B-177516 Enlisted Aide Program of the Military Services

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

B-177516 Enlisted Aide Program of the Military Services I1111 lllllIIIlllll lllll lllll lllllIll11 Ill1 Ill1 LM096396 B-177576 Department of Defense BY THE C OF THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 200548 B-177516 To the President of the Senate and the c Speaker of the House of Representatives This is our report on the enlisted aide program of the \ military services, Department of Defense. C‘ / We made our review pursuant to the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 53), and the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950 (31 U.S.C. 67). We are sending copies of this report to the Director, Office of Management and Budget; the Secretary of Defense; the Secretar- ies of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; and the Commandant of the Marine Corps. Comptroller General of the United States Contents Page DIGEST 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 5 2 HISTORICAL AND LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND OF THE ENLISTED AIDE PROGRAM 8 Army and Air Force 8 Navy and Marine Corps 9 Legal aspects of using enlisted aides as servants 10 Summary 10 3 RECRUITMENT, ASSIGNMENT, AND TRAINING OF ENLISTED AIDES 12 Recruitment and assignment 12 Army training 13 Marine Corps training 15 Navy and Air Force training 15 4 MILITARY SERVICES' POSITIONS ON THE NEED FOR ENLISTED AIDES 16 Statements of the services regarding need for enlisted aides 16 Required hosting of official functions 18 Enlisted aides assigned by officer's rank 19 5 DUTIES AND TASKS OF ENLISTED AIDES 20 \ Major duties and tasks 20 Duties connected with entertaining 22 Feelings of enlisted aides about the the tasks assigned them 23 6 ENLISTED AIDES' ATTITUDES TOWARDTHE PROGRAM AND COMPARISONOF AIDES WITH OTHER SERVICE- MEN 24 Comparison of enlisted aides with servicemen in general 25 Rotation of enlisted aides 27 APPEND1 X Page I Letter dated November 20, 1972, from’ Senator William Proxmire to the General Accounting Office 29 II Letter dated December 1, 1972, from Senator William Proxmire to the General Accounting Office 31 III Personnel and training costs 36 IV Statutory authority for enlisted aide program 37 V Letter dated February 5, 1973, from the General Accounting Office to the Secretary of Defense 38 VI Letter dated March 23, 1973, from the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) to the General Accounting Office 40 VII Army reply 41 VIII Navy and Marine Corps replies 53 IX Air Force reply 64 TABLE 1 Geographic distribution of officers and aides as of December 1972 5 2 Percent of admirals and generals citing various duties 2 responsibilities, condi- tions, and demands on their time as a basis for needing enlisted aides 17 3 Percent, by military service, of enlisted aides who said they did various tasks and of officers who said they assigned these tasks to their enlisted aides 21 / TABLE Page 1 4 Average hours per day spent preparing and serving meals and cleaning quarters, as estimated by enlisted aides 21 Percent of enlisted aides who said they did ~ additional tasks not included in table 3 22 Percent, by military service, of officers who said they used enlisted aides at offi- cial and unofficial functions 22 7 Percent, by military service, of officers responding to several catagories of frequency of official and unofficial functions 23 8 Reenlistment intention and intention to remain in the aide program according to years in the service and years in the aide program 24 9 Racial composition of enlisted aides 25 10 Promotion rates of enlisted aides compared with those of all enlisted,men 26 ABBREVIATIONS GAO General Accounting Office I I I I I I COMPTROLLERGENERAL!S ENLISTEDAIDE PROGRAM I REPORT TO THE CONGRESS OF THE MILITARY SERVICES I I Department of Defense B-177516 I I I I ------DIGEST I I I WHYTHE REVIEW WASMADE not prohibited by law. The assign- 42 ment of enlisted men under the juris- Senator William Proxmire requested diction of the Secretary of the Navy /+ GAO to to duties in a service capacity in I I officers' messes and public quarters I --clarify the statutory and budgetary is authorized by law. (See p. 8.) I I justification for the e-de I pEwam -c-.-w-ruLT-.%x.of the military,w.*v_--I..L-.