Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Congressional research reportMay 29, 2026

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Statutory Framework for Congressional

Management of DOD General and Flag

Officers

Updated May 29, 2026

Congressional Research Service

https://crsreports.congress.gov

R44389

SUMMARY

Statutory Framework for Congressional

Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

In the exercise of its constitutional responsibilities to shape and oversee the U.S. Armed Forces,

Congress has enacted an array of laws that govern foundational aspects of military officer

personnel management, including appointments, assignments, grade structure, promotions, and

separations. Some of these laws are directed specifically at the most senior military officers,

known as general and flag officers (GFOs). Congress periodically reviews these laws and

considers amending them. Areas of congressional interest have included duties and grades of

certain GFO positions, the number of GFOs, the proportion of GFOs to the total force, and

compensation levels of GFOs.

R44389

May 29, 2026

Michael J. Vassalotti,

Coordinator

Section Research Manager

Sofia Plagakis

Senior Research Librarian

Congress and the executive branch have used statutory authority to specify the grade and duties of certain GFO positions and

affect the number of GFOs. As of September 30, 2026, there were 848 active-duty GFOs subject to statutory caps, 9 less than

the maximum of 857 authorized by law. The current number is lower for the post-Cold War era 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. The GFO

corps has increased as a percentage of the total force over the past five decades. In 1965, GFOs made up about one-twentieth

of one percent (0.048%) of the total force, while in 2024, they made up about one-fifteenth of one percent (0.067%) of the

total force, indicating that the share of the total force made up of GFOs has increased by 40%.

Some argue that this increased proportion of GFOs is excessive and contributes to more bureaucratic decisionmaking

processes. Others counter that the increased proportion is linked to the military’s emphasis on joint and coalition operations;

core organizational requirements; management, budgeting, and program requirements; and the employment of automated,

highly lethal, and destructive weapons systems that may require fewer personnel coupled with more discernment in

employment of those weapons.

Compensation for GFOs varies based on pay grade and years of service. 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 2026, the lowest-ranking GFOs may expect to make about

$272,802 per year in RMC, while the highest-ranking GFOs may expect to make about $296,539 per year.

This report provides an overview of Congress’s framework for managing active-duty GFOs in the U.S. Armed Forces—

including duties, statutory controls, authorizations, compensation, and historical trends in the proportion of GFOs relative to

the total force. National Guard and Reserve GFOs are not addressed in this report, except in cases in which they serve on

active duty in a manner that counts against the statutory active-duty caps on GFOs. The report includes issues for

congressional consideration in the exercise of its authority and responsibilities.

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Contents

Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1

The GFO Population ................................................................................................................. 2

Responsibilities of GFO Positions................................................................................................... 2

Statutory Controls on GFO Authorizations ..................................................................................... 3

Presidential Determination for Three-Star and Four-Star Positions.......................................... 6

Statutorily Defined Positions .................................................................................................... 6

Regular Military Compensation for GFOs ...................................................................................... 7

Considerations for Congress............................................................................................................ 8

Proportion of GFOs in the Force ............................................................................................... 8

Historical Perspective ......................................................................................................... 8

Criticisms of Increasing the Proportion of GFOs ............................................................... 8

Justifications for a Higher Proportion of GFOs .................................................................. 9

Justification for the Statutory Status Quo .......................................................................... 11

GFO Assignments ................................................................................................................... 12

GFO Management Considerations for Congress..................................................................... 13

Congress Faces Recurring Questions in Managing GFO Authorizations ............................... 13

Figures

Figure 1. Minimum Number of GFOs for Joint Positions ............................................................... 5

Figure 2. GFO Authorizations by Service ....................................................................................... 6

Figure 3. Department of Defense Budget Authority, by Public Law Title FY1948-FY2028 ......... 11

Tables

Table 1. Grade, Insignia, and Paygrade of General and Flag Officers ............................................ 1

Table 2. Number of Active-Duty General and Flag Officers........................................................... 2

Table 3. Maximum Number of GFOs, by Service, Excluding Joint Positions ................................ 4

Table 4. Annual Regular Military Compensation for General and Flag Officers ............................ 7

Table A-1. Historical GFO Levels ................................................................................................. 15

Table B-1. Selected Positions and Statutes .................................................................................... 16

Appendixes

Appendix A. Historical GFO Levels ............................................................................................. 15

Appendix B. Selected Positions and Statutes ................................................................................ 16

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Contacts

Author Information........................................................................................................................ 23

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Background

The Constitution provides Congress 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 the

authority to provide “Advice and Consent” on presidential nominations of “all other Officers of

the United States,” including military officers.2 On the basis of its constitutional authority,

Congress has passed laws 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 Force are called

general officers. The most senior officers in the Navy are called flag officers.3 The phrase

“general and flag officers,” or “GFOs,” refers to all officers in pay grades O-7 through O-10 and

include all one-, two-, three-, 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), which is

“using a secondary Department of War designation,” under Executive Order 14347 dated

September 5, 2025, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the chiefs of the five

military services, Chief of the National Guard Bureau, 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 defense and service-level departments and agencies.

