Soon after Colonel Rasmuson announced her decision to retire, Secretary of the Army Elvis J. Stahr, Jr., appointed a board, including Colonel Rasmuson, to recommend nominees for her replacement.1 In February 1962, he announced he had selected Lt. Col. Emily C. Gorman to be the sixth director of the Women's Army Corps. Colonel Gorman was sworn in as director and promoted to colonel on 1 August 1962 by a new secretary of the Army, Cyrus R. Vance. She took the oath of office holding the bible used by Colonel Hobby in 1942 and by each of the subsequent directors.

 

Colonel Gorman could look back on twenty years' service in the Army. After graduating from WAAC OCS Class No. 5 at the First WAAC Training Center on 10 October 1942, she was assigned as chief of the center's WAAC Administration School. In 1944, she was selected to be the WAC staff director for the surgeon general of the Army, Washington, D.C., and, in August 1945, she was sent to Berlin as executive secretary of the Allied Control Authority. After eighteen months, she returned home and was demobilized. Seven months later, February 1947, she returned to active duty, at Colonel Hallaren's request, to prepare organization and training plans for a new WAC training center. When the WAC bill passed in 1948, she went to Camp Lee as S-3 (training officer). Promoted to lieutenant colonel in November 1950, she served as commander of the basic training battalion before leaving in 1951 to assume duties as WAC staff adviser at Headquarters, Second Army, Fort Meade. She served as deputy director of the WAC from January 1953 until January 1957, then became the deputy chief of the Plans and Training Division, Headquarters, Continental Army Command, Fort Monroe (1957-1960). She was serving as assistant chief of the Foreign Military Training Division, ODCSOPS, at the Pentagon, when selected by Secretary Stahr.

 

To serve as her deputy director, Colonel Gorman chose Lt. Col. Mary E. Kelly, who was appointed on 3 January 1963. Colonel Odbert, deputy director under Colonel Rasmuson, then retired. Colonel Kelly had served

---

NEWLY NAMED DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WAC, LT. COL. MARY E. KELLY With directors of the women's services. Left to right: Capt. Viola B. Sanders, WAVES; Col. Elizabeth Ray, Women in the Air Force; Col. Emily C Gorman, WAQ Colonel Kelly, and Col. Margaret M. Henderson, Women Marines, 3 January 1963.

 

as the director of instruction at the WAC School from 1957 to 1958 and as a staff officer in ODCSLOG from 1958 to 1963.2  

 

Because Colonel Gorman, like Colonels Boyce, Hallaren, and Rasmuson, had served as the deputy director, she was well aware of the responsibilities of the director's position. And she was well prepared for them. One reporter summed up her presence this way: "Trim and tiny, with brown eyes, this 52-year-old officer has an easy manner that contrasts with her reputation for strict efficiency." 3  Soon after assuming office, Colonel Gorman set her goals-to increase WAC officer and

---

enlisted strength, to raise reenlistment rates, and to improve WAC utilization, job satisfaction, and housing.4  

 

 

Colonel Gorman had been in office only a few weeks when the Cuban Missile Crisis began to build. In a TV address on 22 August 1962, President Kennedy warned that further shipments of Russian military materiel to Cuba would be interpreted as aggressive action and would not be tolerated. Congress authorized the president to recall 150,000 reservists for one year and to extend enlistments, overseas tours, and active duty commitments.5 On 21 October, the president announced that he had "unmistakable" evidence that Cuba was receiving jet bombers and missiles from the Soviet Union and was constructing missile launching pads. Such actions presented a threat to the security of the United States; the president recalled thousands of Navy and Air Force reservists to active duty and ordered a naval task force south to establish and enforce a limited blockade of Cuba by diverting ships laden with military equipment or personnel. The U.S. naval facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was reinforced in anticipation of an attack on the base. The Army relocated troops, planes, airborne and artillery units, and amphibious forces throughout the southeastern states, but did not call up reservists. The crisis ended on 27 October when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev agreed to dismantle and withdraw missiles and jet bombers from Cuba, and President Kennedy pledged not to invade Cuba. 6  

 

Though intense, the Cuban Missile Crisis did not inspire heavy enlistments in the WAC as the Berlin Crisis had the preceding year. Between July and December 1962, 1,888 women enlisted in the Regular Army (active duty), and 1,973 WAC reservists voluntarily returned to active duty. During the Berlin Crisis, 2,469 women had enlisted in the Regular Army and 197 WAC reservists had returned on active duty.7 (See Table 17.)

 

 

To stimulate enlistments, Colonel Gorman enrolled the Corps in the exhibit program that had been operated by the Department of the Army's chief of information since 1936. The exhibits explained what the Army could do, how it trained, and what kind of equipment it used. In 1963, the

---

UNDER SECRETARY OF THE ARMY STEPHEN AILES cuts the ribbon to open the WAC Exhibit Unit on the Pentagon concourse with Colonel Gorman, Director, WAC, and enlisted members of the newly formed WAC Exhibit Team, 14 May 1963.

 

Army Exhibit Unit at Cameron Station, Virginia, built a mobile exhibit to show Americans how and where the WACs served and how effectively the Army utilized women in a variety of jobs. The WAC exhibit was part of the overall program to educate the public and stimulate goodwill and support for the Army.8  

 

 

---

 

The under secretary of the Army and the director of the WAC unveiled the exhibit at the Pentagon on 14 May 1963, the twenty-first anniversary of the WAC. Colonel Gorman selected Lt. Col. Mildred I. C. Bailey to head a team, consisting of herself and six enlisted women, to accompany the exhibit and answer questions about WAC life, training, and assignments. The women also modeled uniforms, current and past. When not on display, the WAC exhibit was loaded into a gold and white, five-ton truck. On its sides were the Pallas Athene profile and the theme of the exhibit, "The Women's Army Corps-Serving with Pride and Dignity." 9  

 