% ssL-*em,; services, Enlisted aides are assiqned to.senior I I and of~~~~~~-~~~~e~~~~~~~~nfficers I fx~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~wb;~~ch, if per- I --determine the nature and propriety formed by the officers themselves, I I of tasks and duties assigned to would be done at the expense of the I ;;ljsted aides. (See apps. I and officers’ primary military and offi- I I . cial duties. I I FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS A court decision and military regula- I I tions state that the propriety of I As of December 1972, 1,722 enlisted duties of enlisted men is governed I men were assigned as aides to 860 ad- by the purpose the duties serve I I mirals and generals and 110 Navy cap- rather than the nature of these I tains. The remaining 457 admirals duties and that the aides' duties I i and generals were not assigned en- must further the accomplishment of a I listed aides. (See p. 5.) necessary military purpose. (See I 1 p. 10.) I P- sts of the enlisted aide I program for fiscal year 1973 were GAO believes it would be difficult I I about $21.3 million; trtin.i.ng.;,cqsts to police any abuses and enforce the were about $360,000. (See.p. 7.) regulations. However, it would prob- I I ably be helpful if the military I Assignment as an enlisted aide is services formally called attention I supposed to be strictly voluntary, to violations and prohibited the L I and enlisted aides are supposed to be further use of enlisted personnel in I , able to transfer from the program such circumstances. (See p. 11.) t at any time. Of 312 aides inter- I 1 viewed by GAO, 272 said they volun- Enlisted aides usually are assigned I teered for the program. The other on the basis of one aide per star-- I I 40 aides said they were assigned. a system that, the military services I (See p. 12.) stated, long has been traditional to I I match the'officers' increasing re- The furnishing of enlisted aides to sponsibility and frequency of occa- f Army and Air Force officers, while I sions requiring personal services, I not specifically provided for by law, including official entertainment. I is a long recognized custom and is (See p. 13.) I I I I I I 1 Tear Sheet I I I I The Marine Corps has three special Most indicated also that the officers training courses for enlisted aides and their families generally treated and the Army has one special course them with dignity and respect. (See and one on-the-job training facility. pp. 23 and 25.) The Air Force and the Navy rely mainly on on-the-job training. (See Younger aides are less likely to re- pp. 13 and 15.) enlist and more likely to transfer out of the program than older aides. The military services provided GAO Aides with relatively little experi- with official positions on the en- ence in the program are more likely listed aide program. They stated to leave the program than more ex- that senior officers required en- perienced aides. (See p. 24.) listed aides due to A large percentage of enlisted aides --the 24-hour-a-day nature of their in all of the services except the jobs, Army are members of minority groups. About 98 percent of Navy aides are --the requirement to host numerous Filipinos; 65 percent of Marine aides official functions, and 35 percent of Air Force aides are black. The Navy and Marine --their extended and irregular work Corps have programs designed to al- hours, and leviate the racial imbalance. The Air Force does not restrict entry to --the need to free the officers' racial groups because the program is wives to provide leadership to voluntary. (See p. 25.) women's organizations and voluntary community services. Enlisted aides in the Navy are not promoted to the higher grades as The 106 admirals and generals re- fast as servicemen in other special- sponding to a GAO questionnaire gave ties because the high retention rates similar reasons for requiring of senior enlisted aides results in enlisted aides. (See apps. VI few openings in higher grades. (See through IX and p. 16.) Almost all p. 27.) said they used enlisted aides to pre- pare for and serve at official and unofficial functions. The average RECOMMENDATIONS number of these functions per month was 2.9 and 1.6, respectively. (See None. p. 23.) Tasks performed by enlisted aides AGENCYCOMMENTS AND UNRESOLVEDISSUES are those generally associated with domestic servants: preparing and The military services,were provided serving meals, cleaning quarters, all of the data GAO gathered in the I maintaining grounds, and bartending. interviews with the enlisted aides (See p. 22.) and from the questionnaires to the generals and admirals. GAO obtained Most enlisted aides interviewed be- the military services' official po- lieved the tasks they performed sitions on the enlisted aide program assisted the officers and released and these statements are included as them to work on their primary duties. appendixes VI through IX. 2 I I I I MATTERSFOR CONSIDERATION in its consideration of Senate bill I BY THE GONGRESS 853, which would restrict officers' use of enlisted men for servant-type I duties and would eliminate the en- I I This report may assist the Congress listed aide training courses. i I I Tear Sheet CIIAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Each of the mi litary services ass 'igns enlisted men as personal aides to senior officers to relieve the officer OC minor details which, if performed by the officer himself, would be at the expense of the officer’s primary military and official duties.