Congress has developed a statutory framework applicable to GFOs and considers amendments to

these laws as it deems appropriate. Congress also periodically reviews the number, duties, and

compensation of GFOs. References in this report to specific grades (ranks) within the GFO corps

use the appropriate capitalized title, insignia, or paygrade as indicated in Table 1.

Table 1. Grade, Insignia, and Paygrade of General and Flag Officers

Grade

(Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and

Space Force)

General

Grade

(Navy)

Admiral

Insignia

Paygrade

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

★

Sources: Grades from 10 U.S.C. §741; insignias from Department of Defense, available at

https://dod.defense.gov/About/Insignias/Officers/; paygrades from 37 U.S.C. §201.

1 U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 8.

2 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.”

3 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, Air Force, and Space Force (Title 10).

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

The GFO Population

Table 2. Number of Active-Duty General and Flag Officers

As of September 30, 2025

Army

Navy

Marine

Corps

Air

Force

Space

Force

TOTAL

General/Admiral

Lieutenant General/Vice Admiral

144

Major General/Rear Admiral

259

Brigadier General /Rear Admiral

(Lower Half)

134

109

116

409

279

219

226

848

Grade

TOTAL

Source: Department of Defense Active Duty Military Personnel by Rank/Grade and Service, September 30,

2025, available at https://dwp.dmdc.osd.mil/dwp/app/dod-data-reports/workforce-reports. Includes GFOs in

Service and Joint assignments.

Responsibilities of GFO Positions

Congress has specified the functions or duties for some key GFO positions, such as members of

the Joint Chiefs of Staff,4 the top two officers of each service (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

Bureau.9 This leaves the majority of GFO positions undefined in statute. In these instances, DOD

uses the following criteria for determining whether a general or flag officer should fill a position:

•

nature, characteristics, and function of the position;

grade and position of superior, principal subordinates, and lateral points of

coordination;

degree of independence of operation;

official relations with other U.S. and foreign governmental positions;

magnitude of responsibilities;

mission and special requirements;

number, type, and value of resources managed and employed;

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 Staff of the Air Force (10 U.S.C. §9033), the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force (10 U.S.C.

§9034), 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 Naval Operations (10 U.S.C. §8033), the Vice Chief of Naval Operations (10 U.S.C.

§8035), the Chief of Space Operations (10 U.S.C. §9082), and the Vice Chief of Space Operations (10 U.S.C. 9083).

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

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

•

forces, personnel, value of equipment, total obligation authority;

geographic area of responsibility;

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 force.10

Statutory Controls on GFO Authorizations

Congress has established a statutory framework for GFOs that limits GFO numbers by grade,

requires presidential appointment to many three-star and four-star positions, and specifies the

grade and/or duties of certain key positions. This framework provides for congressional oversight

of the most senior GFO positions, while providing latitude to the executive branch in the

management of the remaining GFO positions. Combining the maximum number of service and

joint GFO statutory authorizations, the maximum number of GFO positions authorized is 857.

Positions to which DOD is required, or may choose, to assign a GFO may be designated as joint

duty assignments. Those joint duty positions typically reside in joint activities (e.g., the Joint

Staff, combatant command staffs).11 Other positions normally reside in the respective services’

organizations (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 timeframe.13

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 10 U.S.C. §526. 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.

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

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (FY2024 NDAA; P.L. 118-31)

realized a set of legislative actions begun in the FY2017 NDAA, to reduce congressionally

mandated limits on the number of GFOs on active duty, with some exceptions.14 Section 512 of

the FY2024 NDAA amended 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. 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.”15 The FY2026 NDAA (P.L. 119-60 §502) amended 10 U.S.C. 526 to increase

the maximum number of GFOs in the Space Force from 21 to 24 and reduce the maximum

number of Air Force GFOs from 171 to 168. Table 3 summarizes the statutory upper limits by

grade for service-specific GFO positions.

Table 3. Maximum Number of GFOs, by Service, Excluding Joint Positions

Grade

Army

Air Force

Marine

Corps

Navy

Space Force

TOTAL

GFO Maximum

for all grades

219

168

150

625

2-star maximum

239

3- and 4-star

maximum

149

4-star maximum

Source: CRS analysis of 10 U.S.C. §§525 and 526.

Note: Neither 10 U.S.C. §525 nor §526 specifies an exact limit for 3-star GFOs, rather, they specify the total

not-to-exceed number of 3- and 4-star GFOs combined.

There are certain circumstances under which a general or flag officer does not “count” against the

GFO caps (e.g., after retirement approval).16 The President has authority under Title 10, Section

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/2021-12/20110314Track%20Four%20Efficiency%20Initiatives%20Decisions.pdf.

14 The FY2017 National Defense Authorization Act (FY2017 NDAA; P.L. 114-328 §501) 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, H.Rept. 114-840, p. 1013, 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. The John S. McCain National Defense Authorization

Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (P.L. 115-232 §596) required a “report on general and flag officer costs.” William M. (Mac)

Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (P.L. 116-283 §501) provided for accounting for

the number reserve GFOs, required a plan for downsizing the number of active GFOs among other purposes. The

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (P.L. 117-81 §501) provided authority for transferring GFO

billets among the Armed Forces. The James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 P.L.

