General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed March 8, 2024 Forces: Background and Considerations for Michael J. Vassalotti, Congress Coordinator Section Research Manager In the exercise of its constitutional authority over the Armed Forces, Congress has enacted an array of laws whichthat govern important aspects of military officer personnel management, including Sofia Plagakis appointments, assignments, grade structure, promotions, and separations. Some of these laws are Senior Research Librarian directed specifically at the most senior military officers, known as general and flag officers (GFOs). Congress periodically reviews these laws and considers changes as it deems appropriate. Areas of congressional interest have included the number of GFOs authorizedduties and grades of certain GFO positions, the Barbara Salazar Torreon number of GFOs, the proportion of GFOs to the total force, and compensation levels of GFOs, and duties and grades of certain GFOs.

As of November 1, 2018, there were 891 active . Senior Research Librarian As of September 30, 2023, there were 809 active-duty GFOs subject to statutory caps, which is 72 less 48 less than the maximum of 963857 authorized by law. There were also another 29 exempt from the statutory caps. The current number is about averagelow for the post-Cold War era, thoughera and substantially lower than the number of GFOs in the 1960s-1980s, when the Armed Forces were much larger in size than they are today. However, while always very small in comparison to the total force, the general and flag officerGFO corps has increased as a percentage of the total force over the past five decades. GFOs made up about one-twentieth of one percent (0.048%) of the total force in 1965, while they made up about one-fifteenthsixteenth of one percent (0.069063%) of the total force in 20182023, indicating that the share of the total force made up of GFOs is now increased by 44%. 31%. This historical trend is more pronounced with respect to four-star officers (which grew from 0.0014% of the total force to 0.0029%, a 107% increase) and three-star officers (which grew from 0.0045% of the total force to 0.0103%, a 129% increase). One- and two-star officers increased less rapidly (from 0.0425% of the total force to 0.0500%, a 17.6% increase). Some argue that this increased proportion of GFOs is wasteful and contributes to more bureaucratic decisionmaking processes. Others counter that the increased proportion is linked to the military'’s greater emphasis on joint and coalition operations,operations; core organizational requirements, and the increasing use of advanced technologies.

; management, budgeting, and program requirements; and the employment of automated, highly lethal, and destructive weapons systems that may require fewer personnel. Congress has used its authority to specify the grade and duties of certain GFO positions. For example, Congress increased the grade of the Chief of the National Guard Bureau (NGB) from Lieutenant General to General in 2008. Congress also has added the Chief of Space Operations, Commander of Space Command, and, most recently, the Deputy Chief of the NGB as four-star officers. In 2016, Congress removed the statutory grade requirement from 54 GFO positions. Compensation for GFOs varies. One commonly used measure of compensation, known as regular military compensation (RMC), includes basic pay, basic allowance for housing, basic allowance for subsistence, and the federal tax advantage associated with allowances, which are exempt from federal income tax. In 20192024, the lowest-ranking GFOs make about $204,000$251,058 per year in RMC, while the highest-ranking GFOs make about $238,000285,097 per year. This report provides an overview of active-duty GFOs in the United States Armed Forces—including duties, authorizations, and compensation—historical trends in the proportion of GFOs relative to the total force, criticisms and justifications of GFO to total force proportions, and statutory controls. National Guard and Reserve GFOs are not addressed in this report, unless they are serving on active duty in a manner that counts against the active-duty caps on GFOs. Congressional Research Service link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 9 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 15 link to page 17 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 17 link to page 6 link to page 8 link to page 10 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 19 link to page 22 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces Contents Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Responsibilities of GFO Positions ................................................................................................... 2 Statutory Controls on GFO Authorizations ..................................................................................... 3 Current Number of GFOs .......................................................................................................... 5 Presidential Determination for Three-Star and Four-Star Positions .......................................... 6 Statutorily Defined Positions .................................................................................................... 6 Statutory Grades ................................................................................................................. 6 Statutory Duties .................................................................................................................. 7 Regular Military Compensation for GFOs ...................................................................................... 7 An Overview of Regular Military Compensation ..................................................................... 7 RMC for GFOs .......................................................................................................................... 8 Considerations for Congress............................................................................................................ 8 Proportion of GFOs in the Force ............................................................................................... 8 Historical Perspective ......................................................................................................... 8 Overview of Effects of Legislative Action from 2017 Through 2023 ................................ 9 Criticisms of Increasing the Proportion of GFOs ............................................................. 10 Justifications for Increasing the Proportion of GFOs ........................................................ 11 Recurring Questions for Congress in Managing GFO Authorizations ................................... 13 Figures Figure 1. Minimum Number of GFOs for Joint Positions ............................................................... 5 Figure 2. GFO Authorizations, by Service Percentage .................................................................... 5 Figure 3. National Defense Outlays, FY1940-FY2028 (Projected) .............................................. 13 Tables Table 1. Grade, Insignia, and Paygrade of General and Flag Officers ............................................ 2 Table 2. Maximum Number of GFOs, by Service, Excluding Joint Positions ................................ 4 Table 3. Number of Active-Duty General and Flag Officers ........................................................... 6 Table 4. Average Annual Regular Military Compensation for General and Flag Officers .............. 8 Table 5. Historical General and Flag Officer Levels ....................................................................... 9 Appendixes Appendix. Selected Positions with Statutorily Specified Grades and/or Responsibilities ............ 15 Contacts Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 18 Congressional Research Service General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces Congressional Research Service link to page 6 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces Background per year.