Recommended publications
  • AUGUST 2021 May 2019: Admiral Sir Timothy P. Fraser
    ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 May 2019: Admiral Sir Timothy P. Fraser: Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, May 2019 June 2019: Admiral Sir Antony D. Radakin: First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, June 2019 (11/1965; 55) VICE-ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 February 2016: Vice-Admiral Sir Benjamin J. Key: Chief of Joint Operations, April 2019 (11/1965; 55) July 2018: Vice-Admiral Paul M. Bennett: to retire (8/1964; 57) March 2019: Vice-Admiral Jeremy P. Kyd: Fleet Commander, March 2019 (1967; 53) April 2019: Vice-Admiral Nicholas W. Hine: Second Sea Lord and Deputy Chief of the Naval Staff, April 2019 (2/1966; 55) Vice-Admiral Christopher R.S. Gardner: Chief of Materiel (Ships), April 2019 (1962; 58) May 2019: Vice-Admiral Keith E. Blount: Commander, Maritime Command, N.A.T.O., May 2019 (6/1966; 55) September 2020: Vice-Admiral Richard C. Thompson: Director-General, Air, Defence Equipment and Support, September 2020 July 2021: Vice-Admiral Guy A. Robinson: Chief of Staff, Supreme Allied Command, Transformation, July 2021 REAR ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 July 2016: (Eng.)Rear-Admiral Timothy C. Hodgson: Director, Nuclear Technology, July 2021 (55) October 2017: Rear-Admiral Paul V. Halton: Director, Submarine Readiness, Submarine Delivery Agency, January 2020 (53) April 2018: Rear-Admiral James D. Morley: Deputy Commander, Naval Striking and Support Forces, NATO, April 2021 (1969; 51) July 2018: (Eng.) Rear-Admiral Keith A. Beckett: Director, Submarines Support and Chief, Strategic Systems Executive, Submarine Delivery Agency, 2018 (Eng.) Rear-Admiral Malcolm J. Toy: Director of Operations and Assurance and Chief Operating Officer, Defence Safety Authority, and Director (Technical), Military Aviation Authority, July 2018 (12/1964; 56) November 2018: (Logs.) Rear-Admiral Andrew M.
    [Show full text]
  • PART V – Civil Posts in Defence Services
    PART V – Civil Posts in Defence Services Authority competent to impose penalties and penalties which itmay impose (with reference to item numbers in Rule 11) Serial Description of service Appointing Authority Penalties Number Authority (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1. Group ‘B’ Posts : (A) (i) All Group ‘B’ Additional Additional Secretary All (Gazetted) posts other than Secretary those specified in item (B). Chief Administrative Officer (i) to (iv) (ii) All Group ‘B’ (Non- Chief Chief Administrative Officer All Gazetted) posts other than Administrative those specified in item (B). Officer (B) Posts in Lower formations under - (i) General Staff Branch Deputy Chief of Deputy Chief of Army Staff. All Army Staff _ Director of Military Intelligence, | Director of Military Training, | Director of Artillery, Signals Officer-in-Chief, |(i) to (iv) Director of Staff Duties, as the case may be | | (ii) Adjutant-General’s Branch Adjutant-General Adjutant-General All Director of Organisation, Director of Medical (i) to (iv) Services, Judge Advocate-General, Director of Recruiting, Military and Air Attache, as the case may be. (iii) Quarter-Master-General’s Quarter-Master- Quarter-Master-General All Branch General Director concerned holding rank not below (i) to (iv) brigadier (iv) Master General of Master General Master-General of Ordnance All Ordnance Branch of ordnance Director of Ordinance Services, Director of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, as the case may be (v) Engineer-in-Chief Branch Engineer in Chief All Chief Engineers of Commands (i) to
    [Show full text]
  • William D. Sullivan, Navy Vice Admiral Bill Sullivan Graduated from Florida
    William D. Sullivan, Navy Vice Admiral Bill Sullivan graduated from Florida State University in June 1972. He received his Navy commission in September 1972 following graduation from Officer Candidate School in Newport, Rhode Island. During his 37 years of active duty, Vice Admiral Sullivan served in a variety of sea-going assignments including cruiser, destroyer and frigate class surface ships and aircraft carrier strike group staffs. He commanded the guided missile destroyer USS SAMPSON (DDG 10)during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, deploying to the Red Sea while enforcing United Nations sanctions on Iraq. From 1997 to 1999 he commanded the Aegis guided missile cruiser USS COWPENS (CG 63), deploying to the Persian Gulf and executing Tomahawk strike operations against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Vice Admiral Sullivan has served in a variety of staff positions. Joint assignments include Director for Pacific Operations on the Joint Staff (J-3), Director for Strategic Plans and Policy (J- 5) at U.S. Pacific Command and Vice Director, Strategic Plans and Policy (J-5) on the Joint Staff. From 1999 to 2001 he served as Commander, U.S. Naval Forces, Korea. Prior to his retirement from active duty, Vice Admiral Sullivan served as the U.S. Representative to the NATO Military Committee, NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium. Vice Admiral Sullivan earned a Masters Degree in National Security Studies at Georgetown University in 1990 and a Masters Degree in National Security Affairs at the National War College in 1994. Vice Admiral Sullivan is a member of the Veterans Advisory Board for the Florida State University Veterans Legacy Complex which will house student-veteran programs, the Army and Air Force ROTC offices, and the archives and offices of the Institute on World War II and the Human Experience.
