGRESS TO GAIN AN APPRECIATION FOR THE
COMPLEXITY OF THE PCS PROGRAM AND THE ARMY'S PCS READINESS L
TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN OUR RESOLVE TO COMPLY WITH CONGRESSION.

INTENT OF REDUCED MOVES, REDUCED TURBULENCE AND REDUCED FAMI
WE NEED A COMMITMENT FROM THE CONGRESS TO SUSTA

HARDSHIPS.
ESSENTIAL FUNDING--WE CAN NO LONGER ABSORB REDUCTIONS GIVEN
DISPOSITIONS, SPECIFIED TOUR LENGTHS, AND ARMY READINESS

IMPERATIVES.

IN THE

CONCLUSION

IT'S BEEN SAID THAT PREPAREDNESS IS PEACE'S GUARANTO FAILURE IS WAR'S PRECURSOR. THE PEACE WE NOW ENJOY IS TH

OF YESTERDAY'S SACRIFICES AND TODAY'S READINESS.

BUT THE

NOT GUARANTEES THAT THIS PEACE WILL BE A PART OF OUR FUTU STRONG DEFENSE MADE UP OF QUALITY FORCES IS THE ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT IN THE EQUATION THAT ASSURES PEACE.

ALL ARMY LEADERS HAVE DEDICATED THEMSELVES TO PRODUC ARMY OF EXCELLENCE. AND, I BELIEVE THE PROGRESS WE HAVE

DATE SHOWS WE ARE NOT JUST PAYING LIP SERVICE TO THESE ID SOLDIERS AND UNITS NEED CONTINUITY, STABILITY, ASSURANCE ADEQUATE RESOURCES AND INSPIRED LEADERSHIP.

SOLDIERS YEARN FOR A CLIMATE OF COMMAND WHERE LEADER

WHERE THEY KNOW THEIR NEEDS FOR BOTH THEMSELVES AND THEIR

FAMILIES ARE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED AND WHERE RECOGNIZE

ACHIEVEMENT AND TOLERANCE FOR HONEST MISTAKES FOSTERS PER

AND PROFESSIONAL GROWTH. SOLDIERS WANT "STANDARD BEARERS LEADERS WHO INSIST ON AND MEET HIGH STANDARDS OF TRAINING

MAINTAINING, CARING, AND LEADING.

THE ARMY"S LEADERSHIP IS FOCUSED ON THESE REQUIREMEN

CONTINUES TO ACCEPT THESE CHALLENGES IN THE "YEAR OF TRAI

AND I ASK FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT AND SENSITIVITY AS W

THIS MOST TRYING PERIOD WHEREIN HARD FISCAL DECISIONS MUS

MADE AS WE TACKLE THE NEEDS OF THIS COUNTRY.

I APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE AND SHALL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU

ON ARMY PERSONNEL PROGRAMS.

; ITS

FRUIT

E ARE

E. A

G AN

DE TO

LS.

TEACH,

VAL

AND

G."

NTER

E

HAVE

Senator GLENN. Thank you, General, very much.

And with regard to pay, I will not address each one of the you brought up, but with regard to pay, I fought for it and I fought for it in the budget summit that we had before the h and I lost.

And I can assure you that I am very much aware of how m lags, how much military pay on the average lags behind c pay, civil service pay. And we have to redress that.

We have been talking about it for the last 2 years. You can on living on promises forever and seeing people scaled b their total compensation package and still expect them to be in the service.

And I agree with you to the utmost extent on that. And I have liked to have been able to get it through, not only th committee, but the full committee and the Congress, but v have not been able to do that, I can assure you that, bec think it is very important.

Admiral Edney, please go ahead.

STATEMENT OF ADM. LEON A. EDNEY, U.S. NAVY, CHIEF
NAVAL PERSONNEL

Admiral EDNEY. Good morning. I appreciate the opportu appear before your subcommittee to discuss Navy manpow quirements. I have provided a written statement for the reco I will not address the important issues of retention and com tion this morning because I understood that will be the sub the hearing on the 24th of March.

I would like to highlight a few manpower points. In deve the manpower and personnel program for fiscal year 1989 executing our fiscal year 1988 program, we have been driven ternal and external pressures to the limits of manpower effi

The fact is our manpower has not been allowed to incre match our growing force structures over the last several year we are drawing from our shore and support establishments t our fleet properly manned. We have eliminated the planned enlisted growth for fiscal year 1989, and have reduced plann listed end strength by 20,000 across the 5-year defense plan.

We have reached the point where further reductions in st will have a significant adverse impact on fleet readiness. In ing our officer growth of 8,342 from 1980 to 1986, it was men by Mr. Green that OSD determined that 631 billets could validated. In most cases, these billets did not meet the milit sentiality test and were considered convertible to civilian bill

The fiscal year 1987 and 1988 congressionally mandated reductions, combined with fiscal year 1989 budget adjustm budget summit requirements, have deleted 2,817 billets from strength presented in the fiscal year 1988-1989 biannual sur to Congress in January 1987.

Executing the remaining 4 percent officer reduction would in an additional loss of 2,500 officers by the end of 1990. Mr. has already testified that the Navy is unable to sustain that out a significant impact on readiness.