While other Army exhibits toured the country for six months or a year, the WAC Exhibit Unit was on tour for six and a half years. The women assigned to the exhibit received training as models before joining the team and remained with it for only short tours so that their careers would not be injured by an assignment outside their military specialty. Lt. Col. Iona S. Connolly replaced Colonel Bailey in 1968 and remained with the team until it was discontinued. In 1969, Congress reduced the Army's funds for public information activities, and the WAC unit was deactivated in December of that year. In addition to praise from their superiors, team

---

members received the Freedoms Foundation's George Washington Honor Medal for the best government unit activity in 1968.10  

 

 

High reenlistment rates are as important to Army strength as a good year of recruiting. In 1959, the then new Army chief of staff, General Lyman L. Lemnitzer, had set reenlistment goals by asking the major commanders to reenlist one of every three first-term soldiers and four of every five career soldiers.11 To promote the reenlistments, a new option had been added permitting men and women to reenlist for training in a specific career group; WACs could also reenlist for recruiting duty or for their own vacancies. In 1960, an option called "taking a short to re-up" was introduced. Under it, men and women could reenlist after they had completed two years of a three-year enlistment or two-thirds of any enlistment period. The option owed half of its popularity to the fact that it gave men and women an opportunity to enter a different career field by reenlisting for a specific service school. The other half could be attributed to the cash reenlistment bonus.12  The new options helped raise the WAC reenlistment rate for first termers by 6 percent and career reenlistments by 1 percent in 1960. Then the rates began to fall. (See Table 18.)

 

At the director's request, the Enlisted Personnel Directorate (EPD) in the Office of Personnel Operations (OPO) initiated a study late in 1962 to determine why the WAC reenlistment rate was falling. The study presented some illuminating facts. Of 181 MOSs open to enlisted women, the Army actually utilized them in only 94. Ten career management fields were open to women, but 95 percent of the WACs served in only two: administration and medical care and treatment. Many factors contributed to this distribution; among them were the commanders' failure to designate positions for women, which resulted in a lack of promotion opportunities for enlisted women, and a lack of privacy in bachelor housing, particularly for senior NCOs. Approximately 90 percent of the WACs, compared to 54 percent of the men, were unmarried and lived in barracks.13  

---

 

 

The study concluded, "The [WAC] reenlistment rate is adversely affected by limited MOS utilization, lack of promotional opportunities, restrictive and sometimes unappealing living conditions, and an inadequate understanding by many enlisted members of the purpose of the Corps' existence." It recommended that more MOSS be opened to women; that interchangeable TD spaces be approved; that more promotion opportunities be provided for WACs; that a senior enlisted woman be assigned to the EPD to provide career information and to assign WAC NCOs; and that housing conditions for women be improved.14 On 27 May 1963, Colonel Kelly and Maj. Jennie W. Fea, the reenlistment study project officer in EPD, briefed Maj. Gen. Stephen R. Hammer, the chief of OPO, on the study's findings. General Hammer agreed "to expedite action" on the interchangeable space concept, to assign a WAC E-9 (sergeant major) to the Senior Enlisted Control Division, EPD, and to support the director's efforts to improve housing for women.15  

 

Improvements did follow. In April 1964, the Army opened to active duty women sixteen repair and maintenance MOSs previously authorized only for mobilization, and it provided training quotas for the women. In 1966, EPD established the position of WAC NCO Assignment Adviser (E-9) as a career monitor for enlisted women in the top three enlisted grades.16  Between 1962 and 1966, the WAC reenlistment rate for first termers increased by a little over 12 percent. (See Table 18.)

---

 

At the time that General Hammer agreed to expedite action on the interchangeable space concept, the idea already had some acceptance. For the WAC, it would help solve one of the Corps' biggest problems- lack of authorized spaces for WACs. In 1962, the DCSPER had received a recommendation through the Army Suggestion Program proposing that only those TD positions that specifically required a man or specifically required a woman be identified for fill by gender; the balance of the spaces could be coded for fill interchangeably by either a man or a woman. The DCSPER had forwarded the proposal to the Enlisted Personnel Directorate for action and had sent a copy to the director of the WAC. Colonel Gorman had recognized the potential of the idea and, on 16 August 1962, had asked EPD to develop an interchangeable space plan to increase the flexibility of WAC assignments and to provide more TD spaces for WACs to fill.17  

 

Lt. Col. Irene M. Sorrough was assigned to develop the detailed concept for integrating the idea into the Army's replacement system.18  This effort required adding an "interchangeable" category to the identification codes describing TD positions. A number of personnel management experts were consulted about the workability of such a change, while program analysts ensured the data would be accepted by the automatic data processing system.

 

Ultimately, the concept developed by Colonel Sorrough gave commanders a method of identifying more WAC spaces without reducing their control over their TDs or requisitions. The code "X" was used whenever a TD space could be filled interchangeably by an enlisted man or woman. Codes "A" and "E" continued to be used when a space could reasonably be filled only by an enlisted woman (A) or only by an enlisted man (E). An increased flexibility was given to the plan with the revision of WAC housing policy to allow women in grades E-5 through E-9 to be assigned to installations or activities that did not have a WAC detachment.19 No interchangeable code was included in the plan for WAC officer spaces. Officer spaces on TDs included a branch code when specialized training or background was needed. When no specific branch background was needed, the position was coded "NO" to indicate an officer from any branch with the proper MOS could fill the job. Such

---

 

spaces were called "branch immaterial," and WAC officers filled a number of them.20  

 

On 18 February 1963, Colonel Gorman approved the concept of the plan and recommended it to the DCSPER: "The proposed plan will encourage utilization of enlisted women in a broader range of military occupational specialties . . . and will give commanders increased flexibility in the assignment of all enlisted personnel."21 In June 1963, the new DCSPER, Lt. Gen. James L. Richardson, approved the concept and directed EPD to prepare the plan for approval by the chief of staff. As the plan circulated through the Pentagon for final coordination, Colonel Gorman dubbed it the "sexless TD plan." In July 1964, the chief of staff approved it, and a DA circular announced that the interchangeable concept would gradually be implemented throughout the Army. Before a revised regulation on preparation of TDs was issued in April 1965, a late change eliminated the letter "X" and substituted "I" to designate interchangeable spaces on TDs. In October 1965, Colonel Gorman was pleased to tell the WAC staff advisers that the major commanders had begun to designate "I" spaces on their TDs to provide for greater utilization of enlisted women.22  

---

By June 1966, Army reports indicated that the interchangeable code had been favorably received and had noticeably increased the number of WAC spaces on TDs. In 1962, the Army strength report had shown 6,500 spaces for enlisted women versus an actual strength of 8,560 enlisted women. On 30 June 1966, the report showed 20,500 interchangeable spaces plus 2,900 "A" spaces for enlisted women only; actual enlisted WAC strength was 9,179.23 The new scheme had solved the problem of an insufficient number of spaces on manning documents for the training, assignment, and promotion of enlisted women.