117-263 §501) excluded lead special trial counsel of each Armed Service from the GFO strength limits.

15 H.Rept. 118-301, p. 1042.

16 Active-duty GFOs excluded from the caps include those within 60 days of retirement and GFOs transitioning

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

527, of the U.S. Code to suspend the operation of the caps in time of war or national emergency

declared by Congress or the President. Section 526(b) of Title 10 of the U.S. Code further

authorizes the exemption of 232 GFOs in joint positions from the limitations of Section 526(a).

The FY2026 NDAA did not specify any changes to the minimum number of joint GFOs. 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 those illustrated in

Figure 1.17

Figure 1. Minimum Number of GFOs for Joint Positions

Source: CRS analysis of 10 U.S.C. §526(b)(2).

Note: 10 U.S.C. §526 allocates only minimum positions per service, not all positions.

between certain positions for up to 60 days. The Attending Physician of Congress is counted in addition to the number

otherwise permitted for the officers’ 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).

17 10 U.S.C. §526(b)(2).

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Figure 2. GFO Authorizations by Service

Source: CRS analysis of 10 U.S.C. §§525 and 526.

Notes: 10 U.S.C. §526 allocates minimum positions per service within the total of joint assignments. Percentages

in the graph illustrate portion of GFOs by service within the entire GFO population. Percentages are rounded

and may not sum.

Presidential Determination for Three-Star and Four-Star Positions

Section 601 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code 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, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.”

Thus, except for those so designated in statute, all three-star and four-star positions are to be

designated as such by the President. Congress may review the rationale for this designation as

part of its oversight function. The Senate retains the power to confirm or withhold confirmation

of 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 GFOs found in 10 U.S.C. §§525

and 526.

Statutorily Defined Positions

Congress has established in 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 constitute most of these positions. Title 10 U.S.C.

§152 specifies that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff holds the rank of General or Admiral

(O-10) “while so serving.”

Appendix B provides excerpts of the statutorily required responsibilities, duties, or functions of

certain GFO positions. Congress may change these duties. For example, Section 512 of the

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (P.L. 112-81) specified that the Chief of

the National Guard Bureau is a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whose duties include “the

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

specific responsibility of addressing matters involving non-Federalized National Guard forces in

support of homeland defense and civil support missions.”18

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). RMC is a statutorily defined measure of the major compensation elements

that every servicemember receives periodically, and excludes non-cash benefits and deferred

compensation.19 Certain GFOs receive a “personal money allowance” as well, which is not part of

RMC.

Table 4 details the notional RMC that GFOs may receive in 2026. It assumes that all GFOs

receive a basic allowance for housing (BAH) rather than living in government-provided

housing.20

Table 4. Annual Regular Military Compensation for General and Flag Officers

As of January 1, 2026

Grade

Basic Pay

Basic

Allowance

for Housing

Basic

Allowance

for

Subsistence

(Flat Rate)

Federal Tax

Advantage

RMC

General/Admiral

$227,999

$48,092

$3,942

$16,507

$296,539

Lieutenant General/

Vice Admiral

$227,999

$48,172

$3,942

$16,410

$296,523

Major General/

Rear Admiral

$227,999

$48,145

$3,942

$16,443

$296,528

Brigadier General /

Rear Admiral(Lower Half)

$204,958

$48,229

$3,942

$15,673

$272,802

Source: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and Readiness, Directorate of Compensation, Selected

Compensation Tables, 1 January 2026, p. B3. On file with the authors.

18 P.L. 112-81 §512.

19 Statutory definition contained in 37 U.S.C. §101(25): “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.” For more information on Regular Military

Compensation, see CRS In Focus IF10532, Defense Primer: Regular Military Compensation, by Kristy N. Kamarck.

20 About 19% of GFOs lived in government-provided housing as of January 1, 2024, according to DOD reporting, and,

therefore, seemingly did not receive BAH. While this lowers the cash compensation received, they received free

housing instead. For the purposes of Table 4, the value of the free housing is assumed to be equivalent to the BAH of

their GFO peers. The calculation of the proportion living in government-provided housing was made using Selected

Military Compensation Tables (OSD Compensation Greenbook, 2024), Table A-7, Number Of Military Personnel...

Receiving Cash Allowances, and Table A8, Number Of Military Personnel... Receiving Quarters In Kind by Pay Cell,

PDF pp. 7-8, available at https://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/Documents/BlendedRetirementDocuments/

GreenBook%202024%20-%205.2%20percent%20-%20rev.pdf?ver=-pvWgAk1QWQ4cU-5B-nkgg%3d%3d.

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Notes: RMC is Regular Military Compensation. Totals may not sum due to rounding. Members of the Joint

Chiefs of Staff and the Combatant Commanders receive $48,412 in BAH and $16,122 in Federal Tax Advantage.

The Federal Tax Advantage is computed using the standard deduction and 2026 tax rates, including the Earned

Income Tax Credit (EITC).