The Constitution provides Congress with broad powers over the Armed Forces, including the power "“to raise and support Armies," "” “to provide and maintain a Navy,"” and "“to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces."¹” It also provides the Senate with the authority to provide "“Advice and Consent"” on presidential nominations of "“all other Officers of the United States," which includes” including military officers.²1 On the basis of its constitutional authority, Congress has passed a number of laws whichlaws that govern important aspects of military officer personnel management, including appointments, assignments, grade structure, promotions, and separations.

The most senior officers in the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Space Forceand Marine Corps are known as general officers. The most senior officers in the Navy³Navy2 are known as flag officers. The phrase "“general and flag officers" or "GFO",” or “GFOs,” refers to all officers in paygrades O-7 through O-10, thereby including one-star, two-star, three-star, and four-star officers. At the highest level, O-10, GFOs hold the most visible and important military positions in the Department of Defense (DOD), including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the chiefs of the fourfive military services, Chief of the National Guard Bureau, services, and the combatant commanders. At the lowest level, O-7, they hold positions that span an array of roles, including commanders, deputy commanders, and key staff roles in large organizations.

This report provides an overview of active -duty GFOs in the United States Armed Forces—including authorizations, dutiesduties, statutory controls, authorizations, and compensation—historical trends in the proportion of GFOs relative to the total force, and issues for Congress including criticisms and justifications of GFO to total force proportions, and statutory controls and recurring GFO oversight questions. National Guard and Reserve GFOs are not addressed in this report, unless they are serving on active duty in a manner that counts against the active -duty caps on GFOs.

Given the authority granted to general and flag officersGFOs, Congress has developed a statutory framework applicable to this elite group,group and considers changes to these laws as it deems appropriate. Congress also periodically reviews the number, duties, and compensation of GFOs. A frequent tension during these reviews has been DOD requests for additional GFOs versus congressional concerns that there are too many GFOs. As one senior DOD official noted during a 1997 congressional hearing:

, throughout our history there has been a dialogue, just as is going on now, that has ebbed and flowed between the Congress and the military on the number of general and flag and flowed between the Congress and the military on the number of general and flag officers we need.... I think it is fair to say that over the years, the Congress has consistently taken the view that we have needed fewer general and flag officers, and that we have taken the opposite view, that we needed more than the Congress would allow. These debates tended to intensify during periods of major downsizing and restructuring of our the opposite view, that we needed more than the Congress would allow. These debates tended to intensify during periods of major downsizing and restructuring of our forces, such as after World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and now after the cold war.⁴

3 References in this report to specific grades (ranks) within the general and flag officerGFO corps will use the appropriate capitalized title, insignia, or paygrade as indicated in Table 1. 1 Article II, Section 2. This section also provides that “the Congress may, by law, vest the appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law or in the Heads of Departments.” 2 The Coast Guard uses the same rank structure as the Navy. While the Coast Guard is one of the armed forces, it is not covered in this report, as it normally operates under different statutory authority (Title 14) than the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force (Title 10). 3 Testimony of Frederick Pang, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Management Policy, before the Subcommittee on Personnel of the House National Security Committee, April 8, 1997, in House National Security Committee Report No. 105-6, p. 388. Congressional Research Service 1 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces Table 1. Grade, Insignia, and Paygrade of General and Flag Officers Grade (Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Grade Space Force) (Navy) Insignia Paygrade General Admiral four-stars 0-10 Lieutenant General Vice Admiral three-stars 0-9 Major General Rear Admiral two-stars 0-8 Brigadier General Rear Admiral (Lower Half) one-star 0-7 Source: Grades from 10 U.S.C. §741; paygrades from 37 U.S.C. §201; insignias from Department of Defense, available at https://dod.defense.gov/About/Insignias/Officers/. Responsibilities of GFO Positions Table 1.