 

As time went by, the interchangeable system continued to be successful. In 1970, a regulation added an interchangeable code for positions that could be filled either by a male or WAC commissioned officer (code "K") or by a male or WAC warrant officer (code "P").24  In 1972, commanders of TOE units received instructions to use the same codes in preparing manning documents and reporting strength statistics to Department of the Army.25  At the end of December 1974, the report showed a total of 420,315 "I" and "A" spaces (239,758 TOE spaces; 180,557 TD spaces). Actual WAC enlisted strength on that date was 33,545, with a projected increase to 50,400 at the end of FY 1978.26  

 

 

The WAC reenlistment study had also drawn attention to the importance of privacy in housing facilities and reenlistment decisions by career WACs. Lack of privacy affected morale, which, in turn, affected reenlistment rates. To the women, privacy mattered much more than whether the buildings were modern or air-conditioned.

 

Men and women expressed different concerns regarding housing. Enlisted men seldom asked for privacy or considered their barracks a home. Women, on the other hand, wanted a secure, private place to call home. with kitchens, reception rooms, and laundry facilities. For building security some post commanders provided only signs that read, "off limits to male personnel." Some provided locked doors that opened from the inside with a crash bar. When commanders could not provide adequate security, some units bought their own locks or kept a night watch in their own barracks; most improvised kitchens, reception rooms, and laundry

---

rooms. Many WAC unit commanders allowed their permanent-party women some freedom in using bedspreads, dresser scarfs, and rugs and in displaying personal items.

 

Since the early 1940s, the Army had prescribed a distance separating male and female barracks. A World War II regulation prescribed that WAC barracks be at least 150 feet from male barracks or be separated by an intervening structure. After the WAC became a permanent part of the Army in 1948, policy dictated that women's barracks be a reasonable distance from men's barracks and that they be within walking distance of the women's workplaces. The local post engineer decided what a reasonable distance was. However, whenever an opportunity arose for obtaining a newer or a larger building for a WAC detachment, whether the building was next door or across the street from a male unit, both the WAC commander and the staff adviser recommended that the post commander waive the restriction. In 1968, the policy on separating male and WAC barracks was dropped from Army regulations.27  

 

Married WACs had housing problems, too. If a WAC was married to a military man, the couple's eligibility for post housing depended on the husband's rank. If quarters on post were not available, the couple rented a house or an apartment in the community and paid for it with the husband's quarters allowance, at the rate described as "basic allowance for quarters for personnel without dependents." A military wife was not considered a dependent, but a civilian wife was. Therefore, the man with a civilian wife received a quarters allowance at the higher rate for personnel with dependents. A military woman who married a civilian was not eligible for quarters on post, nor could she receive dependents' quarters allowance to live off post unless her husband was, in fact, dependent upon her for over 50 percent of his support. A military couple with bona fide dependents received on-post housing when it was available. If on-post housing was not available and they lived off post, each could draw quarters allowance at the "with dependents" rate.28  

 

Efforts to improve bachelor housing involved setting standards for new military housing and for adequacy of existing on-post housing. In addition to fiscal considerations, Congress decided standards of new construction; the secretary of defense set guidelines for the adequacy of buildings, and post commanders made decisions about the adequacy of buildings on their installations. For new construction or renovation, Congress annually allotted funds for specific projects at specific posts under the Military Construction Program, Army.29  

---

Within the rigidities of this system, housing improvements emerged slowly. The Army authorized improvements, and commanders carried them out when they had the funds to do so. In 1953, the Army authorized the installation of partitions between every two sleeping areas in WAC barracks and, within each resultant cubicle, the addition of clothing wardrobes and electrical outlets. Common areas contained cooking facilities. Ten years later, as those improvements were being completed, the Army authorized post engineers to install free washers and dryers in all bachelor housing when funds were available.30  

 

WAC officers routinely had more privacy than the enlisted women. Single WAC officers lived in bachelor officers quarters for women (WBOQ on post. Married officers or those with dependents lived in family quarters on post. When such quarters were not available, they lived off post and received the quarters allowance for service personnel with dependents. In a WBOQ, bachelor officers in the grade of major and above were assigned suites-two rooms (living room, bedroom) and a bath; captains and below had individual rooms and shared a centrally located bathroom.31  

 

Colonel Gorman encouraged the members of DACOWITS to push for improvements in women's housing and living conditions. A DACOWITS committee surveyed housing in the field, obtained suggestions from the servicewomen concerned, and consulted with the directors of the women's services and with military and civilian housing experts. In June 1964, Comdr. Beatrice M. Truitt, USN, DACOWITS executive secretary, submitted the study, along with DACOWITS recommendations, to Secretary McNamara. The recommendations, while primarily concerned with improving housing conditions for women, also covered housing for servicemen.32  

 

A major breakthrough in military housing had occurred in 1963. In the Military Pay Act of that year, Congress, for the first time, had authorized bachelor officers in the grade of major and above to live off post and receive a basic allowance for quarters when adequate housing was not available on post.33  Male and female officers whose duties did not require

---

them to live on post usually took advantage of this opportunity to rent or buy a house or rent an apartment in the local community.