    [Show full text]
  • The Active-Duty Officer Promotion and Command Selection Processes
    Issue Paper #34 Promotion Version 3 The Active-Duty Officer Promotion and Command Selection Processes Considerations for Race/Ethnicity and Gender MLDC Research Areas 1 Definition of Diversity Abstract gender. The MLDC in turn requested that the military Services and the Coast Guard Legal Implications Two MLDC charter tasks directed the com- describe their promotion and command selec- Outreach & Recruiting missioners to evaluate whether the officer tion processes so that the MLDC could study promotion and command selection systems whether certain features of these systems Leadership & Training provide fair opportunities to both men and might affect the selection of officers based on Branching & Assignments women and members of all race/ethnicity their race/ethnicity or gender. A summary of groups. Using Service briefings and other the presentations from the fall 2009 and win- Promotion information provided to the MLDC, this ter 2010 MLDC meetings, along with relevant Retention Issue Paper (IP) describes key features of material provided by the Services after the meetings, is presented.2 Implementation & the promotion and command selection proc- Accountability esses and discusses how they may accentu- There are three main ways in which ate or mitigate the potential for bias in the promotion and command opportunities may Metrics selection of officers for promotion or com- be unfair. First, a lack of fairness may develop National Guard & Reserve mand. Overall, the promotion and command before officers are actually evaluated for selection board processes include a number promotion or command selection; this occurs of features that attempt to impart fairness if race/ethnicity or gender affects the assign- and to mitigate the impact of bias on the ment of officers to key positions that enhance part of an individual board member.
    [Show full text]
  • Commodore John Barry
    Commodore John Barry Day, 13th September Commodore John Barry (1745-1803) a native of County Wexford, Ireland was a Continental Navy hero of the American War for Independence. Barry’s many victories at sea during the Revolution were important to the morale of the Patriots as well as to the successful prosecution of the War. When the First Congress, acting under the new Constitution of the United States, authorized the raising and construction of the United States Navy, President George Washington turned to Barry to build and lead the nation’s new US Navy, the successor to the Continental Navy. On 22 February 1797, President Washington conferred upon Barry, with the advice and consent of the Senate, the rank of Captain with “Commission No. 1,” United States Navy, effective 7 June 1794. Barry supervised the construction of his own flagship, the USS UNITED STATES. As commander of the first United States naval squadron under the Constitution, which included the USS CONSTITUTION (“Old Ironsides”), Barry was a Commodore with the right to fly a broad pennant, which made him a flag officer. Commodore John Barry By Gilbert Stuart (1801) John Barry served as the senior officer of the United States Navy, with the title of “Commodore” (in official correspondence) under Presidents George Washington, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. The ships built by Barry, and the captains selected, as well as the officers trained, by him, constituted the United States Navy that performed outstanding service in the “Quasi-War” with France, in battles with the Barbary Pirates and in America’s Second War for Independence (the War of 1812).
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Senior Navy Leaders: Requirements for Flag Officer
    THE ARTS This PDF document was made available CHILD POLICY from www.rand.org as a public service of CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION the RAND Corporation. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit NATIONAL SECURITY research organization providing POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY objective analysis and effective SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY solutions that address the challenges SUBSTANCE ABUSE facing the public and private sectors TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY around the world. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND National Defense Research Institute View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Developing Senior Navy Leaders Requirements for Flag Officer Expertise Today and in the Future Lawrence M.
