Gender Issues: Information on DOD's Assignment Policy and Direct Ground
Combat Definition (Letter Report, 10/19/98, GAO/NSIAD-99-7).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed various issues
pertaining to the treatment of men and women in the armed forces,
focusing on: (1) the numbers and types of positions that are closed to
women and the associated justifications for closure; (2) Department of
Defense's (DOD) current rationale for excluding women from direct ground
combat; and (3) the relationship of DOD's definition of direct ground
combat to current military operations.

GAO noted that: (1) approximately 221,000 of DOD's 1.4 million positions
are closed to women, who comprise about 14 percent of the armed
services; (2) about 101,700 of these positions are closed based on DOD's
policy of not assigning women to occupations that require engagement in
direct ground combat; (3) the remaining 119,300 positions are closed
because they are collocated and operate with direct ground combat units,
are located on certain ships where the cost of providing appropriate
living arrangements for women is considered prohibitive, or are in units
that conduct special operations and long-range reconnaissance missions;
(4) GAO found no positions closed to women because of job-related
physical requirements; (5) DOD's current rationale for excluding women
from direct ground combat units or occupations is similar to its
rationale when it first formalized the combat exclusion policy in 1994;
(6) at that time, DOD officials did not consider changing its
long-standing policy because they believed that the integration of women
into direct ground combat units lacked both congressional and public
support; (7) furthermore, transcripts of a 1994 press briefing indicate
that DOD officials believed that the assignment of women to direct
ground combat units would not contribute to the readiness and
effectiveness of those units because of physical strength, stamina, and
privacy issues; (8) at the time of GAO's review, DOD had no plans to
reconsider the ground combat exclusion because in GAO's view: (a) there
is no military need for women in ground combat positions because an
adequate number of men are available; (b) the idea of women in direct
ground combat continues to lack congressional and public support; and
(c) most servicewomen do not support the involuntary assignment of women
to direct ground combat units; (9) DOD's definition of direct ground
combat includes a statement that ground combat forces are well forward
on the battlefield; (10) this statement, however, does not reflect the
less predictable nature of emerging post-Cold War military operations
that may not have a well-defined forward area on the battlefield; and
(11) if this trend continues, DOD's definition of direct ground combat
may become increasingly less descriptive of actual battlefield
conditions.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  NSIAD-99-7
     TITLE:  Gender Issues: Information on DOD's Assignment Policy and 
             Direct Ground Combat Definition
      DATE:  10/19/98
   SUBJECT:  Women
             Ground warfare
             Military personnel
             Military policies
             Personnel management
             Employment discrimination

             
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************


Cover
================================================================ COVER


Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Readiness,
Committee on Armed Services, U.S.  Senate

October 1998

GENDER ISSUES - INFORMATION ON
DOD'S ASSIGNMENT POLICY AND DIRECT
GROUND COMBAT DEFINITION

GAO/NSIAD-99-7

Gender Issues

(703261)


Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  DOD - Department of Defense

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER


B-280994

October 19, 1998

The Honorable Charles S.  Robb
Ranking Minority Member
Subcommittee on Readiness
Committee on Armed Services
United States Senate

Dear Senator Robb: 

At your request, we are reviewing various issues pertaining to the
treatment of men and women in the armed forces.  This report focuses
on your separate but related questions regarding the Department of
Defense's (DOD) policy that excludes women from direct ground combat
and its definition of direct ground combat.  Specifically, we
determined (1) the numbers and types of positions that are closed to
women and the associated justifications for closure, (2) DOD's
current rationale for excluding women from direct ground combat, and
(3) the relationship of DOD's definition of direct ground combat to
current military operations.  We did not evaluate the appropriateness
of DOD's direct ground combat exclusion rationale. 


   BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1

Opportunities for servicewomen have increased dramatically since
1948, when the Women's Armed Services Integration Act of 1948 gave
women a permanent place in the military services.  However, the act
excluded women from serving on Navy ships (except hospital ships and
transports) and aircraft engaged in combat missions.  Because the
Marine Corps is a naval oriented air and ground combat force, the
exclusion of women from Navy ships essentially barred them from
combat positions in the Marine Corps as well.  The Women's Army Corps
already excluded women from combat positions, eliminating the need
for a separate statute for Army servicewomen. 

During the 1970s, Congress and the services created more
opportunities for women in the military.  In 1974, the age
requirement for enlistment without parental consent became the same
for men and women.  Then, in 1976, women were admitted to the Air
Force Academy, the Naval Academy, and the Military Academy.  In 1977,
the Army implemented a policy that essentially opened many previously
closed occupations, including some aviation assignments, but formally
closed combat positions to women.  Finally, in 1978, Congress amended
the 1948 Integration Act to allow women to serve on additional types
of noncombat ships.  The Navy and the Marine Corps subsequently
assigned women to noncombat ships such as tenders, repair ships, and
salvage and rescue ships. 

In February 1988, DOD adopted a Department-wide policy called the
Risk Rule, that set a single standard for evaluating positions and
units from which the military service could exclude women.  The rule
excluded women from noncombat units or missions if the risks of
exposure to direct combat, hostile fire, or capture were equal to or
greater than the risk in the combat units they supported.  Each
service used its own mission requirements and the Risk Rule to
evaluate whether a noncombat position should be open or closed to
women. 

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993
repealed the prohibition on the assignment of women to combat
aircraft in the Air Force, the Navy, and the Marines Corps.\1 The act
also established the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of
Women in the Armed Forces to study the legal, military, and societal
implications of amending the exclusionary laws.  The Commission's
November 1992 report recommended retaining the direct ground combat
exclusion for women. 

In April 1993, the Secretary of Defense directed the services to open
more specialties and assignments to women, including those in combat
aircraft and on as many noncombatant ships as possible under current
law.  The Army and the Marine Corps were directed to study the
possibility of opening more assignments to women, but direct ground
combat positions were to remain closed.  The Secretary of Defense
also established the Implementation Committee, with representatives
from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the military services,
and the Joint Chiefs, to review the appropriateness of the Risk Rule. 
In November 1993, Congress repealed the naval combat ship exclusions
and required DOD to notify Congress prior to opening additional
combat positions to women.\2

In January 1994, the Secretary of Defense, in response to advice from
the Implementation Committee, rescinded the Risk Rule.  In DOD's
view, the rule was no longer appropriate based on experiences during
Operation Desert Storm, where everyone in the theater of operation
was at risk.  The Secretary also established a new DOD-wide direct
ground combat assignment rule that allows all servicemembers to be
assigned to all positions for which they qualify, but excludes women
from assignments to units below the brigade level whose primary
mission is direct ground combat.\3 The purpose of this change was to
expand opportunities for women in the services.  Additionally, the
Secretary stipulated that no units or positions previously open to
women would be closed.  At that time, the Secretary issued a
definition of direct ground combat to ensure a consistent application
of the policy excluding women from direct ground combat units.  As of
September 1998, DOD had not revised its 1994 rule or changed its
direct ground combat definition. 

In addition to establishing the direct ground combat assignment rule
in 1994, the Secretary of Defense also permitted the services to
close positions to women if (1) the units and positions are required
to physically collocate and remain with direct ground combat units,
(2) the service Secretary attests that the cost of providing
appropriate living arrangements for women is prohibitive, (3) the
units are engaged in special operations forces' missions or
long-range reconnaissance, or (4) job related physical requirements
would exclude the vast majority of women.  The military services may
propose additional exceptions, with justification to the Secretary of
Defense. 


--------------------
\1 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993
(P.L.  102-190, Dec.  5, 1991). 

\2 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (P.L. 
103-160, Nov.  30, 1993). 

\3 Brigades are ground combat units of about 3,000 to 5,000 soldiers
whose primary mission is to close with and destroy enemy forces. 
They are comprised of battalions and form part of a division or
corps.  Although many positions in the armed services have secondary
tasks related to direct ground combat, the combat rule focuses on the
primary mission of the unit, according to DOD officials. 


   RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2

Approximately 221,000 of DOD's 1.4 million positions are closed to
women, who comprise about 14 percent of the armed services.  About
101,700 (46 percent) of these positions are closed based on DOD's
policy of not assigning women to occupations that require engagement
in direct ground combat.  The remaining 119,300 positions are closed
because they are collocated and operate with direct ground combat
units, are located on certain ships where the cost of providing
appropriate living arrangements for women is considered prohibitive,
or are in units that conduct special operations and long-range
reconnaissance missions.  We found no positions closed to women
because of job-related physical requirements. 

DOD's current rationale for excluding women from direct ground combat
units or occupations is similar to its rationale when it first
formalized the combat exclusion policy in 1994.  At that time, DOD
officials did not consider changing its long-standing policy because
they believed that the integration of women into direct ground combat
units lacked both congressional and public support.  Furthermore,
transcripts of a 1994 press briefing indicate that DOD officials
believed that the assignment of women to direct ground combat units
"would not contribute to the readiness and effectiveness of those
units" because of physical strength, stamina, and privacy issues.  At
the time of our review, DOD had no plans to reconsider the ground
combat exclusion because in its view, (1) there is no military need
for women in ground combat positions because an adequate number of
men are available, (2) the idea of women in direct ground combat
continues to lack congressional and public support, and (3) most
servicewomen do not support the involuntary assignment of women to
direct ground combat units. 

DOD's definition of direct ground combat includes a statement that
ground combat forces are "well forward on the battlefield." This
statement, however, does not reflect the less predictable nature of
emerging post-Cold War military operations that may not have a
well-defined forward area on the battlefield.  If this trend
continues, DOD's definition of direct ground combat may become
increasingly less descriptive of actual battlefield conditions. 


   NUMBERS AND TYPES OF
   ASSIGNMENTS CURRENTLY CLOSED TO
   WOMEN
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3

At the time of our review, about 221,000 positions, or about 15
percent of the approximately 1.4 million positions in DOD, were
closed to servicewomen.  About half of these are closed because of
DOD's policy to exclude women from positions whose primary mission is
to engage in direct ground combat.  Figure 1 shows the percentage and
numbers of positions closed based on exclusion policies.  Appendixes
I and II provide more details on the numbers and types of positions
closed by each service. 

   Figure 1:  Positions Closed to
   Women Based on Exclusion
   Policies

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Note:  Percentages do not add to 100 due to rounding. 

Source:  Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force data. 

As figure 1 shows, about 46 percent of the positions closed to women
in the military services are associated with the direct ground combat
exclusion policy.  These positions, according to DOD officials, are
in units whose primary mission is to engage in direct ground combat
and includes occupations in infantry, armor, field artillery, and
special forces.  The majority of these closures are in the Army,
followed by the Marine Corps, and a small number in the Air Force. 

About 41 percent of the positions closed to women are attributed to
the collocation exclusion policy.  Units that collocate with direct
ground combat units operate within and as part of those units during
combat operations.  For example, Army ground surveillance radar
units, while not considered direct ground combat units, routinely
operate with infantry and armor units on the battlefield.  Because of
the differences in roles, missions, and organization between the Army
and the Marine Corps, however, some positions that are closed for
collocation reasons in the Army may be closed for direct ground
combat reasons in the Marine Corps, according to DOD officials. 

Cost-prohibitive living arrangements account for about 12 percent of
the positions closed to women.  These positions are exclusive to the
Navy and are on submarines and small surface vessels like mine
sweepers, mine hunters, and coastal patrol ships. 

The special operations forces and long-range reconnaissance missions
exclusion policy accounts for almost 2 percent of all positions
closed to women.  These closures are in the Navy and the Air Force
because the Army classifies most of its special operations forces as
direct ground combat forces.  During our review we found no
additional exceptions or exclusions based on physical requirements. 