 

The new law inspired a number of studies aimed at extending the provision to cover other military personnel. By the end of 1964, Secretary McNamara had received three major studies on the subject-the DACOWITS study, an Army study, and a tri-service study. Secretary McNamara appointed a new study group to evaluate the reports and present recommendations, and, based on the new proposals, in 1967 he issued directives applying to all services. The directives increased the amount of living space allowed each grade in new housing and authorized enlisted personnel in the grade of E-7 and higher and all officers to live off post and receive a quarters allowance when the Army could not provide adequate accommodations under the new standards:

 

E-7 through E-9: A private sleeping room.

Captains and up: An unshared bedroom, living room, and bathroom; access to a kitchen.

Lieutenants and warrant officers: An unshared combination living and bedroom and a bathroom .34  

 

Meanwhile, in 1963, the DACOWITS had proposed an innovative design concept for future barracks. In new barracks construction, a wing should be reserved and designed for women that would include partitions in latrines, a kitchen, laundry room, and date room. The proposal, attributed to Colonel Gorman, would, if implemented, reduce housing costs and ensure that each post had housing available for about 100 enlisted women. Congress seldom approved new construction for WAC detachments because it was uneconomical to build a barracks when the average WAC population at a post was between 75-100 women. Male barracks, on the other hand, usually housed between 250 and 500 men and could be cost justified. Therefore, Colonel Gorman, desirous of obtaining modern buildings for the WACs, suggested WAC wings in male barracks. "We'll live with the men," she remarked, then quickly added a proviso for separate entrances for women.35  

 

The idea was not entirely new. Posts with only a few WAC officers frequently assigned the women to live on one floor or wing of a bachelor officers quarters. In Pirmasens, Germany, the ninety-woman WAC detachment lived on the upper floor of an up-to-then male barracks in a combination of open bays, squad rooms, and individual rooms. Enlisted

---

men still occupied the first and second floors of the building. Access to the women's floor was controlled by the WAC detachment. Despite such precedents, Colonel Gorman's suggestion did not receive favorable consideration. Evidence of a more progressive attitude for future housing programs, however, began to appear. An article in the 7 August 1963 Army Times discussed an "emphasis in Army planning . . . on privacy in future BOQ construction." In addition to discussing privacy, the article predicted that in the future "all BOQ units on a post will be placed at one site" and that consequently "there will be no more separate and segregated projects for male and female officers." 36  

 

Further progress in housing concepts came when Congress approved construction of a major cantonment area at Fort Myer, Virginia. Here barracks would be built to house enlisted members of all services, and post services (chapels, post exchanges, commissaries, clubs, transportation, bowling alleys, and tennis courts) would be located within walking distance of the barracks. In the FY 1965 budget, Congress authorized the funds to build the Tri-Service Enlisted Women's Barracks for 700 enlisted women of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Women Marines in the area would continue to live in barracks at Henderson Hall, the headquarters of the U.S. Marine Corps. The new barracks made it possible to discontinue five small enlisted women's units in the Washington, D.C., area.37  

 

Colonel Gorman and Colonel Kelly met frequently with representatives of the Army Corps of Engineers to discuss the size of bedrooms, closets, shower rooms, laundry rooms, company offices, and visitor reception areas. Because the barracks was the first of its kind, the director knew that the design and construction standards would set a precedent. Her demands for the greatest possible space for privacy, storage, and convenience brought her in constant conflict with the engineers whose criteria were "adequacy" in comfort but "perfection" in engineering specifications. The engineers won all the arguments on size of rooms and closets and placement of offices and storage rooms. But despite inadequacies in those areas, the huge H-shaped building was air-conditioned, had an intercommunications system, game rooms, a lounge, and recreation areas. Each floor had a kitchenette and public telephones. Each wing on each floor had a central bathroom and laundry. Each woman had a private mail box.

 

The ground-breaking ceremony for the new barracks was held on 24 May 1966, a few months before Colonel Gorman left office. As a matter of principle, Colonel Gorman refused to attend the ceremony. "I'll only

---

 

go if the Chief of Staff orders it." She later commented, "Housing-a raging battle I did not win." 38  

 

Management of the women's tri-service barracks was assigned to the Army. The WAC detachment commander at Fort Myer, Maj. Nelda Ruth Cade, was appointed commandant of the building. The women moved into the building in March 1968; each service had an assigned section of the building. Junior officers of the other women's services assisted Major Cade in counseling the women and managing activities in the building. A WAC first sergeant, Anna M. Armour, assisted her in her command duties-administration, discipline, living arrangements, and housekeeping. The residents followed the regulations and policies of their parent service regarding personnel management, wearing of the uniform, military courtesy, and other procedures. When four women were assigned to one room, beds were double-decked to make room for chairs, TV stands, lockers, and desks. After the Army authorized NCOs to live off post, the women in the barracks inherited more room, and beds were undecked. Like Colonel Gorman, Major Cade believed the women deserved space for a chair, writing table, and a lamp. She accused the decisionmakers of failure to "understand that singles want the same amount of space and comforts that married people do." She wrote that the decisionmakers "assume that single people spend their time at the clubs or sitting around in dayrooms watching TV."39  

---

Though bachelor housing continued to need more attention, progress had been made. DOD decided a housing allowance for off-post living was more cost effective and efficient for the top enlisted grades and officers than building quarters for them on military posts. The director of the WAC had changed a long-standing policy and had permitted women in the grade of E-5 and higher to be assigned to installations that had no WAC detachment but could provide other housing or an off-post housing allowance. All of the services had authorized more living space for individuals and had acknowledged a trend toward modern living arrangements in building the Tri-Service Cantonment Area at Fort Myer. With these improvements, married military couples and women with civilian husbands could hope for a resolution of their housing allowance problems in the future.