Current Number of General and Flag Officers

As of November 1, 2018, there were 920 active duty GFOs, of which 891 were subject to the statutory caps and 29 were exempt from the statutory caps.⁵ Distribution by grade and service is summarized in Table 2. The 891 GFOS subject to the statutory caps is lower than the maximum of 963 authorized in statute (see "Current Grade Limits" later in this report). This is in accord with an intentional decision made by DOD in 2011 as part of an efficiency initiative directed by then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.⁶ By keeping GFO numbers substantially below the maximum authorized, this policy provides DOD flexibility to respond to new requirements for GFOs without the delays caused by the need to find an "offset" by downgrading or eliminating another GFO position.⁷

Responsibilities of General and Flag Officer Positions

While Congress has specified functions or duties for some key positions—such as members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,⁸ the Combatant Commanders,⁹4 the top two officers of each service,¹⁰ the Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command,¹¹ and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau¹²—the great (i.e., service chiefs and vice chiefs),5 the combatant commanders,6 the Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command,7 the Commander of U.S. Cyber Command,8 and the Chief and Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau9—the majority of GFO positions are not defined in statute. In these instances, DOD uses the following criteria for determining whether a position should be filled by a general or flag officer:

• Nature • nature, characteristics, and function of the position;
• Grade • grade and position of superior, principal subordinates, and lateral points of coordination;
• Degree coordination; • degree of independence of operation;
• Official • official relations with other U.S. and foreign governmental positions;
• Magnitude of responsibilities;
• Mission • magnitude of responsibilities; • mission and special requirements;
• Number • number, type, and value of resources managed and employed;
• Forces • forces, personnel, value of equipment, total obligation authority;
• Geographic • geographic area of responsibility;
• Authority • authority to make decisions and commit resources;
• Development of policy;
• National commitment to international agreements;
• Impact on national security and other national interests; and
• Effect on the prestige of the nation or the armed force¹³

Historical Changes in General and Flag Officer Levels

A summary of the number of active duty GFOs and the proportion of GFOs relative to the total force over the past five decades is provided in Table 3. A review of GFO levels indicates an 11% increase in the number of four-star officers (36 on September 30, 1965 vs. 40 on September 30, 2018) and a 24% increase in the number of three-star officers (119 vs. 147). At the same time, the number of one-star and two-star officers has decreased by about 35% (1,129 vs. 734).

These increases occurred at the same time that the size of the officer corps in general was increasing as a percentage of the total force. As indicated in the last column of Table 3, between 1965 and 2018, the officer corps increased from 12.76% of the total force in 1965 to 17.51% in 2018, indicating that the share of the total force made up of officers increased by 37%.