   DOD'S CURRENT RATIONALE FOR
   EXCLUDING WOMEN FROM DIRECT
   GROUND COMBAT
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4

When DOD formalized its policy excluding women from direct ground
combat positions in 1994, it adopted the primary elements of the
Army's ground combat exclusion policy as the DOD-wide assignment
rule.  According to DOD officials from the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, the prohibition on
direct ground combat was a long-standing Army policy, and for that
reason, no consideration was given to repealing it when DOD adopted
the current assignment policy in 1994. 

Other reasons for continuing the ground combat exclusion policy were
presented in a 1994 DOD news briefing announcing the opening of
80,000 new positions to servicewomen.  At the briefing, defense
officials said they believed that "integrating women into ground
combat units would not contribute to the readiness and effectiveness
of those units" due to the nature of direct ground combat and the way
individuals need to perform under those conditions.  The DOD official
providing the briefing said that physical strength and stamina,
living conditions, and lack of public support for women in ground
combat were some of the issues considered.  According to DOD, its
perception of the lack of public support was partly based on the
results of a survey done in 1992 for the Presidential Commission on
the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces.  DOD documents also
cited the Department's lack of experience with women in direct ground
combat and its observation of the experience of other countries as
part of the rationale for continuing the exclusion of women from
direct ground combat. 

As of September 1998, DOD had no plans to reconsider the ground
combat exclusion policy because, in its view, there is no military
need for women in ground combat positions because an adequate number
of men are available.  Additionally, DOD continues to believe that
opening direct ground combat units to women lacks congressional and
public support.  Finally, DOD cited military women's lack of support
for involuntary assignments to ground combat positions as another
reason for continuing its exclusion policy.  This lack of support has
been documented in several studies of military women.  For example,
in a 1997 Rand Corporation study, done at the request of DOD, most
servicewomen expressed the view that while ground combat positions
should be opened to women, such positions should be voluntarily
assigned.\4


--------------------
\4 Margaret C.  Harrell and Laura L.  Miller, New Opportunities for
Military Women:  Effect Upon Readiness, Cohesion, and Morale, Rand
National Defense Research Institute (Washington, D.C.  1997). 


   DIRECT GROUND COMBAT DEFINITION
   MAY NOT ACCOUNT FOR ANTICIPATED
   CHANGES IN MILITARY OPERATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5

DOD provided the military services with a single definition of direct
ground combat.  The services use the definition to ensure a common
application of the policy excluding women from direct ground combat
units.  To be considered a direct ground combat unit, the primary
mission of the unit must include all the criteria of the direct
ground combat definition.  Specifically, DOD defines direct ground
combat as engaging "an enemy on the ground with individual or crew
served weapons, while being exposed to hostile fire and to a high
probability of direct physical contact with the hostile force's
personnel."\5

In addition, DOD's definition states that "direct ground combat takes
place well forward on the battlefield while locating and closing with
the enemy to defeat them by fire, maneuver, or shock effect."
According to ground combat experts, "locating and closing with the
enemy to defeat them by fire, maneuver, or shock effect" is an
accurate description of the primary tasks associated with direct
ground combat units and positions.  However, DOD's definition of
direct ground combat links these tasks to a particular location on
the battlefield--"well forward." In making this link, the definition
excludes battlefields that may lack a clearly defined forward area. 

According to current Army and Marine Corps ground combat doctrine,
battlefields are generally conceptualized to include close, deep, and
rear operational areas.  Close operations areas involve friendly
forces that are in immediate contact with enemy forces and are
usually exposed to the greatest risk.  Direct ground combat units,
along with supporting collocated units, primarily operate in the
close operations area.  Deep operations are focused beyond the line
of friendly forces and are generally directed against hostile
supporting forces and functions, such as command and control, and
supplies.  Rear operations sustain close and deep operations by
providing logistics and other supporting functions.  Several factors
determine how the battlefield will develop during a military
operation, including mission, available resources, terrain, and enemy
forces. 