    [Show full text]
  • RAND Study of Reserve Xxii Realigning the Stars
    Realigning the Stars A Methodology for Reviewing Active Component General and Flag Officer Requirements RAND National Defense Research Institute C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2384 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0070-3 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2018 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover design by Eileen Delson La Russo; image by almagami/Getty Images. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Realigning the Stars Study Team Principal Investigator Lisa M. Harrington Structure and Organization Position-by-Position Position Pyramid Health Analysis Analysis Analysis Igor Mikolic-Torreira, Paul Mayberry, team lead Katharina Ley Best, team lead Sean Mann team lead Kimberly Jackson Joslyn Fleming Peter Schirmer Lisa Davis Alexander D.
    [Show full text]
  • US Military Ranks and Units
    US Military Ranks and Units Modern US Military Ranks The table shows current ranks in the US military service branches, but they can serve as a fair guide throughout the twentieth century. Ranks in foreign military services may vary significantly, even when the same names are used. Many European countries use the rank Field Marshal, for example, which is not used in the United States. Pay Army Air Force Marines Navy and Coast Guard Scale Commissioned Officers General of the ** General of the Air Force Fleet Admiral Army Chief of Naval Operations Army Chief of Commandant of the Air Force Chief of Staff Staff Marine Corps O-10 Commandant of the Coast General Guard General General Admiral O-9 Lieutenant General Lieutenant General Lieutenant General Vice Admiral Rear Admiral O-8 Major General Major General Major General (Upper Half) Rear Admiral O-7 Brigadier General Brigadier General Brigadier General (Commodore) O-6 Colonel Colonel Colonel Captain O-5 Lieutenant Colonel Lieutenant Colonel Lieutenant Colonel Commander O-4 Major Major Major Lieutenant Commander O-3 Captain Captain Captain Lieutenant O-2 1st Lieutenant 1st Lieutenant 1st Lieutenant Lieutenant, Junior Grade O-1 2nd Lieutenant 2nd Lieutenant 2nd Lieutenant Ensign Warrant Officers Master Warrant W-5 Chief Warrant Officer 5 Master Warrant Officer Officer 5 W-4 Warrant Officer 4 Chief Warrant Officer 4 Warrant Officer 4 W-3 Warrant Officer 3 Chief Warrant Officer 3 Warrant Officer 3 W-2 Warrant Officer 2 Chief Warrant Officer 2 Warrant Officer 2 W-1 Warrant Officer 1 Warrant Officer Warrant Officer 1 Blank indicates there is no rank at that pay grade.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles Henry Davis. Is 07-18 77
    MEMO I R CHARLES HENRY DAVIS. IS 07-18 77. C. H. DAVIS. RKAD ISEFORE rirrc NATFONAF, ACADK.MY, Ai'itn,, 1S()(>. -1 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR OF CHARLES HENRY DAVIS. CHARLES HENRY DAVIS was born in Boston, January 10, 1807. He was the youngest son of Daniel Davis, Solicitor General of the State of Massachusetts. Of the other sons, only one reached maturity, Frederick Hersey Davis, who died in Louisiana about 1840, without issue. The oldest daughter, Louisa, married William Minot, of Boston. Daniel Davis was the youngest son of Hon. Daniel Davis, of Barnstablc, justice of the Crown and judge of probate and com- mon pleas for the county of Barn.stable. The family had been settled in Barnstable since 1038. Daniel Davis, the second, studied law, settled first in Portland (then Fahnouth), in the province of Maine, and moved to Boston in 1805. He married Lois Freeman, daughter of Captain Constant Freeman, also of Cape Cod. Her brother. Iiev. James Freeman, was for forty years rector of the King's Chapel in Boston, and was the first Unita- rian minister in Massachusetts. The ritual of King's Chapel was changed to conform to the modified views of the rector, and remains the same to this day. Another brother, Colonel Constant Freeman, served through the Revolutionary war and attained the rank of lieutenant colonel of artillery. In 1802 lie was on the permanent establishment as lieutenant colonel of the First United States Artillery. After the war of 1812-'14 be resigned and was Fourth Auditor of tlie Treasury until bis death, in 1824.
