Document: Navy To Reduce Admirals By 34

[Richard]

Will the Army and Air Force soon be following suit...

I had to chuckle over this bit of NavSpk - "...aligns Navy Flag Officer billet structure to inventory..."

Richard

Document: Navy To Reduce Admirals By 34
USNI, 15 aUG 2013

Upon the recommendation of the Chief of Naval Operations, the Secretary of the Navy has approved a plan that will result in 34 Navy Flag Officer positions being reduced, eliminated, or consolidated.

The plan aligns Navy Flag Officer billet structure to inventory, complies with statutory limits of USC Title 10, and preserves Navy’s ability to meet Joint flag officer requirements.

The plan balances these reductions across officer communities and enables Flag Officer promotions to occur within the year of selection.

Navy Flag Officer end strength adjustments are already underway using a phased approach that involves reduced promotions and increased retirements.

This revised billet structure postures the service to absorb future reductions in headquarters and staff due to sequestration.

This initiative is aligned with similar manpower policies enacted over the past few years to adjust inventory and billet structure of the officer and enlisted force.

http://news.usni.org/2013/08/15/docu...b_source=pubv1

[Streck-Fu]

Good start...that's a big reduction in expensive staffs and benefits as well.

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by Streck-Fu

Good start...that's a big reduction in expensive staffs and benefits as well.

Anyone venture a guess as to the number of "billets" the services have for the O7's & up??

I'd put good money that a 34 reduction is small compared to the total??

[Airbornelawyer]

It is rather easy to find out how many female or minority admirals there are, as EEO offices love to put out fact sheets, but for admirals in general, I don't see a breakdown.

A perspective on how relatively top-heavy the Navy might be can be seen here though. This is officers as a percentage of total active Navy strength for various years and as of today:

1930 - 09.33%
1940 - 08.23%
1945 - 09.51% [height of total Navy strength]
1950 - 09.71%
1960 - 10.88%
1970 - 11.28%
1980 - 11.93%
1990 - 12.31%
2000 - 14.35%
2010 - 15.84%
08.16.13 - 16.27%

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq65-1.htm
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/nav_legacy.asp?id=146

I suppose there could be benign reasons for the relative increase in officer strength over the years. A carrier navy has more pilot officers, for example, and the battleship navy had more swabbies. The increase in the post-Cold War era probably relates in part to the desire to maintain a mobilization base. A cadre navy will naturally have a higher percentage of officers and senior petty officers than a fully-manned navy. But senior officer self-interest in maintaining lots of command and staff slots would play a role.

BTW, that article only discusses admirals, but the Navy is also looking at reductions in senior petty officers to, as they say, "align billet structure to inventory."

[Airbornelawyer]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

Anyone venture a guess as to the number of "billets" the services have for the O7's & up??

I'd put good money that a 34 reduction is small compared to the total??

Here are the statutory limitations, from 10 U.S. Code § 526 - Authorized strength: general and flag officers on active duty:

(a) Limitations.— The number of general officers on active duty in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps, and the number of flag officers on active duty in the Navy, may not exceed the number specified for the armed force concerned as follows:
(1) For the Army, 230.
(2) For the Navy, 162.
(3) For the Air Force, 208.
(4) For the Marine Corps, 60.

(b) Limited Exclusion for Joint Duty Requirements.—
(1) The Secretary of Defense may designate up to 310 general officer and flag officer positions that are joint duty assignments for purposes of chapter 38 of this title for exclusion from the limitations in subsection (a). The Secretary of Defense shall allocate those exclusions to the armed forces based on the number of general or flag officers required from each armed force for assignment to these designated positions.

(2) Unless the Secretary of Defense determines that a lower number is in the best interest of the Department, the minimum number of officers serving in positions designated under paragraph (1) for each armed force shall be as follows:
(A) For the Army, 85.
(B) For the Navy, 61.
(C) For the Air Force, 76.
(D) For the Marine Corps, 21.

(3) The number excluded under paragraph (1) and serving in positions designated under that paragraph—
(A) in the grade of general or admiral may not exceed 20;
(B) in a grade above the grade of major general or rear admiral may not exceed 68; and
(C) in the grade of major general or rear admiral may not exceed 144.