 

 

If there were anything the director did not welcome in 1964, it was a General Accounting Office (GAO) investigation-especially after having launched a program to increase enlistments and improve the WAC image. In February, she received some probing calls from GAO, the congressional watchdog agency, about WAC strength, training, and discharge rates. A quick check revealed that the other women's service directors had received similar calls. Around Washington, a hint of interest by GAO usually heralded an investigation accompanied by adverse publicity. The bad news officially arrived in March. The director of GAO advised the service secretaries that his agency would examine the high rate of discharge among enlisted women before they had completed their first enlistment.40  

 

GAO began its investigation in early April. From a list of all the women (2,291) who had entered Army basic training during 1960, they selected 600 (20 percent) at random and traced their history of military service through Army Finance Center records. A similar procedure was followed in each of the other services. The results (see Table 19) showed that 64.6 percent, or almost two out of every three enlisted women, left the Army before completing their first enlistment. Losses for pregnancy, unsuitability, and marriage accounted for 42, 33, and 22 percent of the discharges, respectively.41  

---

 

Source: GAO, Draft Rpt, Dec 64, sub: Waste of Funds Resulting from Failure of Majority of Enlisted Women to Complete First Tour of Duty.

 

The GAO report also discussed the financial impact of the discharges. The services, it said, spent $12 million a year to replace women discharged before completing their initial enlistment contracts. The average first-term enlistee spent fourteen months on active duty. Replacement costs included a per capita share of funds spent by the services on recruitment, training, pay and allowances, transportation, separation, general support, and specialist training. GAO noted that in each of the fiscal years 1961 through 1963, the services discharged as many women as they had in 1960, primarily for reasons of marriage, pregnancy, and unsuitability. Turnover was not declining. In its summary, GAO wrote: "Accordingly we recommend that the Secretary of Defense take action . . . to materially reduce the high turnover rate for enlisted women and, if this proves to be infeasible, to consider filling such positions through the Federal civil service system."42  

 

The services unanimously rejected the suggestion. The Air Force did not "agree with the recommendations and conclusions of the draft report." It maintained that "no attempt was made by the General Accounting Office to validate their conclusions and recommendations" and that "the $12 million replacement cost . . . is overstated by an estimated $1.5 million." Air Force Secretary Eugene M. Zuckert even referenced a report issued by the President's Commission on the Status of Women in October 1963 that showed that, because of family responsibilities, civil service women under age 25 in the lower grades of the stenographic and clerical field had a higher turnover rate than men-almost three women left their jobs for every man who left. He also presented statistics to show that when overtime was included, civilian workers cost more on a per capita basis than military personnel.43  The Navy's reply pointed out that

---

enlisted women filled military positions more likely to be filled by enlisted men than civilian women. "Women fill military billets in the Shore Establishment in the activities to which they are assigned within authorized military allowances: they are included within the authorized strength of their service, a strength based on known and approved military requirements."44  The Army noted that long-range losses would not be reduced if enlisted women were replaced by civilian women. "Statistics maintained during FY 64 indicate that 94 percent of losses due to marriage and pregnancy and 98 percent of the losses due to unsuitability for military service were first term enlistees. Therefore while losses due to these causes are relatively high among this group, they are extremely low among those serving second and subsequent enlistments."45  The Defense Department answered GAO in March 1965. As a result of the report, the services began a concerted effort to reduce the high turnover and initiated a project to search out positions that did not require military incumbents and to convert them to civilian spaces.46  

 

In a final report issued on 31 May 1966, GAO again suggested that by substituting civilian for military women, the services could recruit fully trained women under twenty-five who had lower turnover rates. Also, personnel losses would be less because civilians would not be subject to the services' physical and disciplinary standards for retention.47  The Defense Department responded that the services had instituted stricter rules regarding discharge on marriage and had improved screening techniques to eliminate potentially unsuccessful recruits; these changes had reduced losses during FY 1966. As to replacing military women with civilians, high draft calls during this period had made it necessary for DOD "to take full advantage of available manpower resources, such as enlisted women." The services, however, would continue to study and improve personnel policies to reduce turnover of enlisted women.48 On the whole, the GAO study caused more concern to the WAC leadership than to the lower ranks. There was little sign of public interest, and the inquiry did not injure WAC recruiting.

---

Although the publicity produced by the GAO study did not prove harmful, Colonel Gorman was forced to make several changes in women's discharge policies. After 1 July 1965, women could be discharged for marriage only after they had (1) completed one year in their current enlistment and any accumulated service obligations and (2) been denied reassignment with their husbands-either at the same post or close enough to establish a joint household. In June 1966, statistics showed that the rate of discharge had declined less than a percentage point; a more drastic step had to be taken. Colonel Gorman announced that discharge on marriage was eliminated for women who enlisted or reenlisted on or after 20 June 1966. Losses then declined from 36.7 percent in FY 1965 to 31.1 percent in FY 1969.49  

 

The procedures for screening women applicants for enlistment that had gone into effect in 1963 were strictly enforced. After the GAO investigation began, Colonel Gorman asked the Standards and Systems Branch, OPO, to develop three additional forms for use in the recruit screening process-WAC Applicant Scholastic Record, WAC Applicant Employment Record, and WAC Applicant Personal History Questionnaire. The branch also developed a "Guide for the WAC Applicant." Using it, a recruiter could evaluate the potential recruit's personality before recommending that her application be approved by the commander of a recruiting station.50  

 

Losses for unsuitability dropped as a result of emphasis on the screening process and the new forms. At the WAC Staff Advisers Conference in 1964, Colonel Kelly reported that the percentage of WAC losses for unsuitability had fallen from 12.7 percent in FY 1962 to 11.7 percent in FY 1964. By the end of FY 1969, such losses dropped to 9.1 percent.51  

 

In addition to her work on projects and issues such as reenlistment programs, the interchangeable code, bachelor housing, and the GAO investigation, Colonel Gorman visited WACs stationed in the European and Far East commands as well as in detachments throughout the United States; conducted a myriad of public relations activities; and participated regularly in graduations and special events at the WAC Center and WAC

---

School. She also initiated the effort to remove promotion restrictions on WAC officers by expanding the grade structure.

 

 

Colonel Gorman took an approach different from that of her predecessors in trying to obtain higher promotions for WAC officers. Colonel Rasmuson, for example, had presented a study, supported by the 1956 JAG decision, to show that a change in policy on the matter would allow the Army to promote women other than the director to colonel. The study brought no change. Colonel Gorman, on the other hand, set out to achieve the promotions by increasing the authorized grade structure of the WAC.

