a more important player in our nation's defense. This has been accomplished because of dedication on the part of all involved. The individual soldier has been willing to train extra hours and, when required, to deploy to distant training areas to gain as much expertise as possible on the latest techniques and equipment. The leadership of the Guard has been committed to finding new and innovative ways to train, motivate and provide the best for the least cost. The Army has been fully supportive of the Guard as an equal partner and has provided the latest equipment and unparalleled training opportunities. The Congress has been willing to direct the necessary funding to carry out these crucial programs which make the ARNG a vital part of the Total Army. The partnership between the Army National Guard, the Army, and the Congress has worked well to fashion an Army Guard fully capable of serving as an equal partner - an "Army on Call" - for this nation's defense. We must continue this trend in the coming years.

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD BUDGET

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY

The FY 88/89 National Guard Personnel, Army (NGPA) budget request of $3,325 provides pay and related expenses for Army National Guard personnel. The FY 89 budget maintains end strength (457,270 including an AGR strength of 25,725) at FY 88 levels. Besides pay and allowances for ARNG soldiers, NGPA funds pay for School Training ($179M) and Special Training ($102M). These two accounts provide overseas training, mobilization exercise training, retraining required to meet force structure changes, and professional development training so critical to an ever more rapidly deploying Guard. While the School Program will increase in FY 89, the Special Training account will experience a reduction of $25 million in the FY 89 budget over the Fy 88 level.

The Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMARNG) provides operation, maintenance, and training support. The chart below provides a breakdown of the dollars requested. A key element in the OMARNG budget for FY 89 is the maintenance of the ARNG military technicians at the FY 88 level. These personnel comprise a part of the Full-time Unit Support program which provides administration, training, and logistical and maintenance support to the Guard. These individuals are critical to the Guard maintaining a readiness posture required by today's Total Force concept.

The Military Construction, Army National Guard (MCNG) request for FY 89
includes funds for the construction of new armories, the alteration and/or
expansion of existing armories, the construction of training facilities, and
the construction of maintenance facilities as shown below.

Mrs. BYRON. Thank you.

I will start with a few questions. We might as well start with a zinger for Admirals. Admiral Smith, one of the things that has always concerned me, looking at the Navy Reserve forces, is the difficulty of getting a reservist on board ship for any length of time whereas the Air Force can pick up a C-130, as they do on a regular basis on a weekend drill, whereas the Army can go out on weekends, it is a little difficult to man a ship on a weekend basis.

Secretary Webb felt fairly strongly about the cuts that the Navy was taking in the retirement of 18 ships rather than transferring those to the Reserve component. Do you feel that with the strength that we have, the current manpower in the Navy Reserve right now, we would have had enough manpower available to man those ships and to find them on a very fulltime beneficial basis? You talked in your statement about the number of Navy reservists currently that are serving in the Persian Gulf. I know we have things going on in the Med. It was not at all surprising to me to find on the battleship, the tremendous number of reservists that were there.

Does the Reserve have the depth to handle more ships in its inventory?

Admiral SMITH. I think "depth" is an appropriate adjective. Yes, ma'am, we do.

Mrs. BYRON. That was a yes or no question. A yes or no answer. General Moore, let me talk a little bit about the Marine Corps Reserve. The staff had been briefed that only access non-prior service recruit reservists that had a specific school slot in the military occupation specialty for that individual to fill are going to be recruited. Yet, Table 16 of the 1987 Reserve Forces Policy Board Report indicates that 44 percent of the Marine Corps Reserves were not recruited according to their MOS he or she was to fill. Can you that is a fairly large discrepancy, and, once again, it goes to the heart of the issue, and that was the skill qualifications of our Reserve component.

General MOORE. Yes, ma'am. We initiated some programs so that today we have 77 percent MOS's matched with our individuals across the board. We have changed the policy to where 85 percent of the prior service and non-prior service personnel are assigned an MOS producing school seat when recruited. So, today, we are looking to end this fiscal year with about 85 percent matched MOS's. Mrs. BYRON. General Scheer, let me talk a little bit about the Air Force. The skill mismatch and the inadequate training which seems to be a serious problem facing the Reserves with the budget summit agreement that was a result in the Reserve for a more significant program growth in end-strength. Looking beyond the 1990 time frame, what is our priority going to be? Are we going to have to have more and better trained or return to a significant endstrength growth? I think that is going to be a very difficult thing when we are looking at the number. Of course, the Air Force has taken the largest number of decline of Active duty personnel. With that reduction of Active duty personnel comes a large number of pilot, navigators and specialists in the aviation field.

With the loss of pilots, there seems to be no slots in the Reserve or the Air Guard to pick up those individuals and really capitalize

on what has been a very major investment in our Air Force in our national security. What way are we going to go? More bodies or better training?

General SCHEER. I do not know, Madam Chairman. You are right. The Air Force, I think, has taken a 20,000 end-strength cut. Mrs. BYRON. Twenty-three thousand.