So they are authorized 162 admirals in Navy slots, and at least 61 in joint duty assignments. If I am reading that article right, that means they are about 21% overstrength (34/162). Also, based on the statement "preserves Navy’s ability to meet Joint flag officer requirements.", I would guess that reducing admiral slots by 34 doesn't mean reducing actual admirals by 34, since many could shift to joint duty assignments.

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by Airbornelawyer

I would guess that reducing admiral slots by 34 doesn't mean reducing actual admirals by 34, since many could shift to joint duty assignments.

Or could there be 34 unfilled or "not to be refilled after retirement" slots??

Using 2010 published numbers..

The Air Force had 333K Troops and 285 O7+ slots,
or 1.2 Generals per 1K HC

The Navy had 325K sailors and 223 O7+ slots in 2011,
or 1.45 Admirals per 1K HC..

The Army had 565K Troops and 315 O7+ slots,
or 1.8 Generals per 1K HC

The MARINES had 200K troops & 81 O7+ slots??
Or about 2.5 slots per 1K HC..



40 yrs ago, the 1st Air Cav Div had one(1) O7 and I'm not sure the ADC slot was filled?? for some 60k Troops..

I think we are top heavy??

[MR2]

Self-perpetuating slothness.

[Airbornelawyer]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

Using 2010 published numbers..

The Air Force had 333K Troops and 285 O7+ slots,
or 1.2 Generals per 1K HC

The Navy had 325K sailors and 223 O7+ slots in 2011,
or 1.45 Admirals per 1K HC..

The Army had 565K Troops and 315 O7+ slots,
or 1.8 Generals per 1K HC

The MARINES had 200K troops & 81 O7+ slots??
Or about 2.5 slots per 1K HC..

Those are just the number of slots. From my post, add the total number of authorized slots in your branch of service to the minimum number of joint slots, and you get your numbers. But the joint numbers are a minimum, not a maximum. So you could fill all your own slots and pack in a bunch more in purple suits. Also, there's a 60-day window during which officers released from joint duty assignments don't count against your service caps, so at any one time, there's no clear upper limit on how many generals and admirals there can be.

From the prior section, 10 USC § 525, here are the permitted rank distributions. Again, officers on joint duty or just released from joint duty don't count.

(a) For purposes of the applicable limitation in section 526(a) of this title on general and flag officers on active duty, no appointment of an officer on the active duty list may be made as follows:
(1) in the Army, if that appointment would result in more than—
(A) 7 officers in the grade of general;
(B) 45 officers in a grade above the grade of major general; or
(C) 90 officers in the grade of major general;

(2) in the Air Force, if that appointment would result in more than—
(A) 9 officers in the grade of general;
(B) 43 officers in a grade above the grade of major general; or
(C) 73 officers in the grade of major general;

(3) in the Navy, if that appointment would result in more than—
(A) 6 officers in the grade of admiral;
(B) 32 officers in a grade above the grade of rear admiral; or
(C) 50 officers in the grade of rear admiral;

(4) in the Marine Corps, if that appointment would result in more than—
(A) 2 officers in the grade of general;
(B) 15 officers in a grade above the grade of major general; or
(C) 22 officers in the grade of major general.

The statute isn't clear, but I would expect that Rear Admirals (Lower Half) aren't counted as RADMs for §525(a)(3)(C), but are treated like BGs in the other service.

Combining the two sections, and taking into account the typo by the drafters (they repeated MG/RADM and left out LTG/VADM in §526(b)(3)(B) and (C)), this would appear to be the total distribution:

O-10 - 20 joint, 7 USA, 9 USAF, 6 USN, 2 USMC
O-9 - 68 joint, 45 USA, 43 USAF, 32 USN, 15 USMC
O-8 - 144 joint, 90 USA, 73 USAF, 50 USN, 22 USMC
O-7 - no real upper limit

Any guesses as to how many four-stars there were in 1944-45? Somehow I think it was less than 44.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by MR2

Self-perpetuating slothness.

While I get a kick out of Richard's noting the alignment of structure to inventory (how many wouldn't like to do that before a draw-down?) you're right & this has seen more sequels than Bruce Willis.

Butter pecan, please.

[The Reaper]

How about a comparison with the hull inventory vs. Admirals?

Hell, USASOC stood up a Spec Ops Aviation Command that only has one unit (the 160th) under it and they put a BG in charge. WTF does a small regiment need a GO in charge? Allegedly so that we can have a GO at the table when Big Army Aviation meets.

Seriously?

TR