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 size of

the active force over the past five decades is provided in Appendix A. A review of GFO levels

indicates a 13.9% increase in the number of four-star officers in this period (36 on September 30,

1965, versus 41 on September 30, 2024, the end of the fiscal year) and a 39.5% increase in the

number of three-star officers (119 versus 166), with variations over time related to contemporary

events. Over the same time period, the number of one-star and two-star officers decreased by

41.9% (1,129 versus 656).

During this time, the size of the active force dropped by approximately 51.9%, from 2.66 million

on September 30, 1965, to 1.28 million on September 30, 2024. Thus, a more salient measure

may be the proportion of GFOs to the total force.

Looking at the data from this perspective, GFOs have generally made up a small percentage of

the active force; however, the GFO corps has increased as a percentage of the active 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-fifteenth of one percent (0.067%) of the total

force in FY2024, indicating that the share of the total force made up of GFOs has increased by

39.6%. This historical trend is more pronounced with respect to four-star officers (which grew

from 0.0014% of the total force to 0.0032%, a 128.6% increase) and three-star officers (which

grew from 0.0045% of the total force to 0.013%, a 189% increase). One- and two-star officers as

a percentage of the total force increased 20.5% (from 0.0425% of the total force to 0.0512%).

These increases occurred while the size of the officer corps in general increased as a percentage

of the active force. As indicated in the last column of Table A-1, between 1965 and 2024, the

officer corps increased from 12.8% of the active force to 18.2%, indicating that the share of the

active force comprised of officers increased by 42.2%.

Criticisms of Increasing the Proportion of GFOs

Generally, criticisms of increasing the proportion of GFOs relative to the total force fall into two

broad categories. 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 may slow down decisionmaking processes. Each point is examined in more detail below.

•

Cost. GFOs cost more to employ than officers of a lower rank, in part due to the

higher compensation they receive. For example, a GFO in paygrade O-7 (i.e., 1star officers, Brigadier General / Rear Admiral (Lower Half)) may expect to

receive about $272,802 in RMC in 2026, while an officer in paygrade O-6 (i.e.,

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

•

Colonel / Captain) may expect to receive about $237,978.21 There can be

additional costs associated with GFOs such as large staffs, official travel, and

security details.22

Decisionmaking. Another criticism is that increasing the proportion of GFOs

may slow decisionmaking by adding additional layers of management between

the highest and lowest echelons of command. 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.

He noted, as an example, that “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.”23

Justifications for a Higher Proportion of GFOs

Several congressional hearings have addressed the potential benefits of having a high proportion

of GFOs relative to the total force.24 A 1997 congressional review of GFO authorizations

describes several rationales for a relatively high proportion, including the following:

•

Coalition operations. Forging coalitions with other nations to achieve common

security objectives can generate demand for senior military leaders to conduct

coordinated planning, training, and operations with peers from foreign nations.

Conducting contingency operations after the end of the Cold War often involved

forces from dozens of countries, including the forces of the nation in which the

operations took place. Examples of these coalition operations include those in

Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as smaller-scale contingencies such as Bosnia,

Haiti, Kosovo (ongoing), Somalia (ongoing), and Syria (ongoing). Contingency

operations such as these are often commanded by a GFO, who usually has

additional GFOs as subordinate commanders and senior staff officers. Both their

experience and the authority inherent in their grade can be considered important

elements to the success of complex operations. Political and diplomatic

considerations can also be a factor, as the officers leading these operations are

typically expected to interact with the senior military and civilian leadership of

the participating foreign nations.

Organizational structure. The relative increase in GFOs in proportion to the

active force is due in part to the organizational structure of the Armed Forces. For

21Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and Readiness, Directorate of Compensation, Selected Military

Compensation Tables, 1 January 2026, p. B3. On file with the authors.

22 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.

23 Secretary of Defense Robert Gates speech at Eisenhower Library, delivered May 8, 2010, available at

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/PDF/SiteCollectionDocuments/Reports/2010/May%202010/Day10/

GateSpeech050810.pdf.

24 See the following hearings: “Flag and General Officer Strengths,” Subcommittee on Manpower and Personnel of the

Senate Armed Services Committee, September 17, 1981; “General and Flag Officer Requirements,” Subcommittee on

Manpower and Personnel of the Senate Armed Services Committee, August 10, 1988; “Review of General and Flag

Officer Authorizations,” Subcommittee on Personnel of the House National Security Committee, April 8, 1997, in

House National Security Committee Report No. 105-6; “General and Flag Officer Requirements,” Subcommittee on

Personnel of the Senate Armed Services Committee, September 14, 2011, Senate Hearing 112-258.

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

•

example, there was a Chief of Staff of the Air Force at the peak of the Vietnam

War, when the Air Force had about 900,000 airmen, and there is still one in 2026,

with the Air Force strength at approximately 319,000 airmen as of December 31,

2025.25 Given the organizational structure and “posture” of the Armed Forces—

some of which is required by law—the amount of management “overhead” does

not necessarily change in direct proportion to the size of the force.

Technological changes. A third justification for increased GFO ratios is that

technological advances have changed the way the United States fights its wars.

Modern weapons systems, much more powerful and accurate than their

predecessors, require fewer personnel to deliver greater firepower. Thus, while

the number of personnel a GFO commands may decline as more sophisticated

equipment is substituted for manpower, the lethality of those forces may increase.