Criticisms of the Increasing Proportion of GFOs

• Cost. GFOs cost more to employ than officers of a lower rank. In part, this is due to the higher compensation they receive. For example, the average GFO in paygrade O-7 receives $204,405 in regular military compensation¹⁴ in 2019, while the average officer in paygrade O-6 receives $180,709. Additionally, there can be other costs associated with GFOs, particularly at higher grades, such as the costs of larger staffs, official travel, security details, and aides.¹⁵ An example of this perspective was provided by a witness at a 2011 congressional hearing, who stated "The progression towards a more top-heavy force is not without its consequences.... The cost of officers increases markedly with their rank, so taxpayers are overpaying whenever a G/FO is in a position that could be filled by a lower ranking officer."¹⁶
• Decisionmaking. Another criticism is that an increasing proportion of GFOs slows down decisionmaking by adding additional layers of management between the highest echelons of command and the lowest. In a 2010 speech, former • development of policy; • national commitment to international agreements; 4 10 U.S.C. §§151-154. 5 Specifically, the Chief of Staff of the Army (10 U.S.C. §7033), the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army (10 U.S.C. §7034), the Chief of Naval Operations (10 U.S.C. §8033), the Vice Chief of Naval Operations (10 U.S.C. §8035), the Commandant of the Marine Corps (10 U.S.C. §8043), the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps (10 U.S.C. §8044), the Chief of Staff of the Air Force (10 U.S.C. §9033), the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force (10 U.S.C. §9034), and the Chief of Space Operations (10 U.S.C. §9082). 6 10 U.S.C. §164. 7 10 U.S.C. §167. 8 10 U.S.C. §167b. 9 10 U.S.C. §10502 and 10 U.S.C. §10505, respectively. Congressional Research Service 2 link to page 8 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces • impact on national security and other national interests; and • effect on the prestige of the nation or the armed force.10 Statutory Controls on GFO Authorizations Congress has established a statutory framework for GFOs, which limits their numbers by grade, requires presidential determination of many three-star and four-star positions, and specifies the grade and/or duties of certain key positions. This framework provides for greater congressional control over the most senior GFO positions, while providing substantial latitude to the executive branch in the management of the remaining GFOs. Positions to which DOD is required or may choose to assign a GFO may be designated as joint duty assignments. Such positions may reside in joint activities (e.g., the Joint Staff, combatant command staffs).11 All other positions normally reside in the respective services (e.g., the Army Staff, division, wing, or higher commands).12 The FY2017 National Defense Authorization Act (FY2017 NDAA; P.L. 114-328) included a provision, codified at 10 U.S.C. §526, to reduce the number of GFOs authorized to be on active duty for more than one year, effective as of January 1, 2023. The conference report that accompanied the bill highlighted congressional concerns that the military departments had not demonstrated a willingness to implement GFO reductions directed by then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates in 2011 and noted the context of significant reductions in personnel strength that occurred in the calendar year 2011-2016 time frame. 13 The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (FY2024 NDAA; P.L. 118-31) concludes a series of legislative actions begun in the FY2017 NDAA, to lower congressionally mandated limits on the number of GFOs on active duty. Table 2 summarizes the statutory limitations by grade for GFOs for service-specific positions. 10 Criteria provided by Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs, May 12, 2015. In a 2021 congressional hearing, Clifford L. Stanley, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, provided similar criteria. See, Testimony of Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford L. Stanley, in U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Personnel, General and Flag Officer Requirements, 112th Cong., 1st sess., September 14, 2021, S.Hrg. 112-258, p. 62. 11 For GFO billet management, these positions reside in “The Joint Pool.” For detailed information on DOD GFO management, see Chairman of The Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 1331.01E, March 31, 2022, at https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Library/Instructions/CJCSI%201331.01E.pdf. 12 10 U.S.C. §526. 13 The conference report that accompanied the FY2017 National Defense Authorization Act stated, “The conferees note that despite two decades of Congressional concern the Department of Defense and the military departments have not demonstrated the willingness to implement even the reduction in the number of general and flag officer positions directed by the Secretary of Defense's Track Four Efficiencies Initiatives decision of March 14, 2011. In the context of the Department of Defense's continued requests to reduce military end strength, especially in the Army and the Marine Corps, reductions that Congress has cautiously considered and authorized, the time has come for the Department to rigorously evaluate and validate every general and flag officer position. The conferees believe that an additional 10% reduction in the number of general and flag officer positions may be appropriate by downgrading or eliminating positions in addition to the 110 positions required to be eliminated under this provision are achieved. The conferees expect that the Department of Defense and the military departments will improve efficiency by eliminating bloated headquarters and staffs while preserving the necessary number and grades of positions for general and flag officers who are responsible to train and lead our Nation's forces in battle and to bring them safely home again.” H.Rept. 114-840, p. 1013. A copy of the Track Four Efficiency Initiatives Decisions memo by Secretary Gates is available at https://dodprocurementtoolbox.com/cms/sites/default/files/resources/2021-12/20110314-Track%20Four%20Efficiency%20Initiatives%20Decisions.pdf. Congressional Research Service 3 link to page 10 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces Table 2. Maximum Number of GFOs, by Service, Excluding Joint Positions As codified in 10 U.S.C. §§525 and 526 Marine Space Force Grade Army Navy Corps Air Force TOTAL General/Admiral 8 6 2 9 2 27 Lieutenant 46, less the 34, less the 17, less the 44, less the 7, less the 148, less the General/Vice number of number of number of number of number of number of Admiral Generals Admirals Generals Generals Generals Generals and Admirals Major 90 49 22 73 6 240 General/Rear Admiral Brigadier General/ 219, less the 150, less the 64, less the 171, less the 21, less the 525, less the Rear Admiral number in number in number in number in the number in the number in the (Lower Half) the grades higher grades the grades grades of grades of grades of of Major of Rear of Major Major Major Major General Admiral General General General General/Rear through though through through through Admiral General Admiral General General General through General/Admi ral TOTAL 219 150 64 171 6 525 Source: Total number for each service from P.L. 118-31 §501 and 10 U.S.C. §525(a). Notes: FY2020 NDAA (P.L. 116-92 §953) authorized Chief of Space Operations as a four-star position. Per the Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 2670 (H.Rept. 118-301), the conferees “authorized the permanent increase in general and flag officer authorized strengths [in Section 501, by one per service] to accommodate the congressional requirement for a general or flag officer to serve as the lead special trial counsel, and [added] an increase of an additional Marine Corps general officer to address safety needs in the Marine Corps.”14Robert Gates criticized the impact of an increase in GFOs and senior civilians in making the Department of Defense a top-heavy and overly bureaucratic organization:

Justifications for Increasing Proportion of GFOs

Regular Military Compensation for General and Flag Officers

An Overview of Regular Military Compensation

Regular Military Compensation (RMC) is a statutorily defined measure of the major compensation elements which every servicemember receives. It is widely used as a basic measure of military cash compensation levels and for comparisons with civilian salary levels. RMC, as defined in law, is "the total of the following elements that a member of the uniformed services accrues or receives, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind every payday: basic pay, basic allowance for housing, basic allowance for subsistence, and Federal tax advantage accruing to the aforementioned allowances because they are not subject to Federal income tax."²² These elements are described in more detail in the Appendix.²³ Certain GFOs receive a "personal money allowance" as well. This is not part of RMC, but is described in a footnote below.²⁴ Congress included provisions in recent National Defense Authorization Acts to deny GFOs any increase in basic pay during calendar years 2015 and 2016.²⁵