 

She initiated her action with a memo to the DCSPER on 23 September 1963. In it, she recommended that the WAC be authorized 3 colonels (up from 1), 85 lieutenant colonels (up from 75), 20 sergeants major (up from 12), and 80 master (or first) sergeants (up from 65).52  She supported her request with a September 1962 confirmation of the 1956 JAG ruling and with charts showing the low rate of promotion of WAC officers-for example, the selection rate of male officers to temporary lieutenant colonel was 61.4 percent, but for WAC officers, 4.9 percent. She also cited the low number of WAC NCOs in the top enlisted grades-for example, 14,000 male E-8s versus 80 WAC E-8s. Within ODCSPER, only the director of military personnel refused to concur in the increase. He argued three points: an increased WAC structure required deducting spaces from the male branches; WAC officers lacked the versatility of male officers who could serve in administrative or combat positions; and no military requirements existed for the recommended increase.53 The manpower director, however, believed that the request should be approved because the interchangeability concept had been approved for manning documents and provided ample spaces to assign WACs in all grades.54  Nonetheless, after studying Colonel Gorman's proposal, the DCSPER disapproved it on 30 January 1964, commenting that it was "not favorably considered as there has been no demonstrated requirement for an increased grade structure."55  

---

The commander of the Continental Army Command (CONARC) was the next person to broach the issue of obtaining additional WAC colonel spaces. On 5 January 1965, General Hugh P. Harris, Jr., asked the DCSPER for a colonel's space to promote the commander of WAC Center and commandant of WAC School, then Lt. Col. Elizabeth P. Hoisington. The dual command responsibilities of the position exceeded those of similar commanders whose minimum rank was colonel. But the DCSPER replied that "any increase in WAC strength would be at the expense of other promotion lists." According to the explanation, "Male officers engaged in administrative and support activities to a large extent . . . are recoverable to perform combat leadership functions. On the other hand, WAC officers are not. Herein lies the principal difference between [the commandant of the WAC School and] the male commandants of other Army schools."56  

 

In June, during its annual national convention, the Reserve Officers Association (ROA) passed a resolution, drafted by its South Carolina and New York chapters, supporting the Bolte legislation to "allow women officers of the Services to compete on an equal basis with their male officer contemporaries."57  When the resolution was submitted to the DCSPER, he returned it stating his previous objections. Despite this, ROA sent its resolution to each service secretary with a letter that encouraged him to support equal promotion opportunities for women officers. ROA thus added another voice to the growing chorus of support.

 

President Lyndon B. Johnson had become a participant in the issue late in May 1965. He sent word to Secretary of the Army Stephen Ailes that he planned to promote Lt. Col. Mary Juanita D. Roberts, his executive secretary, to colonel. A reserve officer serving on extended active duty, Colonel Roberts had over twenty-one years of active federal service. When the DCSPER asked Colonel Gorman for her opinion on this matter, she endorsed the promotion and explained that it could be accommodated by an increase in the number of WAC colonels authorized, an action she had recommended earlier.58

---

Without waiting for a response from the Department of the Army, the president, under his executive authority, forwarded to the Senate his nomination of Mary Juanita Roberts for promotion to colonel. The Senate confirmed the nomination, and the Army issued orders promoting her effective 7 June 1965. Colonel Gorman took advantage of the event by sending a summary sheet to the chief of staff requesting that six WAC colonels be authorized. Predictably, the DCSPER added his nonconcurrence to the paper saying that "no military requirements exist to justify the increase; colonel requirements in all branches exceed the Officer Grade Limitation Act and increasing WAC colonel strength will add to the shortage." However, he continued, "In the near future, a recommendation will be submitted concerning the upgrading of the position of Commandant, WAC Training Center and School, from lieutenant colonel to colonel to include provision for a `spot promotion.' " 59

 

In view of the DCSPER's nonconcurrence on the summary sheet, Vice Chief of Staff Creighton W. Abrams called a conference with the DCSPER and the WAC director. Colonel Gorman told General Abrams that her objective was to correct the long-standing inequity that limited the promotion of WAC officers. She referred to the JAG ruling that had cleared the way for a change in policy. She illustrated the problem by pointing to the low selection rate for women officers and NCOs. At the conclusion of the conference, General Abrams approved her request for five more colonels spaces for the WAC. A few days later, Maj. Gen. Philip F. Lindeman, Acting DCSPER, informed the White House that the WAC colonels authorization had been increased to six and that a selection board would be convened to select four women for temporary promotion to that grade.60

 

Before the board could be scheduled, however, Colonel Gorman needed to upgrade the positions selected to be colonels spaces. Her request to revise her own manning document (TD No. CS 8532) went to the Staff Management Division, Office of the Chief of Staff-her channel for personnel spaces and operating funds.61  Rather than routinely approv-

---

ing the change directed by the vice chief of staff, the division sent the request to the Judge Advocate General, Maj. Gen. Robert H. McCaw, for a legal opinion of the action. Within two weeks the JAG advised that he overruled the earlier decision. He explained that "it is the opinion of this office that additional appointments to the grade of colonel in the Women's Army Corps may be accomplished only by securing necessary legislation or by the President personally, pursuant to his constitutional authority (41 Op Attny. Gen. 291 (1956))."62 His decision was endorsed by the general counsel of the Army and the judge advocate generals of the Air Force and Navy. After Colonel Gorman advised General Abrams of this turn of events, he discussed the matter with General McCaw. But the decision of 13 August held. The Management Division told Colonel Gorman: "In view of the legal opinion of TJAG, the Vice Chief of Staff has decided that no further action will be taken with respect to increasing the number of WAC colonels from two to six or with respect to convening a selection board until enabling legislation or a Presidential directive is obtained." 63

 

This reversal only made Colonel Gorman more determined than ever to accomplish her objective. A friend later commented, "If they had told Emily to stop, she probably would have resigned, run for Congress, won a seat, and pushed the bill through by herself." 64  The arrival of a new DCSPER on 1 September 1965 gave Colonel Gorman another opportunity to promote her project. Encouraged by her initial interview with Lt. Gen. James K. Woolnough, she sent a memorandum through him to the vice chief of staff pointing out that the recent JAG ruling made it impossible to promote WAC officers to colonel by administrative means. Therefore, she said, "This office will seek authorizing legislation to provide equitable promotion opportunities for WAC officers and actively solicit the support of DACOWITS at the October meeting for such legislation."65 Neither the DCSPER nor the vice chief of staff objected to her plan of action.