From this perspective, the lethality of the weapons systems, rather than the

number of people, provides the justification for an organization to be led by a

very senior military officer. Additionally, the advent and development of new

domains of warfare—such as space and cyber—has led to the creation of new

organizations (e.g., U.S. Space Force, U.S. Cyber Command) to exploit

advantages and defend against vulnerabilities in those environments, with

additional senior positions.

Resource Management Changes. DOD budget authority and complexity have

generally increased over time, as have expectations of their management. (DOD

budget authority is depicted in Figure 3.) As with the increased sophistication of

operations and weaponry, responsibility for budgets that amount to over one-half

of federal discretionary spending may require more senior-level management.

25 Department of Defense Active Duty Military Personnel by Rank/Grade and Service, December 31, 2025.

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Figure 3. Department of Defense Budget Authority, by Public Law Title

FY1948-FY2028

In billions of constant FY2025 dollars

Sources: FY2025 Budget Request: Department of Defense-Military (Subfunction 051), by Cameron M. Keys.

CRS analysis of Department of Defense, National Defense Budget Estimates for FY2025, April 2024, Table 6-8.

Note: Figures for FY2026-FY2029 are projections.

Translating defense authorization laws governing policy and appropriations laws for

defense and military construction into a Future Years Defense Program that illustrates

policy and plans five years into the future and “record[s] and display[s] resource

decisions,” may require the seniority of a GFO.26

Justification for the Statutory Status Quo

As noted above, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (FY2024 NDAA;

P.L. 118-31) realized a congressionally directed reduction of GFO billets, achieved through

intensive study and oversight.27 The law does not prohibit the executive branch from further

reductions, and the executive branch has initiated such a reduction. Secretary of Defense Peter B.

Hegseth, who is using “Secretary of War” as a “secondary title” under Executive Order 14347

dated September 5, 2025, released a memorandum on May 5, 2025, directing the following

general and flag officer reductions.

•

A minimum 20% reduction of 4-star positions across the Active Component;

A minimum 20% reduction of general officers in the National Guard; and

26 For more information on the Future Years Defense Program, see CRS In Focus IF10831, Defense Primer: Future

Years Defense Program (FYDP), by Brendan W. McGarry and Alexandra G. Neenan.

27 See footnote 13 and see footnote 14. See also H.Rept. 114-840, p. 1013. A copy of the Track Four Efficiency

Initiatives Decisions memo by Secretary Gates is available at https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/pc/docs/archive/314-2011_Track_Four_Efficiency_Initiatives_Decisions.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

•

An additional minimum 10% reduction in general and flag officers with the

realignment of the Unified Command Plan.28

The final list of “redundant” positions is yet to be released. Therefore, Congress may choose

whether or not to await further legislative action and review any future executive branch

decisions.

GFO Assignments

Assignment to any role in the uniformed military services is subject to controls provided in

statutes, DOD regulations, and military department regulations. Congress has the constitutional

power to make the laws that govern the Armed Forces.29 In carrying out these laws, the President,

as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces (U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section II), exercises

command authority, which extends to the most junior leader of any unit. In statute, the Defense

Secretary has “authority, direction, and control” over the Defense Department.30 The duty

assignment of any servicemember, including leadership and command positions at all levels,

depends on such delegated command authority.

GFOs are subject to the same command authority and to certain statutes and regulations that

apply to their nomination for promotion and service in certain assignments. For joint duty

assignments (JDAs), including as Combatant Commanders, other than those in statute, “Most

GFO JDAs are identified and managed as 2-year assignments. The tour length for Combatant

Commanders and Defense Agency directors is 3 years. Acquisition billets are governed by

additional legislation that may require tour lengths of 3 or 4 years.”31 Services have their own

specific regulations that apply only to GFOs in service-controlled billets.

Terminology in describing assignment actions, including GFOs, can be imprecise. The terms fire,

sack, axe, cashier, relieve, reassign, and dismiss are used as synonyms in various press articles

and oral reporting to describe the dynamic process of a uniformed officer’s change of position.

The latter three terms figure in statute and in DOD issuances. Dismissal is the most severe

because it expels the officer from the service altogether as punishment for misconduct. Such

authority has limits in statute, especially regarding dismissal, which can occur only by sentence of

court martial, unless the President orders it during war, in which case the officer is entitled to

demand court martial (e.g., 10 U.S.C. §§804 and 1161). Relief and reassignment are duty changes

that may be negative, positive, or neutral in character, depending on the individual situation.

Appendix B includes selected provisions of the U.S. Code that inform decisions related to GFO

assignments.

Secretary of Defense Peter B. Hegseth, Memorandum For Senior Pentagon Leadership, Subject: General/Flag

Officer Reductions, available at https://media.defense.gov/2025/May/05/2003704210/-1/-1/1/MEMORANDUMDIRECTING-GENERAL-AND-FLAG-OFFICER-REDUCTIONS.PDF.

29 U.S. CONST. art. I, §8, cls. 14 (to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces), 16

(to govern such part of the militia in federal service).

30 10 U.S.C. §113.