The phrase "well forward on the battlefield" in DOD's definition,
according to ground combat experts, implies that military forces will
be arrayed in a linear manner on the battlefield.  On this
battlefield, direct ground combat units operate in the close
operational area where the forward line of troops comprises the main
combat units of friendly and hostile forces.  Land battles envisioned
in Europe during the Cold War were planned in a linear manner. 
Figure 2 depicts an example of a linear battlefield. 

   Figure 2:  A Linear Battlefield

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Army information. 

Battlefields can also be arrayed in a nonlinear manner, meaning that
they may have a less precise structure, and the functions of close,
deep, and rear operations may have no adjacent relationship.  On a
nonlinear battlefield, close operations can take place throughout the
entire area of military operations, rather than just at the forward
area as in the linear organization.  Recent military operations like
Operation Restore Hope in Somalia and Operation Joint Endeavor in
Bosnia involved nonlinear situations that lacked well-defined forward
areas, according to ground combat experts.  Figure 3 depicts an
example of a nonlinear battlefield. 

   Figure 3:  A Nonlinear
   Battlefield

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Army information. 

Ground combat experts in the Army and the Marine Corps note that, in
the post-Cold War era, the nonlinear battlefield is becoming more
common.  Should this trend continue, defining direct ground combat as
occurring "well forward on the battlefield" may become increasingly
less descriptive of actual battlefield conditions. 


--------------------
\5 Examples of individual weapons include handguns and rifles. 
Crew-served weapons require more than one person to operate and
include such weapons as mortars and tanks. 


   AGENCY COMMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6

We provided a draft of this report to the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, the Army, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and the Navy. 
The Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military services
orally concurred with information presented in the report. 
Additionally, the Army, the Navy, and the Marine Corps provided
technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. 


   SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :7

To identify the military occupations and positions closed to women,
we reviewed data from the Army, the Marine Corps, the Navy, and the
Air Force on current positions closed to women, the numbers
associated with each closed position, and the justification for each
closed position.  Based on the information provided, we compiled the
closed occupations and positions to determine the total number of
positions closed and the justification for each.  We discussed the
currency of this information with officials from the Department of
the Army, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel; Headquarters Marine
Corps, Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower and Reserve Affairs; the
Department of the Navy, Bureau of Naval Personnel; and the Department
of the Air Force, Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel.  During this
review, we did not evaluate the military services' decisions for
closing certain positions or units to women. 

To identify DOD's rationale for the exclusion of women from direct
ground combat positions, we reviewed documents, including policy
memorandums, congressional correspondence, and press briefings from
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness.  We also interviewed officials from the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, who helped
provide useful information regarding the historical origins of the
prohibition of women in direct ground combat. 

To determine the relationship of DOD's definition of direct ground
combat to current military operations, we reviewed Army and Marine
Corps ground combat doctrine.  Doctrine is developed from a variety
of sources, including actual lessons learned from combat operations,
and it provides a framework for military forces to plan and execute
military operations.  We also interviewed ground combat doctrine
officials at the Army's Combined Arms Center, Fort Leavenworth,
Kansas, and the Marine Corps' Combat Development Command, Quantico,
Virginia, and an expert from the Naval War College, Newport, Rhode
Island. 

We did not evaluate the rationale the military services used to
classify closures based on the Secretary of Defense's approved
justifications.  To calculate the percentage of positions closed to
women in the military services, we used the active duty authorized
personnel end strength for fiscal year 1998.  Authorized end strength
is the maximum number of personnel authorized by Congress for a
particular service.  The Marine Corps, in some publications, may show
a higher percentage of positions closed because it uses actual
assignable positions to derive the percentage of positions closed to
women.  The actual strength, which is a measurement of personnel at a
particular point in time, fluctuates throughout the year and can
sometimes be lower than authorized personnel end strength. 

We conducted our review from March to September 1998 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards. 