Regular Military Compensation for General and Flag Officers

Table 4 provides the average RMC that general and flag officers received in 2019. It assumes that all GFOs receive BAH, rather than living in government provided housing.²⁶

Statutory Controls on GFOs

Current Grade Limits

Sections 525 and 526 of Title 10 establish the number of general and flag officers that may be on active duty in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. The two provisions establish separate caps for each service and for the joint community. There are certain circumstances under which a general or flag officer does not "count"“count” against these caps.²⁷15 Additionally, the President has authority under 10 U.S.C. §527Title 10, Section 527, of the U.S. Code to suspend the operation of the caps in time of war or national emergency declared by the Congress or the President. Section 526(b) of Title 10 of the U.S. Code further authorizes exemption of up to 232 GFOs from the limitations of Section 526(a). Unless the Secretary of Defense determines that a lower number is in the best interest of the department, the GFOs serving in the 232 authorized joint positions shall be at least 75 Army officers, 53 Navy officers, 17 Marine Corps Officers, 68 Air Force Officers, and 6 Space Force Officers.16 Section 512 of the FY2024 NDAA amends 10 U.S.C. §10505 to require that the Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau be appointed to serve in the grade of general and that the Secretary of Defense designate this position as one of the general officer positions to be excluded from the limitations of Section 526(a) of Title 10 of the U.S. Code. This position would count among those listed in Table 3. 14 H.Rept. 118-301, p. 1042. 15 Active-duty GFOs excluded from the caps include those within 60 days of retirement and GFOs transitioning between certain positions for up to 60 days. The Attending Physician of Congress is counted in addition to the number otherwise permitted for the officer’s armed force in grades above O-7. Certain reserve component GFOs serving on active duty for limited periods of time are also excluded; see 10 U.S.C. §§525 (d)-(g) and 526(c)-(g). 16 10 U.S.C. §526(b)(2). Congressional Research Service 4 link to page 10 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces Figure 1. Minimumtime of war or national emergency declared by the Congress or the President.

Table 5 summarizes the statutory limitations by grade for GFOs for service-specific positions. Table 6 summarizes the statutory limitations for GFOs service in Joint positions. Combining the maximum number of service and joint GFO authorizations, the maximum number of GFO positions authorized is currently 963. The current number of active duty GFOs subject to the statutory caps is 891. There are another 29 active duty GFOs who are not subject to the statutory caps.²⁸ (See "Current Number of General and Flag Officers" earlier in the report.)

Grade Limits after December 31, 2022

Presidential Determination for Three-Star and Four-Star positions

Section 601 of Title 10 provides that "[t]he President may designate positions of importance and responsibility to carry the grade of general or admiral or lieutenant general or vice admiral.... An officer assigned to any such position has the grade specified for that position if he is appointed to that grade by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate."” Thus, with the exception of those so designated in statute, all three-star and four-star positions must be designated as such by the President. Congress can review the rationale for this designation as part of its oversight function, and the Senate retains the power to confirm or reject the nomination of an individual to fill such a position. The authority of the President to designate such positions is also limited by the strength caps on general and flag officersGFOs found in 10 U.S.C. §§525 and 526.

Statutorily Defined Positions

Congress has established a number of GFO positions in law which carry designatedin law certain GFO positions with specified grades, designated duties, or both.

Those GFOs named in 10 U.S.C. §151, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the commanders of unified and specified combatant commands comprise most of these positions. Statutory Grades Statutory Grades

Congress has specified the grade for a number of keycertain positions. For example, 10 U.S.C. §152 specifies that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff holds the rank of General or Admiral. Similar language also exists for the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top two officers of each service, the Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, the Commander of U.S. Cyber Command, and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau. Table 7 The Appendix highlights some positions with statutorily required grades. Congress sometimes changesmay change these statutory grades. For example, in 2008, Congress increased the grade of the Chief of the National Guard Bureau from Lieutenant General to General.³¹17 Additionally, Section 502 of the FY2017 National Defense Authorization Act amended various statutory NDAA amended various statutory 17 P.L. 110-181 §1811. Congressional Research Service 6 link to page 19 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces provisions to eliminate the statutory grade for 54 positions.³²18 As explained in the report that accompanied the Senate version of the FY2017 National Defense Authorization ActNDAA, where the provision originated:

The, [t]he Committee determined that in order to effectively manage the reduction in the number of general and flag officers prescribed elsewhere in this Act, that the Secretary of Defense must be given the flexibility to assign appropriate officer grades to positions. The provision would not prohibit the position from being filled by an officer with the same, or a higher, or lower grade than the law currently requires.³³

19 Statutory Duties

Positions with statutorily required grades typically have statutorily required duties as well. Table 7 The Appendix provides excerpts of the statutorily required responsibilities, duties, or functions of certain GFO positions. Congress sometimes changesmay change these duties. For example, in 2011, Congress changed the law to specify that the Chief of the National Guard Bureau was a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff whose duties included "“the specific responsibility of addressing matters involving non-Federalized National Guard forces in support of homeland defense and civil support missions.”20 Regular Military Compensation for GFOs Military personnel, including GFOs, are compensated in three main ways: cash compensation (pay and allowances), noncash compensation (benefits), and deferred compensation (retired pay and benefits). This report discusses only the compensation elements that make up regular military compensation (RMC). An Overview of Regular Military Compensation RMC is a statutorily defined measure of the major compensation elements that every servicemember receives. It is widely used as a basic measure of military cash compensation levels and for comparisons with civilian salary levels. RMC, as defined in law, is “the total of the following elements that a member of the uniformed services accrues or receives, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind every payday: basic pay, basic allowance for housing, basic allowance for subsistence, and Federal tax advantage accruing to the aforementioned allowances because they are not subject to Federal income tax.”21 Certain GFOs receive a “personal money allowance” as well. This is not part of RMC. 18 Section 502 of the FY2017 NDAA eliminated the statutory general or flag officer grade for 54 positions, including each of the services’ senior medical officer, senior legal officer, and chief of legislative affairs. The statutory grade was also removed for the chief of each reserve component (e.g., Chief of the Navy Reserve, Director of the Army National Guard; however, the Chief of the National Guard Bureau retained the statutory designation as an O-10 position). The elimination of a statutory requirement does not necessarily affect the grade of the position, as the military services may designate the position at an equivalent, lower, or higher grade, subject to the statutory strength caps on GFOs and presidential determinations for three-star and four-star positions. 19 S.Rept. 114-255, pp. 135-36. 20 P.L. 112-81 §512. 21 Statutory definition contained in 37 U.S.C. §101(25). For more information on Regular Military Compensation, see CRS In Focus IF10532, Defense Primer: Regular Military Compensation, by Kristy N. Kamarck, and CRS Report RL33446, Military Pay: Key Questions and Answers, by Lawrence Kapp and Barbara Salazar Torreon. Congressional Research Service 7 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 12 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces RMC for GFOs Table 4 provides the average RMC that GFOs received in 2023. It assumes that all GFOs receive a basic allowance for housing (BAH) rather than living in government provided housing.22 Table 4. Average Annual Regular Military Compensation for General and Flag Officers (as of January 1, 2024) Average Basic Average Allowance Basic for Average Average Allowance Subsistence Federal Tax Average Grade Basic Pay for Housing (Flat Rate) Advantage RMC General/Admiral $221,900 $44,212 $3,804 $15,180 $285,097 Lieutenant General/Vice Admiral $221,900 $44,267 $3,804 $15,091 $285,062 Major General/Rear $217,164 $44,230 $3,804 $15,024 $280,222 Admiral Brigadier General /Rear $188,805 $44,222 $3,804 $14,227 $251,058 Admiral (Lower Half) Source: Selected Military Compensation Tables (OSD Compensation Greenbook, January 2024), Table B3, Detailed RMC Tables for All Personnel, (PDF p. 94), at https://militarypay.defense.gov/References/Greenbooks/. Notes: Average RMC assumes receipt of BAH rather than government-provided housing. Amounts in each column are rounded to the nearest dollar and therefore may not sum perfectly. Considerations for Congress Proportion of GFOs in the Force Historical Perspective A summary of the number of active-duty GFOs and the proportion of GFOs relative to the total force over the past five decades is provided in Table 5. A review of GFO levels indicates a 2.8% increase in the number of four-star officers (36 on September 30, 1965, versus 37 on September 30, 2023) and an 11% increase in the number of three-star officers (119 versus 132), with variations over time related to current events. At the same time, the number of one-star and two-star officers has decreased by about 43.3% (1,129 versus 640). During this time, the size of the total force dropped by approximately 51.5%, from 2.66 million on September 30, 1965, to 1.29 million on September 30, 2023. Thus, a more salient