31 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, The Joint Staff, Manpower And Personnel Actions Involving General And

Flag Officers, CJCSI 1331.01E, Washington, DC, March 31, 2022, p. C-1. Based on 10 U.S.C. §664. See also Under

Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DOD Joint Officer Management Program, Office of the Under

Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DOD INSTRUCTION 1300.19, Washington, DC, May 18, 2023, p.

27, https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/130019p.pdf?ver=2018-04-03-114842-923.

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

GFO Management Considerations for Congress

Congress has established in 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. The National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (P.L. 119-60 §911) amended 10 U.S.C. §§151 and

164(a) to require that the President notify Congress when a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or

a commander of a unified or specified combatant command is being removed or transferred, and

provide a statement of the reason for the removal or transfer, no later than five days after the

removal or transfer. Congress may consider whether or not to adjust other statutory requirements

controlling GFO assignments. This could include

•

presidential reports to Congress in the case of §601 GFO assignments that fall

outside of the assignment framework represented in Appendix B;

a specified tour duration for Combatant Commanders;

specified Service rotation in Combatant Command assignments, or a sense of

Congress regarding a preferred Service to lead such commands; and

more detailed education, training, or assignment history requirements (e.g., for

Combatant Commanders, an assignment in the nominated theater at the O-6 level

or above).

Appendix B highlights positions and selected provisions with statutory requirements that affect

responsibilities, duties, or functions of certain GFO positions and GFO positions generally.

Congress Faces Recurring Questions in Managing

GFO Authorizations

Should Congress elect to address GFO authorizations, duties, compensation, or other related

topics in more detail, it may consider the following:

•

What is the most appropriate way to determine how many GFOs DOD should

have? How closely should this be linked to total force size? To what extent do

statutory requirements drive GFO requirements? What other factors would be

useful in determining the optimal number of GFOs?

Are there GFO roles that could be filled by civilian employees? Which tasks or

roles require a senior military officer, especially in terms of advanced managerial

skills, and which tasks or roles currently held by senior military officers could be

done by senior civilian personnel?

How do advances in information technology and decisionmaking tools affect the

need for GFOs? Could the use of these technologies result in flattened

management structures and decrease the need for GFOs? Or do they require

additional GFOs with specialized expertise?

Could organizational restructuring of the Joint Staff, Service Staffs, and

combatant command staffs decrease the need for GFOs or allow positions to be

held by officers of a lower pay grade? Could selected organizations be merged to

reduce the requirements for GFOs?

How important is rank equivalence when senior U.S. military personnel work

with their allied peers? Could military relations with international partners be

restructured to reduce the need for GFO representation?

Congressional Research Service

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

•

Could National Guard and Reserve GFOs be used to reduce the need for activeduty GFOs?

Are there GFO positions that could be eliminated or “downgraded” to a lower

rank? What are the costs and benefits associated with these actions? How might

this affect military effectiveness?

Can the direct and indirect costs associated with GFOs be reduced? For example,

could staff overhead costs be reduced without significantly affecting the ability of

GFOs to carry out their duties?

Congressional Research Service

Appendix A. Historical GFO Levels

Table A-1. Historical GFO Levels

Officers

As Percentage of Total Force

Year

4-Star

3-Star

2-Star

1-Star

1- & 2Star

All

GFOs

All

Officer

Active

Force

4-Star

Officers

3-Star 1- & 2- Star

Officers

All GFOs

All

Officers

1965

119

n/a

1,129

1,284

338,822

2,655,389

0.0014%

0.0045%

0.0425%

0.048%

12.76%

1970

141

n/a

1,157

1,338

402,226

3,066,294

0.0013%

0.0046%

0.0377%

0.044%

13.12%

1975

118

443

584

1,027

1,181

292,424

2,128,120

0.0017%

0.0055%

0.0483%

0.055%

13.74%

1980

113

406

559

965

1,110

277,622

2,050,627

0.0016%

0.0055%

0.0471%

0.054%

13.54%

1985

125

370

519

889

1,050

308,919

2,151,032

0.0017%

0.0058%

0.0413%

0.049%

14.36%

1990

121

367

530

897

1,054

296,591

2,043,705

0.0018%

0.0059%

0.0439%

0.052%

14.51%

1995

110

274

432

706

851

237,602

1,518,224

0.0023%

0.0072%

0.0465%

0.056%

15.65%

2000

119

282

436

718

871

217,178

1,384,338

0.0025%

0.0086%

0.0519%

0.063%

15.69%

2005

128

272

439

711

874

226,619

1,389,394

0.0025%

0.0092%

0.0512%

0.063%

16.31%

2010

150

310

482

792

981

234,000

1,430,985

0.0027%

0.0105%

0.0553%

0.069%

16.35%

2015

141

310

420

730

909

230,468

1,313,940

0.0029%

0.0107%

0.0556%

0.069%

17.54%

2018

147

296

438

734

921

230,708

1,317,325

0.0030%

0.0112%

0.0557%

0.070%

17.51%

2019

142

295

409

704

883

214,661

1,325,826

0.0028%

0.0107%

0.0531%

0.0666%

16.19%

2020

153

281

417

698

896

215,935

1,333,461

0.0034%

0.0115%

0.0523%

0.0672%

16.19%

2021

156

293

405

698

895

216,369

1,333,771

0.0031%

0.0117%

0.0523%

0.0671%

16.22%

2022

146

283

373

656

841

213,175

1,296,309

0.0030%

0.0113%

0.0506%

0.0649%

16.44%

2023

132

252

388

640

809

234,252

1,286,027

0.0029%

0.0103%

0.0500%

0.0630%

18.22%

2024

166

282

374

656

863

233,581

1,280,652

0.0032%

0.013%

0.0512%

0.0674%

18.24%

2025

144

259

409

668

848

235,575

1,298,099

0.0028%

0.0111%

0.0515%

0.0653%

18.15%

Source: CRS compilation of data produced by the Defense Manpower Data Center.