 

Colonel Gorman opened her new campaign with a draft summary sheet to the ODCSPER directorates. She proposed that the judge advocate general prepare legislation to remove promotion restrictions, including promotion to general officer, on Regular Army and Reserve women officers. This time, the directorates and the other general and special staff divisions (including the surgeon general since the action included promo-

---

tion of Army Nurse Corps and Army Medical Specialist Corps officers) approved the recommendations. On 29 December 1965, Colonel Gorman forwarded a summary sheet to the chief of staff recommending that legislation be prepared to remove promotion restrictions for Regular Army and Reserve officers of the ANC, AMSC, and WAC. Deputy Under Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) Arthur W. Allen, Jr., approved the action and directed the judge advocate general to prepare the legislation.66  

 

The legislation drafted by the judge advocate general encountered no staff resistance. However, the surgeon general, Lt. Gen. Leonard D. Heaton, made a last minute addition. He asked that the law authorize four more colonels for women officers in the medical corps-one for the assistant chief of the Army Nurse Corps and one for each of the three sections of the Army Medical Specialist Corps (Dietitians, Physical Therapists, and Occupational Therapists). An addendum to the legislative proposal covered the surgeon general's request. When the draft reached Under Secretary Allen's desk, however, he disapproved it and stated his objections: "I believe that approval of the addendum and the legislation as now drafted would create the anomalous situation of colonels working for colonels. This is an undesirable situation and one which I feel we should avoid."67  The paper went back to the DWAC-another temporary setback.

 

Colonel Gorman's effort with the DACOWITS, however, was yielding results. After its fall 1965 meeting, its members had recommended to Secretary McNamara that legislation separate from the Bolte legislation be prepared to eliminate the restrictions on the careers of women officers.68 Later, in March 1966, Assistant Secretary of Defense (Manpower) Thomas D. Morris advised the service secretaries that the Bolte bill was dead and asked them to prepare legislation to remove the statutory inequities affecting women in the service.69  

 

Meanwhile, members of the DACOWITS, representatives of veterans' organizations and women's clubs, former directors of the women's services, and other servicewomen had begun to bombard members of Congress with requests for legislation to remove the inequities. On 31 March

---

1966, Congressman Otis G. Pike of New York introduced H.R. 14208 for this purpose. Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina invited Colonel Gorman to his office to discuss the issues and afterward wrote Assistant Secretary Morris that the Senate Armed Services Committee would welcome legislation to correct the existing discriminatory provisions of law affecting military women officers.70  

 

In May, the Department of Defense completed the task of consolidating the services' legislative proposals. The Bureau of the Budget approved the proposed bill, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Cyrus R. Vance sent it to Congress. On 28 June 1966, Chairman L. Mendel Rivers of the House Armed Services Committee introduced the bill as H.R. 16000. The proposed law eliminated restrictions on women's promotion and retirement and the 2 percent limitation on their numbers; permitted men to be appointed in the Army Nurse Corps and Army Medical Specialist Corps and in the Navy and Air Force Nurse Corps; allowed women other than those in the medical corps into the Army and Air National Guard; and provided assistant chiefs, with the rank of colonel, for the ANC and AMSC as General Heaton had requested .71  

 

On 31 July 1966, a critical time in the progress of the bill, Colonel Gorman's four-year term as director of the WAC came to an end. The progress she had made, however, provided the basis for continuing this effort by her successor, Col. Elizabeth P. Hoisington, and the deputy director, Colonel Kelly.

 

Hearings on H.R. 16000 began on 21 September before Subcommittee 1 of the House Armed Services Committee. Opening the sessions, Chairman Philip J. Philbin of Massachusetts reassured the members that the bill would not be used arbitrarily to promote women to general or flag rank. He argued that "every time you promote a woman to flag rank there is one less star available for a male officer" and that this reality "alone will probably guarantee that there is no excessive passing out of stars to women officers." 72

 

A number of witnesses testified in support of the bill: Congressman Pike and Richard S. Schweiker and William S. Moorhead of Pennsylvania; Genevieve Blatt, Secretary of Internal Affairs, Commonwealth of

---

Pennsylvania; Maj. Gen. Earl F. Cook, U.S. Army, Retired, and vice president of the Association of the United States Army; Mrs. Donald Quarles, on behalf of the DACOWITS; and Judith G. Whitaker, executive director of the American Nurses Association. Assistant Secretary Morris was accompanied at the hearing by Colonel Hoisington and the other women directors, but he alone testified, saying in part that "removal of these restrictions will permit women officers to advance to positions of higher responsibility to the extent that they are as well-fitted for these duties as male officers." And he added that the "impact" of the change would be "spread over many years."73 At the conclusion of the hearing, the subcommittee reported the bill out favorably to the full House Armed Services Committee. On 4 October, the committee approved it, and, on 7 October, H.R. 16000 was unanimously passed in the House and sent to the Senate. The Senate received the bill on 10 October 1966 and referred it to the Armed Services Committee. The second session of the 89th Congress adjourned on 22 October; before the committee considered the bill. As had happened to WAC legislation in the 1940s, this legislation had to be reintroduced in both houses the following year.74

 

The reintroduced bill made excellent progress in the first session of the 90th Congress. On opening day, 10 January 1967, Congressman Schweiker offered H.R. 1274, which was identical to H.R. 16000. On 21 February, Congressman Rivers introduced another version, H.R. 5894, which contained one minor change from the earlier bills. To resolve the "colonels working for colonels" quandary objected to by Under Secretary Allen, the new draft included a phrase declaring that the chief of the Army Nurse Corps, the chief of the Army Medical Specialist Corps, and the director of the WAC outranked all other officers in their own Corps. Mr. Schweiker withdrew H.R. 1274 and strongly recommended passage of Rivers' revision. Schweiker's support 

was a deciding factor in committee and on the floor of the House.75

 

