accepted the connection between military efficiency and
integration even before the Fahy Committee began to preach the point.
Despite their very dissimilar postwar racial practices, the Air Force
and the Navy were facing the same problem. In a period of reduced
manpower allocations and increased demand for technically trained men,
these services came to realize that racial distinctions were imposing
unacceptable administrative burdens and reducing fighting efficiency.
Their response to the Fahy Committee was merely to expedite or revise
integration policies already decided upon.

_The Air Force, 1949-1951_

The Air Force's integration plan had gone to the Secretary of Defense
on 6 January 1949, committing that service to a major reorganization
of its manpower. In a period of severe budget and manpower
retrenchment, the Air Force was proposing to open all jobs in all
fields to Negroes, subject only to the individual qualifications of
the men and the needs of the service.[16-1] To ascertain these needs
and qualifications the Director of Personnel Planning was prepared to
screen the service's 20,146 Negroes (269 officers and 19,877 airmen),
approximately 5 percent of its strength, for the purpose of
reassigning those eligible to former all-white units and training
schools and dropping the unfit from the service.[16-2] As Secretary of
the Air Force Symington made clear, his integration plan would be
limited in scope. Some black service units would be retained; the rest
would be eliminated, "thereby relieving the Air Force of the critical
problems involved in manning these units with qualified
personnel."[16-3]

[Footnote 16-1: Memo, ASecAF for Symington, 25 Mar 49,
sub: Salient Factors of Air Force Policy Regarding
Negro Personnel, SecAF files.]

[Footnote 16-2: Negro strength figures as of 5 April
1949. Ltr, ASecAF to Robert Harper, Chief Clerk,
House Armed Services Cmte, 5 Apr 49, SecAF files.]

[Footnote 16-3: Memo, Symington for Forrestal, 6 Jan
49, SecAF files.]

In the end the integration process was not a drawn-out one; much of
Symington's effort in 1949 was devoted instead to winning approval
for the plan. Submitted to Forrestal on 6 January 1949, it was (p. 398)
slightly revised after lengthy discussions in both the Fahy Committee
and the Personnel Pol