Notes: Figures are as of September 30 of each year. n/a = not applicable.

CRS-15

Appendix B. Selected Positions and Statutes

Table B-1. Selected Positions and Statutes

Position/Service

Statute

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

of Staff/Joint

10 U.S.C. §§152-153

General or Admiral

•

CRS-16

Selected Duties,

Responsibilities, or Functions

Grade and Requirements

Must have served as the Vice

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

of Staff, Service Chief, or

commander of a unified or

specified combatant command.

•

Assisting the President and the

Secretary of Defense in

providing for the strategic

direction of the Armed Forces.

•

In matters related to strategic

and contingency planning,

developing strategic

frameworks and preparing

strategic plans, as required, to

guide the use and employment

of military force and related

activities across all geographic

regions and military functions

and domains, and to sustain

military efforts over different

durations of time, as

necessary.

•

In matters relating to global

military strategic and

operational integration,

providing advice to the

President and the Secretary on

ongoing military operations,

and advising the Secretary on

the allocation and transfer of

forces among geographic and

functional combatant

commands, as necessary, to

address transregional,

multidomain, and

multifunctional threats.

The President may waive the

above if the President

determines such action is

necessary in the national

interest.

Appointment Duration

Four years (except in time of war)

Term begins on October 1 of an

odd-numbered year.

Position/Service

Service Chiefs/Army, Marine

Corps, Navy, Air Force, and

Space Force

CRS-17

Statute

10 U.S.C. §7033 (for

other Service Chiefs,

see 10 U.S.C.

§§8043, 8033, 9033,

and 9082)

Selected Duties,

Responsibilities, or Functions

Grade and Requirements

General or Admiral

•

“Significant experience in joint

duty assignments; and ... one

full tour of duty in a joint duty

assignment ... as a general

officer.”

•

In matters related to

comprehensive joint readiness,

evaluating the overall

preparedness of the joint force

to perform the responsibilities

of that force under national

defense strategies and to

respond to significant

contingencies worldwide.

•

In matters relating to joint

capability development,

identifying new joint military

capabilities based on advances

in technology and concepts of

operation needed to maintain

the technological and

operational superiority of the

Armed Forces, and

recommending investments

and experiments in such

capabilities to the Secretary.

•

In matters relating to joint

force development activities,

developing doctrine for the

joint employment of the

Armed Forces, and formulating

policies and technical

standards, and executing

actions, for the joint training of

the Armed Forces.

Varies by Service.

For the Chief of Staff of the

Army:

•

Presiding over the Army Staff.

Appointment Duration

Four years, term extendable up to

four years during time of war or

during a national emergency

declared by Congress.

Serves at the pleasure of the

President.

Position/Service

Statute

The President may waive the above

if the President determines such

action is necessary in the national

interest.

Commander of a combatant

command, Commander,

United States Forces,

Korea/Joint

CRS-18

10 U.S.C. §164 and

§604

Selected Duties,

Responsibilities, or Functions

Grade and Requirements

General or Admiral

•

10 U.S.C. §604 refers to

“commander of a combatant

command” positions as “Joint

4-star officer positions.”

•

Joint specialty under Section

661 of Title 10; has completed

a tour of duty in a joint duty

assignment as a general or flag

officer.

•

Transmitting the plans and

recommendations of the Army

Staff to the Secretary and

advising the Secretary about

such plans and

recommendations.

•

After approval of the plans or

recommendations of the Army

Staff by the Secretary, acting as

the agent of the Secretary in

carrying them into effect.

•

Exercising supervision,

consistent with the authority

assigned to commanders of

unified or specified combatant

commands under Chapter 6 of

this title, over such members

and organizations of the Army

as the Secretary determines.

•

Performing duties as

prescribed for members of the

Joint Chiefs of Staff.

•

Giving authoritative direction

to subordinate commands and

forces necessary to carry out

missions assigned to the

command, including

authoritative direction over all

aspects of military operations,

joint training, and logistics.

•

Prescribing the chain of

command to the commands

and forces within the

command.

Appointment Duration

Not specified

Normally three years; DOD policy

requires two years (see footnote

footnote14).

Position/Service

Commander, Special

Operations Command/Joint

CRS-19

Statute

10 U.S.C. §167 in

addition to §164

Selected Duties,

Responsibilities, or Functions

Grade and Requirements

General or Admiral

•

Organizing commands and

forces within that command as

necessary to carry out

missions assigned to the

command.