    [Show full text]
  • I Drape-Nuts Son, Lottie Esplna Johnson
    that we mast bare more officer* and better trained men of high rank. In all the prin¬ EISEMAN & CO.. 421 7TH, § cipal navies of the world except our own Under Odd Fellows' Hall. St admiral forms of the GRADUATE TOGETHER WHATTHE NAVY LACKS the grade of vlc«> part regular organisation. Other nations have apparently created that grade to give a AN OPEN strong Inducement to rear admirals t« be V- Pro¬ industrious and to develop their skill and Colored Nomal, and Admiral Dewey Discusses efficiency in a fair competition, for promo¬ High CONFESSJON. I tion for vice admiral; second, because the . § commander-in-chief Of a fleet or a large Schools. We're overstocked and will posed Retirement Scheme. squadron, with Increased authority and re¬ Armstrong resort to the most effective sponsibility, Is logically entitled to a higher rank than the flag officers serving under means of remedying that him; and, third. It gives a grade of select¬ state of affairs.in other OLD ed flag officers of high rank, experience, EXERCISES LAST EVENING FLAG OFFICERS TOO proved skill and efficiency, competent and words, SACRIFICE goods. ready to obtain the best possible results SPRING AND SUMMER with any fleet or squadron placed under his command. Audienoe in Convention Hail SUITS must go regardless High Rank Beached at an Earlier Age "The United 8tates has a smaller number Ap~ of value or of cost. of commissioned officers of all ranks In the in Other Countries. sea-going corps than any power except plauds Students. Take advantage of your Austria. We have only 1.95 commissioned to weara¬ officers to each 1,000 tons of warships chance provide built and building, while Great Britain bles at these ridiculous CHANCE FOE THE YOUNG MEN has 2.52.
    [Show full text]
  • The Queen's Regulations for the Royal Air Force Fifth Edition 1999
    UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED The Queen’s Regulations for the Royal Air Force Fifth Edition 1999 Amendment List No 30 QR(RAF AL30/Jun 12 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED INTENTIONALLY BLANK QR(RAF AL30/Jun 12 UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED Contents CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................................................1-1 CHAPTER 2 STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICES AND ORGANIZATION OF THE ROYAL AIR FORCE...........................................................2-1 CHAPTER 3 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR OFFICERS.......................................................................................................................................3-1 SECTION 1 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMMANDERS.................................................................................................................3-1 SECTION 2 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR OFFICERS GENERALLY...............................................................................................3-17 SECTION 3 - INSTRUCTIONS RELATING TO PARTICULAR BRANCHES OF THE SERVICE.....................................3-18 CHAPTER 4 COMMAND, CORRESPONDING RANK AND PRECEDENCE..........................................................................................................4-1 CHAPTER 5 CEREMONIAL............................................................................................................................................................................................5-1
    [Show full text]
  • Albert J. Baciocco, Jr. Vice Admiral, US Navy (Retired)
    Albert J. Baciocco, Jr. Vice Admiral, U. S. Navy (Retired) - - - - Vice Admiral Baciocco was born in San Francisco, California, on March 4, 1931. He graduated from Lowell High School and was accepted into Stanford University prior to entering the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, in June 1949. He graduated from the Naval Academy in June 1953 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering, and completed graduate level studies in the field of nuclear engineering in 1958 as part of his training for the naval nuclear propulsion program. Admiral Baciocco served initially in the heavy cruiser USS SAINT PAUL (CA73) during the final days of the Korean War, and then in the diesel submarine USS WAHOO (SS565) until April of 1957 when he became one of the early officer selectees for the Navy's nuclear submarine program. After completion of his nuclear training, he served in the commissioning crews of three nuclear attack submarines: USS SCORPION (SSN589), as Main Propulsion Assistant (1959-1961); USS BARB (SSN596), as Engineer Officer (1961-1962), then as Executive Officer (1963- 1965); and USS GATO (SSN615), as Commanding Officer (1965-1969). Subsequent at-sea assignments, all headquartered in Charleston, South Carolina, included COMMANDER SUBMARINE DIVISION FORTY-TWO (1969-1971), where he was responsible for the operational training readiness of six SSNs; COMMANDER SUBMARINE SQUADRON FOUR (1974-1976), where he was responsible for the operational and material readiness of fifteen SSNs; and COMMANDER SUBMARINE GROUP SIX (1981-1983), where, during the height of the Cold War, he was accountable for the overall readiness of a major portion of the Atlantic Fleet submarine force, including forty SSNs, 20 SSBNs, and various other submarine force commands totaling approximately 20,000 military personnel, among which numbered some forty strategic submarine crews.
    [Show full text]