measure may be the proportion of GFOs to the total force. Looking at the data from this perspective, it is clear that although GFOs have always made up a very small percentage of the total force, the GFO corps has increased as a percentage of the total 22 About 17% of GFOs live in government-provided housing and therefore do not receive BAH. While this lowers the cash compensation received, they receive free housing instead. For the purposes of Table 4, the value of the free housing is assumed to be equivalent to the average BAH of their GFO peers. Calculation of proportion living in government provided housing made using Selected Military Compensation Tables (OSD Compensation Greenbook, 2019), Table A5, BAH Percentages 2019, and Table A6, Military Personnel by Pay Cell, available at https://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/Documents/Reports/GreenBook%202019.pdf?ver=2019-01-16-132128-617. Congressional Research Service 8 link to page 13 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces force over the past five decades. GFOs made up about one-twentieth of one percent (0.048%) of the total force in 1965, whereas they made up about one-sixteenth of one percent (0.063%) of the total force in 2023, indicating that the share of the total force made up of GFOs has increased by 31%. This historical trend is more pronounced with respect to four-star officers (which grew from 0.0014% of the total force to 0.0029%, a 107% increase) and three-star officers (which grew from 0.0045% of the total force to 0.0103%, a 129% increase). One- and two-star officers as a percentage of the total force increased less demonstrably (from 0.0425% of the total force to 0.0500%, a 17.6% increase). These increases occurred at the same time that the size of the officer corps in general was increasing as a percentage of the total force. As indicated in the last column of Table 5, between 1965 and 2023, the officer corps increased from 12.76% of the total force in 1965 to 18.22% in 2023, indicating that the share of the total force made up of officers increased by 42.8%. Overview of Effects of Legislative Action from 2017 Through 2023 The FY2017 NDAA (P.L. 114-328) was enacted on December 23, 2016. Section 501 stipulates the purpose was to “reduce the number of general and flag officers on active duty by 110 from the aggregate authorized number of general and flag officers authorized by sections 525 and 526 of title 10, United States Code, as of December 31, 2015.” The FY2024 NDAA, in Section 501, codified and generally affirmed this purpose. Overall, the reduction is for 100 GFOs, or 11% of the GFO population. With respect to the total force, GFOs made up about one-fourteenth of one percent (0.069%) of the total force in 2015, whereas they made up about one-sixteenth of one percent (0.063%) of the total force in 2023, indicating that the share of the total force made up of GFOs has decreased by 8.7%. Four-star officers dropped by one, from 38 to 37, remaining at 0.0029% of the force. Three-star officers dropped from 141 to 132, a 6.4% population drop that reduced them from 0.0107% to 0.0103% of the force. One- and two-star officers dropped from 730 to 640, a 12.33% population drop that reduced them from 0.0556% to 0.0500% of the force. Table 5. Historical General and Flag Officer Levels (As of September 30th of each year) 1- & 2- 4-Star 3-Star Star All All Officers Officers Officers GFOs Officers As As As As As 1- & 2- Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent 4-Star 3-Star 2-Star 1-Star Star All All Total of Total of Total of Total of Total of Total Year Officers Officers Officers Officers Officers GFOs Officer Force Force Force Force Force Force 1965 36 119 n.a. n.a. 1,129 1,284 338,822 2,655,389 0.0014% 0.0045% 0.0425% 0.048% 12.76% 1970 40 141 n.a. n.a. 1,157 1,338 402,226 3,066,294 0.0013% 0.0046% 0.0377% 0.044% 13.12% 1975 36 118 443 584 1,027 1,181 292,424 2,128,120 0.0017% 0.0055% 0.0483% 0.055% 13.74% 1980 32 113 406 559 965 1,110 277,622 2,050,627 0.0016% 0.0055% 0.0471% 0.054% 13.54% 1985 36 125 370 519 889 1,050 308,919 2,151,032 0.0017% 0.0058% 0.0413% 0.049% 14.36% 1990 36 121 367 530 897 1,054 296,591 2,043,705 0.0018% 0.0059% 0.0439% 0.052% 14.51% Congressional Research Service 9 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces 1- & 2- 4-Star 3-Star Star All All Officers Officers Officers GFOs Officers As As As As As 1- & 2- Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent 4-Star 3-Star 2-Star 1-Star Star All All Total of Total of Total of Total of Total of Total Year Officers Officers Officers Officers Officers GFOs Officer Force Force Force Force Force Force 1995 35 110 274 432 706 851 237,602 1,518,224 0.0023% 0.0072% 0.0465% 0.056% 15.65% 2000 34 119 282 436 718 871 217,178 1,384,338 0.0025% 0.0086% 0.0519% 0.063% 15.69% 2005 35 128 272 439 711 874 226,619 1,389,394 0.0025% 0.0092% 0.0512% 0.063% 16.31% 2010 39 150 310 482 792 981 234,000 1,430,985 0.0027% 0.0105% 0.0553% 0.069% 16.35% 2015 38 141 310 420 730 909 230,468 1,313,940 0.0029% 0.0107% 0.0556% 0.069% 17.54% 2018 40 147 296 438 734 921 230,708 1,317,325 0.0030% 0.0112% 0.0557% 0.070% 17.51% 2019 37 142 295 409 704 883 214,661 1,325,826 0.0028% 0.0107% 0.0531% 0.0666% 16.19% 2020 45 153 281 417 698 896 215,935 1,333,461 0.0034% 0.0115% 0.0523% 0.0672% 16.19% 2021 41 156 293 405 698 895 