---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :7.1

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional
committees and Members of Congress; the Secretaries of Defense, the
Army, the Air Force, and the Navy; the Commandant of the Marine
Corps; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget.  We will
also make copies available to other interested parties upon request. 

Please contact me at (202) 512-5140 if you or your staff have any
questions concerning this report.  Major contributors to this report
are listed in appendix III. 

Sincerely yours,

Mark E.  Gebicke
Director, Military Operations
 and Capabilities Issues


POSITIONS CLOSED TO WOMEN, BY
SERVICE
=========================================================== Appendix I

About 15 percent of all positions across the armed forces are closed
to women because they (1) are in occupations that primarily engage in
direct ground combat, (2) collocate and operate with direct ground
combat units, (3) are located on ships where the cost of providing
appropriate living arrangements is considered prohibitive, or (4) are
in units that engage in special operations missions and long-range
reconnaissance.  Table I.1 shows the number of positions closed in
each service and the exclusion justification. 



                         Table I.1
          
           DOD Exclusions and Number of Closed or
                    Restricted Positions

                            Living
              Collocati  arrangeme
                on with    nts are         Special
      Direct     ground       cost  operations and
      ground     combat  prohibiti      long-range
      combat      units         ve  reconnaissance   Total
----  ------  ---------  ---------  --------------  ------
Army  71,670     70,280          0               0  141,95
                                                         0
Mari  28,469     14,991          0               0  43,460
 ne
 Cor
 ps
Navy       0      4,187     25,663           3,516  33,366
Air    1,594        297          0             419   2,310
 For
 ce
==========================================================
Tota  101,73     89,755     25,663           3,935  221,08
 l         3                                             6
----------------------------------------------------------
Source:  Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force data. 


   ARMY
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1

About 142,000 positions, or about 29 percent, of the Army's fiscal
year 1998 active force authorized personnel end strength of 495,000
are closed to women.  About half of these closures are associated
with occupations involving direct ground combat.  These closures
include the occupational fields of infantry, armor, and special
forces.  The remaining closures are in occupational specialties or
units that are required to collocate and remain with direct ground
combat units, including combat engineering, field artillery, and air
defense artillery.  Also, some occupational specialties in the
petroleum and water, maintenance, and transportation career fields,
for example, are considered open to women but are closed at certain
unit levels because they collocate with direct ground combat units. 



   MARINE CORPS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2

About 43,400 positions, or about 25 percent, of the Marine Corps'
fiscal year 1998 active force authorized personnel end strength of
174,000, are closed to women.\1 About two-thirds of the closures are
in occupational fields involving direct ground combat, such as
infantry, artillery and tank, and assault amphibious vehicles.  The
other third of the closures are in occupational specialties that are
required to collocate and remain with direct ground combat units,
such as counterintelligence specialists and low-altitude air defense
gunners.  In addition, some occupational specialties, such as landing
support specialist and engineering officer, are generally open to
women but are closed at certain unit levels because of collocation
with direct ground combat units. 


--------------------
\1 The Marine Corps shows over 30 percent of its positions closed to
women in some publications because it does not use authorized active
duty personnel end strength to derive the percentage of positions
closed to women.  According to Marine Corps officials, the Corps uses
the number of actual assignable positions, which was about 141,300 in
fiscal year 1998.  The number of actual assignable positions closed
to women does not include about 31,400 servicemembers classified as
patients, prisoners, trainees, and transients who are counted against
authorized end strength but are not actually assigned to specific
positions. 


