An informal Crimson survey conducted yesterday of more than half the Undergraduate Council representatives indicates that the council will likely overturn last Sunday's resolution calling for the return of the Reserve Officers Training Corps to Harvard.

Of 54 representatives surveyed, seven who supported reinstating ROTC in last Sunday's council vote said they would now vote to repeal that resolution. These seven votes alone could reduce the resolution's margin of support, which was 41-24 at last Sunday's meeting, to a mere 34--31.

In addition, six representatives who voted for the original proposal said that they were now undecided on the issue.

Only two more representatives of the sixundecided or the 34 not poiled would need tochange their votes for the council to repeal itscall for an on-campus ROTC program.

It is unclear, however, whether the results ofan unscientific Crimson survey conducted yesterdaywill affect council members' decision-making. Thestudent survey showed that 50 percent supportedlast Sunday's resolution while 40 percent opposedit.

The council vote last Sunday asking for anon-campus ROTC program, without academic creditfor military courses, has met with staunchcriticism from student activists who charge thatthe resolution violates the anti-discriminatoryclause in the council's constitution.

The armed forces, including ROTC programs, havean explicit policy of barring gays and lesbiansfrom service.

Representatives will vote tomorrow on a seriesof five resolutions, four of which wererecommended by the Services Committee. They are:

--That the council repeal last week'sresolution on the grounds that it violates thecouncil constitution and Harvard rules.

--That the University be allowed to bring backROTC only if the military changes itsdiscriminatory policies.

--That ROTC instructors never be grantedtenured faculty status.

--That all new organizations must comply withthe University's anti discrimination policies.

A fifth resolution, sponsored by Joel D.Hornstein '92 and Dana M. Bush '91, criticizesROTC's discriminatory policies, but does not makethe military's return contingent upon any changesin the policies. Hornstein, a member of Navy ROTC,sponsored the original ROTC proposal.

But, as the council gears up for what itexpects to be its most heavily attended meetingever, military leaders from two of the threebranches have said that ROTC programs at Harvardare not feasible.

Navy ROTC's Acting Executive Officer, Lt.Walter S. Josephson, said Navy's return to Harvardwould provide greater convenience for Harvardstudents, but would weaken the numerical strengthof the Navy ROTC unit at MIT.

"The number of Harvard students is small enoughthat it does not warrant a new unit," Josephsonsaid.

Currently 20 percent of participants in allthree ROTC branches at MIT are Harvard students.

Josephson added that ROTC officers areinterested in the council resolution because "itwas passed by a pretty significant margin."

Capt. Brian Mazerski, Air Force ROTC's publicaffairs officer, said the Air Force would beunlikely to start a Harvard unit because of thepaucity of Air Force ROTC students at the schooland the cost of creating a new program. "I thinkit would be pretty costly," he said. "I don'tforsee it even if there is a want to do that."

A Harvard program would also be unlikely,Mazerski said, because Air Force ROTC programs arebeing consolidated nationwide due to decliningenrollment. Last year, the Air Force consideredclosing about 40 ROTC units, including one atBoston University, he said.

Only the Army's ROTC expressed an interest inestablishing a unit at Harvard Lt. Col. Edward D.Hammond, director of MIT's Army ROTC unit, said hewould favor the creation of a new detachment atHarvard.

"Having one on campus would increase thetendency of students to join," Hammond said. "Asit is, it's a bit of a barrier. We would like tomake [ROTC] available to most students.