216,369 1,333,771 0.0031% 0.0117% 0.0523% 0.0671% 16.22% 2022 39 146 283 373 656 841 213,175 1,296,309 0.0030% 0.0113% 0.0506% 0.0649% 16.44% 2023 37 132 252 388 640 809 234,252 1,286,027 0.0029% 0.0103% 0.0500% 0.0630% 18.22% Source: CRS compilation of data produced by the Defense Manpower Data Center. Criticisms of Increasing the Proportion of GFOs There have been two principal criticisms raised against increasing the proportion of GFOs relative to the total force. The first criticism revolves around the increased cost of employing a GFO compared with employing a lower-ranking officer. The second relates to the belief that too many GFOs slow down decisionmaking processes. Each point is explained in more detail below. • Cost. GFOs cost more to employ than officers of a lower rank. In part, this is due to the higher compensation they receive. For example, the average GFO in paygrade O-7 receives $251,058 in RMC23 in 2024, while the average officer in paygrade O-6 receives $220,275. Additionally, there can be other costs associated with GFOs, particularly at higher grades, such as the costs of larger staffs, official travel, security details, and aides.24 An example of this perspective was provided by a witness at a 2011 congressional hearing, who stated, “The progression towards a more top-heavy force is not without its consequences.... The cost of 23 Title 37 U.S.C. §101(25) defines regular military compensation (RMC), as “the total of the following elements that a member of the uniformed services accrues or receives, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind every payday: basic pay, basic allowance for housing, basic allowance for subsistence, and Federal tax advantage accruing to the aforementioned allowances because they are not subject to Federal income tax.” 24 These costs are difficult to estimate, as noted by the Government Accountability Office, DOD Needs to Update General and Flag Officer Requirements and Improve Availability of Associated Costs, GAO-14-745, September 9, 2014, available at http://gao.gov/products/GAO-14-745. Compensation figures are from Military Compensation Tables (OSD Compensation Greenbook, 2023), Table B3, Detailed RMC Tables for All Personnel, (PDF p. 94) at https://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/GreenBook%202023.pdf. Congressional Research Service 10 General and Flag Officers in the U.S. Armed Forces officers increases markedly with their rank, so taxpayers are overpaying whenever a GFO is in a position that could be filled by a lower ranking officer.”25 • Decisionmaking. Another criticism is that an increasing proportion of GFOs slows decisionmaking by adding additional layers of management between the highest echelons of command and the lowest. In a 2010 speech, former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates criticized the impact of an increase in GFOs and senior civilians in making the DOD a top-heavy and overly bureaucratic organization: During the 1990s, the military saw deep cuts in overall force structure—the Army by nearly 40 percent. But the reduction in flag officers—generals and admirals—was about half that. The Department’s management layers—civilian and military—and numbers of senior executives outside the services grew during that same period. Almost a decade ago, Secretary Rumsfeld lamented that there were 17 levels of staff between him and a line officer. The Defense Business Board recently estimated that in some cases the gap between me and an action officer may be as high as 30 layers.... Consider that a request for a dog-handling team in Afghanistan—or for any other unit—has to go through no fewer than five four-star headquarters in order to be processed, validated, and eventually dealt with. This during an era when more and more responsibility—including decisions with strategic consequences—is being exercised by young captains and colonels on the battlefield.26 Justifications for Increasing the Proportion of GFOs The increasing proportion of GFOs in comparison to the total force has been a topic of particular interest during past congressional hearings.27 During these hearings, and particularly during a 1997 congressional review of GFO authorizations, witnesses from the DOD put forth a number of rationales for this growth, including the following: • Coalition operations. A rationale used to explain the increased proportion of GFOs has been an increased emphasis by the United States on forging coalitions with other nations to achieve common security objectives. This has, in turn, generated a demand for senior military leaders to conduct coordinated planning, training, and operations with their peers from foreign nations. The argument is also linked to the number of contingency operations the U.S. military has conducted since the end of the Cold War, which have often involved forces from dozens of countries, including the forces of the nation in which the operations take place. Examples of these coalition operations include Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as smaller-scale contingencies such as Bosnia, Haiti, and Kosovo (ongoing), Somalia (ongoing), and Syria (ongoing). Contingency operations such as these are often commanded by a GFO, who usually has additional GFOs as 25missions."³⁴

Considerations for Congress

Appendix. Elements of Regular Military Compensation