Subcommittee 1 of the House Armed Services Committee completed its hearings on the bill in one day. Chairman Philbin reviewed the history of the bill and its purposes. Assistant Secretary Morris, the only witness called, gave testimony similar to that he had given the previous year on H.R. 16000. Congressmen Schweiker and Pike submitted statements recommending H.R. 5894. The subcommittee reported the bill out favorably;

---

the full committee unanimously approved it; and, on 1 May, the bill was approved on the floor of the House and sent to the Senate.76  

 

The Senate Armed Services Committee conducted its hearing on the bill on 19 October 1967. The only Defense Department witness called was Brig. Gen. William W. Berg, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower (Military Personnel Policy). He reiterated the department's support for the legislation. The committee chairman, Richard S. Russell of Georgia, joined Senator Thurmond in actively supporting the measure.

 

At one point, the hearing strayed off the subject of career equality for women. Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii interjected a question about military women marrying and being forced to leave the service when they became pregnant.

 

SENATOR INOUYE: Does this bill liberalize some of the restrictions we now have on women members marrying and raising children?

GENERAL BERG: It has nothing to do with that sir.

SENATOR INOUYE: Why hasn't the service done something about this? It would appear to me that by our rules and regulations, we discourage our women members to carry on without considering the normal and natural life of raising families. I have been told that under certain circumstances evidence of pregnancy would mean immediate dismissal. This doesn't happen in civil life.

 

In reply, General Berg explained that each service tried to assign married military personnel to the same station and encouraged them to remain in service. But, he explained, discharge on pregnancy was mandatory in all services because the services could not allow the time lost due to pregnancy and because mothers in the service would have difficulty in taking care of their children. Senator Inouye noted that women in government and industry had children and returned to work. "Why," he asked, "isn't it possible for women members in uniform to do the same thing?" To conclude this line of questioning as quickly as possible, General Berg stated that he did not know why the situation existed and that the current bill did not address the problem. Because no one else continued the line of questioning, it was dropped.77 Nonetheless, comments made by congressmen in hearings are seldom forgotten.

 

When the committee met in executive session, it voted unanimously to report H.R. 5894 favorably to the full Senate. The Senate passed H.R. 5894 on 26 October 1967. The bill then went to President Johnson who had previously indicated that he would sign it.78  

---

PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON signs H. R. 5894 removing career restrictions on all women officers, 8 November 1967.

 

At a colorful ceremony in the White House at eleven o'clock on the morning of 8 November, the president signed the bill into law (PL 90130). The 14th Army Band (WAC) played "Hail to the Chief' as the president entered the East Room through a cordon of fifty enlisted women representing all the services. Among the guests attending the ceremony were Senator Margaret Chase Smith, Congresswoman Frances P. Bolton, the current directors of the women's services, Col. Oveta Culp Hobby and other former directors of the women's services, and many former and current members of DACOWITS. President and Mrs. Johnson held a reception for the group in the State Dining Room. In his remarks before signing the bill, so important to women in the services, the president said, "We have brought women to even higher and more influential positions throughout the land-and the government has improved. Women are leaders and doers today in our Congress and

---

SGT. PATSY M. WRIGHT, the first WAC to be assigned to attache duty, receives congratulations from Colonel Gorman, Director, WAC, and Maj. Gen. Edgar C Doleman, Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, DA, 2 June 1964. Sergeant Wright was assigned to Athens, Greece.

 

AT HER RETIREMENT REVIEW, COLONEL GORMAN reviews the troops by jeep accompanied by Lt. Gen. James K. Woolnough, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, DA, and Lt. Col. Frances M. Yoniack, Deputy Commander, WAC Center,- jeep driver, M. Sgt. Donna Bell, 28 July 1966

---

throughout our government. So here today in the East Room of the White House, we will end the last vestige of discrimination-I hope-in our Armed Forces."79  

 

Though PL 90-130 became law after Colonel Gorman left office, the WAC program had made significant progress under her direction. She had pushed and gained support for implementation of the interchangeable code and elimination of promotion and retirement inequities. Those two steps did more to ensure the assimilation of WACs into the Army's personnel management system than anything since the integration of women into the Regular Army and Reserve forces in 1948. Those steps also ensured improved utilization under the expanded program of WAC assignment opportunities that Colonel Gorman had brought about with the removal of restrictions on the assignment of women to bands other than the 14th Army Band (WAC), to attache duty, and to installations and activities without a WAC unit. She had assigned women to Alaska (1963) and Vietnam (1965) and had opened sixteen new MOSS to enlisted women.

 

Of course, not all was positive. Colonel Gorman's long and difficult struggle to eliminate promotion restrictions had shown that while male attitudes toward women in the Army had tempered somewhat, there still remained a great reluctance among some officers to accept women as equals. And, despite that reluctance, the conflict in Vietnam, then expanding, was creating a greater demand for Army women than the WAC could satisfy within the recruiting standards then in place. Personnel requirements to pursue the war rose monthly, and plans were in progress to deploy a WAC detachment there. A new officer procurement program had been formulated to attract greater numbers of WAC officers. The greatest impact of the envisioned expansion of the Corps would be felt at WAC Center and WAC School, whose personnel and facilities had been stretched to the limit. The new WAC director, Col. Elizabeth P. Hoisington, would need all her experience to resolve these problems. Nevertheless, WACs were now a larger, more important, more respected part of the Army.

 

On 28 July 1966, Colonel Gorman's retirement ceremonies were held at WAC Center. At her regimental retirement review, on the Marshall Parade Ground, she was presented with the rarely awarded Distinguished Service Medal by Lt. Gen. James K. Woolnough, DCSPER of the Army, in recognition of her achievements as director of the WAC and her twenty-four years of service in the United States Army.80