•

Employing forces within that

command as necessary to

carry out missions assigned to

the command.

•

Assigning command functions

to subordinate commanders.

•

Coordinating and approving

those aspects of administration

and support (including control

of resources and equipment,

internal organization, and

training) and discipline

necessary to carry out

missions assigned to the

command.

•

Exercising the authority with

respect to selecting

subordinate commanders,

selecting combatant command

staff, suspending subordinates,

and convening courts-martial.

•

Developing strategy, doctrine,

and tactics [related to special

operations activities].

•

Preparing and submitting to

the Secretary of Defense

program recommendations

and budget proposals for

special operations forces and

for other forces assigned to

No requirements beyond

those specified in §164.

Appointment Duration

Not specified

Position/Service

Statute

Selected Duties,

Responsibilities, or Functions

Grade and Requirements

Appointment Duration

the special operations

command.

Commander, Cyber

Command/Joint

CRS-20

10 U.S.C. §167b in

addition to §164

General or Admiral

•

No requirements specified

beyond those specified in

§164.

•

Training assigned forces.

•

Conducting specialized

courses of instruction for

commissioned and

noncommissioned officers.

•

Validating requirements.

•

Establishing priorities for

requirements.

•

Ensuring the interoperability of

equipment and forces.

•

Ensuring the combat readiness

of forces assigned to the

special operations command.

•

Monitoring the preparedness

to carry out assigned missions

of special operations forces

assigned to unified combatant

commands other than the

special operations command.

•

Managing the development and

acquisition of specialoperations equipment.

•

Developing strategy, doctrine,

and tactics [related to cyber

operations activities].

•

Preparing and submitting to

the Secretary of Defense

program recommendations

and budget proposals for

cyber operations forces and

for other forces assigned to

the cyber command.

Not specified

Position/Service

CRS-21

Statute

Selected Duties,

Responsibilities, or Functions

Grade and Requirements

•

Exercising authority, direction,

and control over the

expenditure of funds for

forces assigned directly to the

cyber command, and for cyber

operations forces assigned to

unified combatant commands

other than the cyber

command.

•

Training and certifying assigned

joint forces.

•

Conducting specialized

courses of instruction for

commissioned and

noncommissioned officers.

•

Validating requirements,

establishing priorities for

requirements, and ensuring

the interoperability of

equipment and forces.

•

Monitoring the promotion of

cyber operation forces and

coordinating with the military

departments regarding the

assignment, retention, training,

professional military education,

and special and incentive pays

of cyber-operation forces.

•

Ensuring the combat readiness

of forces assigned to the cyber

command.

•

Monitoring the preparedness

to carry out assigned missions

of cyber forces assigned to

unified combatant commands.

Appointment Duration

Position/Service

Chief of the National Guard

Bureau/Joint

“Positions of importance and

responsibility”

Grade of general or admiral

or lieutenant general or vice

admiral

Vice Chief of the National

Guard Bureau/Joint

“Positions of importance and

responsibility”

Statute

10 U.S.C. §10502

10 U.S.C. §601

10 U.S.C. §10505

10 U.S.C. §601

Selected Duties,

Responsibilities, or Functions

Grade and Requirements

General

•

Must have had at least 10

years of federally recognized

commissioned service in an

active status in the National

Guard in a grade above the

grade of brigadier general.

•

Significant joint duty

experience.

•

The President designates such

positions serving on active

duty in any grade above

colonel or Navy captain.

•

Other joint duty assignments.

General

•

Must have had at least 10

years of federally recognized

commissioned service in an

active status in the National

Guard.

•

Serving as a principal advisor

to the Secretary of Defense,

through the Chairman of the

Joint Chiefs of Staff, on

matters involving

nonfederalized National Guard

forces and on other matters as

determined by the Secretary

of Defense.

•

Serving as the principal advisor

to the Secretary of the Army

and the Chief of Staff of the

Army, and to the Secretary of

the Air Force and the Chief of

Staff of the Air Force, on

matters relating to the

National Guard, the Army

National Guard of the United

States, and the Air National

Guard of the United States.

•

Addressing matters involving

nonfederalized National Guard

forces in support of homeland

defense and civil support

missions as a member of the

Joint Chiefs of Staff.

•

Performing such duties as may

be prescribed by the Chief of

the National Guard Bureau.

Appointment Duration

Four years, may be reappointed.

Serves at the pleasure of the

President.

Four years.

May be removed from office at any

time for cause.

Source: Title 10, U.S. Code.

Notes: This table does not include a full listing of statutory positions. Likewise, for the positions it does list, the table does not include a full description of statutorily

defined functions, duties, or responsibilities.

CRS-22

Statutory Framework for Congressional Management of DOD General and Flag Officers

Author Information

Michael J. Vassalotti, Coordinator

Section Research Manager

Sofia Plagakis

Senior Research Librarian

Acknowledgments

Lawrence Kapp, former Specialist in Defense Personnel Policy, originally authored this report.

Disclaimer

This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan

shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and

under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other

than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in

connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not

subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in

its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or

material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to

copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service

R44389 · VERSION 20 · UPDATED

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.