General SCHEER. Twenty-three thousand. The Reserve forces and the Guard are taking their fair share of cuts. So, while we have had waiting lists of people off Active duty to get in our units, those now will even grow. Obviously, we will not be able to help out in that area and take advantage of those people getting off of Active duty.

Mrs. BYRON. Is that across the board? The waiting list for the Reserve? Or are there certain areas that you still have short-fall in? General SCHEER. In the air crew area, the pilot area, it is across the board. Now, loadmasters and flight engineers and strategic airlift, that is more difficult to come by. Now we are up to close to 100 percent manning in those areas. But across the board in the air crew, in the pilot area, yes. The waiting lists, in fact, most of the time, we have done away with the waiting list because there were just too many on that.

But the Air Force has said that when they weigh the risks against what has to be bought for the future in modernization and so forth, this is the best way to go. So the ratios, in the fighter world, for instance, the Guard Reserve make up approximately one-third of that. So, when the Active force takes down two wings, then the Guard Reserve will take down a wing equivalent. How that ever comes out in the future, what we are going to do beyond 1990, I do not really know.

General CONAWAY. Madam Chairman, if I could add to that, too. I concur with General Scheer. It is a very tough situation and a tough issue. I know the Air Force would prefer not to make any of these conventional cuts as they try to balance the budget. We do have cuts we are making. As you know from the budget submit, units that both General Scheer and I have are downsizing from 24 to 18 fighters and 16 to 12 airlift airplanes. While we do have waiting lists, this is a tough dilemma that we are all facing. Now, maybe it is a sign of the times, but we are going to have to put out on the street combat ready air crews and associated maintenance personnel that we cannot move or PCS to another location. Therein lies one of the inflexibilities of the Guard and Reserve in that we do not have that capability to PCS and then slow down recruiting. But the asset is there and we have to see how far we go.

Mrs. BYRON. Basically, specifically, geographically, there is no difference in any of the areas?

General CONAWAY. At the current time there is a pretty good market out there to recruit. We cannot take on the resource. Obviously, the best balance is when Air Force is retaining over 60 percent of their aircrews. Then General Scheer and I take about half of the 40 percent air crews who go back to civilian life, to the airlines, the family business, or whatever they are going to do. Right now, with retention down in the 40-percent area, they have about 800 a year separating in the 6-11 year group. What did we take, Roger? About 200 or so of those. About 200 was all we could take

last year. So, 600 highly trained resources, that cost millions, we cannot utilize.

Mrs. BYRON. Mr. Bateman?

Mr. BATEMAN. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

Our Coast Guard was substantially lower in its capability to meet its mobilization requirements than the Reserves and other uniform services. We mandated it in the authorization bill for that reason. That the Coast Guard presents to the Congress a plan whereby it would meet its Reserve mobilization requirement by September 1998.

Can you tell me when we would at this stage see that plan?

Admiral WELLING. Sir, the Coast Guard has been developing that plan, and is now working with the Office of the Secretary to bring it to fruition and hopefully get it to Congress.

Mr. BATEMAN. Might I just add a caveat. That the legislation directed that it be done not later than 60 days after the date of enactment. So you are late. I understand that things around here are often later than earlier. But I particularly would suggest that-we do want to see it. It remains to be a very significant concern. I am sure that you as a very important part of the Coast Guard have a

concern.

But the pitifully inadequate capabilities of the Coast Guard to meet mobilization requirements is something that is very important. There are some of us here in the Congress who want to help the Coast Guard address it. When you look at the figures over the years as to how low you are relatively in your capabilities to meet the mobilization requirements of other services, it does not seem to me that you have made a concerted effort to mitigate that problem. If you have got friends who want to help you, for heaven's sake let your friends give you the maximum help.

I might mention that I have read your prepared statement that was submitted for the record, and I certainly sympathize with the point of view there. That it appears sometimes, especially with the Coast Guard, that your authorizing committees and your appropriations committees do not have a fair appreciation of that goal, because we do keep authorizing in that direction.

The Coast Guard is taking on more and more missions while we have less and less forces, budgetarily. I think that this is something that all of my colleagues in the Congress will have to address.

I did not mean to make a speech actually. We look forward to receiving that report, and hopefully to being able to help you address this problem.

If I have any time left, this one is for General Scheer or General Conaway. Talk to me a little more about this reduction from 24 to 18 planes in the squadrons, and that phenomena that we are actually turning out on the street and effectively losing combat ready pilots and crews.

Is that a wise thing for us to be doing given our budgetary constraints, or are there better things that we can and should be doing to avoid that kind of loss of trained personnel?

General SCHEER. Well, sir, the rationale behind it was because of the fiscal constraints that the Air Force had to draw its forces from 38 fighter wings down to 35. It would do that by taking two Active duty wings and one Reserve equivalent wing.