   NAVY
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:3

About 33,300 positions, or about 9 percent, of the Navy's fiscal year
1998 active force authorized personnel end strength of 390,802 are
closed to women.  About 77 percent of these closures are in positions
on submarines and small surface vessels where the Navy considers
modifications required for living arrangements to be cost
prohibitive.  About 13 percent are closed because they collocate with
special operations forces or Marine Corps forces that engage in
direct ground combat.  Slightly more than 10 percent of the positions
in the Navy are closed because they are in units that conduct special
operations forces missions


   AIR FORCE
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:4

About 2,300 positions, or less than 1 percent, of the Air Force's
fiscal
year 1998 active force authorized personnel end strength of 371,577
are closed to women.  About 69 percent of these are in occupations
such as tactical air command and control, combat controller, and
pararescue, which are involved with direct ground combat, according
to Air Force documents.  About 18 percent are closed because the Air
Force places restrictions on assignments to aircrew positions in its
helicopters that conduct special operations forces missions.  About
13 percent of the closures are in certain weather and radio
communications occupations because they collocate with ground combat
units or special operations forces. 


SERVICE CAREER FIELDS AND
OCCUPATIONS CLOSED TO WOMEN
========================================================== Appendix II

Appendix II shows the career fields and occupations that are closed
to women.  Other occupations, for example in transportation,
maintenance, and aviation, are generally considered open, but women
may be restricted from assignment to them at various unit levels
because these units collocate with direct ground combat forces. 


   ARMY
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1


      CLOSED CAREER FIELDS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.1

Armor
Infantry
Special Forces


      CLOSED OCCUPATIONAL
      SPECIALTIES
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.2

Short Range Air Defense Artillery Officer
Forward Area Air Defense Systems Technician
Field Artillery Firefinder Radar Operator
Air Defense Command Control, Computers, Communication,
  and Intelligence Tactical
Operations Center Enhanced Operator/Maintainer
Bradley Linebacker Crewmember
Avenger Crewmember
Chaparral System Mechanic
Combat Engineer
Self-Propelled Field Artillery Turret Mechanic
M1 Abrams Tank Turret Mechanic
M60A1/A3 Tank Turret
Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Turret Mechanic
Self-Propelled Field Artillery System Mechanic
M1 Abrams Tank System Mechanic
M60A1/A3 Tank System Mechanic
Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Mechanic
Ground Surveillance Systems Operator


   MARINE CORPS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2


      CLOSED CAREER FIELDS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.1

Infantry
Artillery
Tank and Assault Amphibian Vehicle


      CLOSED MILITARY OCCUPATIONAL
      SPECIALTIES
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.2

Ground Intelligence Officer
Counterintelligence Officer
Counterintelligence Specialist
Interrogation Specialist
Ordnance Vehicle Maintenance Officer
Towed Artillery Systems Technician
Assault Amphibian Repairer/Technician
Main Battle Tank Repairer/Technician
Ordnance Vehicle Maintenance Chief
Low Altitude Air Defense Gunner
Forward Air Controller/Air Officer
Low Altitude Anti-Air Warfare Officer
Marine Corp Security Force Guard
Marine Corp Security Force Close Quarter Battle Team Member


   NAVY
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3


      CLOSED CAREER FIELDS AND
      RATINGS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.1

Special Warfare Officer
Warrant Officer, Special Warfare
Submarine Duty Officer
Special Warfare Combatant Swimmers
SEAL Candidate
Special Warfare Combatant Craft Crewmember
Special Operations Independent Duty Corpsman
Special Operations Technician
Submarine Force Independent Duty
Aviation Boatswain's Mate Launch and Recovery Equipment
Fire Control Technician
Fire Control Technician, Ballistic Missile
Fire Control Technician, Gun Fire Control
Gunner's Mate, Guns
Gunner's Mate, Missile
Missile Technician
Sonar Technician, Surface
Sonar Technician, Submarine


      SHIPS CLOSED TO WOMEN
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.2

Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarine
Attack Submarine
Mine Counter Measure
Mine Hunter, Coastal
Patrol Coastal


   AIR FORCE
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4


      CLOSED CAREER FIELDS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.1

Combat Controller
Pararescue
Tactical Air Command & Control
Combat Control


MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
========================================================= Appendix III

NATIONAL SECURITY AND
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS DIVISION,
WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Carol R.  Schuster
William E.  Beusse
Colin L.  Chambers
Carole F.  Coffey
Julio A.  Luna
Andrea D.  Romich


*** End of document. ***