[Senate Hearing 109-22]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-22, Pt. 6
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2006
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
S. 1042
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
__________
PART 6
PERSONNEL
__________
APRIL 5 AND 13, 2005
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
21-107 PDF WASHINGTON : 2005
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JOHN WARNER, Virginia, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona CARL LEVIN, Michigan
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine JACK REED, Rhode Island
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri BILL NELSON, Florida
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina EVAN BAYH, Indiana
JOHN CORNYN, Texas HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
Judith A. Ansley, Staff Director
Richard D. DeBobes, Democratic Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Personnel
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona E. BENAJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES
Active Component, Reserve Component, and Civilian Personnel Programs
april 5, 2005
Page
Chu, Hon. David S.C., Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness.................................................. 5
Hagenbeck, LTG Franklin L., USA, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Personnel...................................................... 31
Hoewing, VADM Gerald L., USN, Chief of Naval Personnel, United
States Navy.................................................... 37
Osman, Lt. Gen. H.P., USMC, Deputy Commandant for Manpower and
Reserve Affairs, United States Marine Corps.................... 57
Brady, Lt. Gen. Roger A., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel,
United States Air Force........................................ 70
Strobridge, Steven P., Co-Chairman, The Military Coalition....... 89
Raezer, Joyce Wessel, Director, Government Relations, National
Military Family Association.................................... 131
Holleman, Deirdre Parke Esq., Co-Director, National Military and
Veterans Alliance.............................................. 148
Active and Reserve Military and Civilian Personnel Programs
april 13, 2005
Hall, Hon. Thomas F., Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve
Affairs........................................................ 183
(iii)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2006
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Personnel,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
ACTIVE COMPONENT, RESERVE COMPONENT, AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL PROGRAMS
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in
room SR-232A, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Lindsey
O. Graham (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Committee members present: Senators Graham and E. Benjamin
Nelson.
Committee staff member present: Leah C. Brewer, nominations
and hearings clerk.
Majority staff members present: David M. Morriss, counsel;
Scott W. Stucky, general counsel; Diana G. Tabler, professional
staff member; and Richard F. Walsh, counsel.
Minority staff member present: Gerald J. Leeling, minority
counsel.
Staff assistants present: Alison E. Brill and Pendred K.
Wilson.
Committee members' assistants present: Steven R. Norton,
assistant to Senator Chambliss; Meredith Moseley, assistant to
Senator Graham; and Eric Pierce, assistant to Senator Ben
Nelson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, CHAIRMAN
Senator Graham. Good afternoon, everyone. The subcommittee
will come to order.
The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony on
Active-Duty, Reserve, and civilian personnel programs in review
of the defense authorization request for fiscal year 2006.
I would like to begin by stating how honored I am to be
chairing the Subcommittee on Personnel. It really is an honor,
and I look forward to my time here. I am particularly grateful
to have Senator Nelson as the ranking member. I have found him
to be a problem-solving Senator who understands what the Armed
Services Committee is all about, and there is no more dedicated
Senator to the cause than Senator Nelson from Nebraska. So I
look forward to our time together.
My predecessor, Senator Chambliss, did a superb job. He is
my neighbor from Georgia, and I will try to carry on the
tradition that he and Senator Nelson have started. I thank him
for his continuing service as a member of the subcommittee and
as co-chairman of the Senate Reserve Caucus. Senator Nelson,
thank you again for volunteering to serve as the ranking
member.
As he knows, the subcommittee has a strong tradition of
operating in a bipartisan spirit on behalf of soldiers,
sailors, airmen, and marines, and I intend to continue that
tradition. When I am at home speaking about the problems that
our country faces, one of the things I stress is that when you
are in Iraq or Afghanistan or anyplace wearing the uniform of
the United States, the enemy could care less about your
politics. They could care less about your heritage. All they
want to know is are you an American, and if that is the case,
then you are in harm's way. I really do respect what Senators
Warner and Levin have done to try to make this committee as
bipartisan as possible. I am sure that Senator Nelson and I
will continue that tradition.
I want to extend thanks and appreciation to Senators
Collins, Dole, and Kennedy for their continuing membership on
the Personnel Subcommittee and to Senators McCain, Lieberman,
and Akaka for joining us on the subcommittee. This is a good
group. There is a lot going on today in the Capitol and they
will be very involved as the subcommittee moves forward.
Secretary Chu, welcome. This will be your fifth appearance
I believe.
Dr. Chu. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. I really do appreciate you coming. I have a
lot of respect for your knowledge and your service to our
country.
I also would like to welcome the members of our first
panel, all of them wearing the uniform of our great Nation:
Lieutenant General Franklin Hagenbeck, United States Army,
Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel; Vice Admiral Gerald
Hoewing, United States Navy Chief of Naval Personnel;
Lieutenant General H.P. Osman, United States Marine Corps,
Deputy Commandant for Manpower and Reserve Affairs; and
Lieutenant General Roger Brady, United States Air Force, Deputy
Chief of Staff for Personnel.
Thank you all. I know enough about the military to
understand that getting one star is a big deal, getting three
is a huge deal. Thank you for your service.
Before we get started, I think it is appropriate to talk
about people out in the field of all ranks, particularly our
young officers and enlisted people who are serving in far-off
places. The Personnel Subcommittee's goal is to make sure that
we have a force fit and ready to fight and that the force and
the families are well taken care of. Now is an opportunity to
reflect for just a moment on what we have accomplished as a
Nation militarily since September 11, 2001.
Since then, we have defended the homeland. We have routed
the Taliban during Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). We have
ousted Saddam Hussein during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Our
troops remain deployed and under combat conditions in
Afghanistan and Iraq today performing heroically and defending
those fledgling democracies. I have been to Iraq three times. I
have been to Afghanistan twice.
I will talk to you a bit about my observations, but the
people in those countries are tasting freedom and all the
burdens that come with it because the young men and women from
this country and other coalition nations decided to go and make
that possible. Our subcommittee is going to treat these people
right.
In Iraq, our troops continue to fight the insurgents who
have killed and wounded so many Americans and innocent Iraqis
who aspire to live in a democratic nation. Our hearts and
prayers go out to the families of those who have been injured
and who have made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of freedom.
On behalf of all of my colleagues, however, I wish to express
our gratitude and pride in the accomplishments of the men and
women of the Armed Forces. Their successes could not have been
achieved without the support of their families, their
communities and, in the case of our guardsmen and reservists,
their employers.
I want to stress that for a moment. I was in a Guard unit
that was activated during the first gulf war, and when people
are called to Active-Duty from the Guard and Reserves, many
times the base or the unit is far away from a military base in
its traditional form. There is no better experience to see a
community come together to support families of guardsmen and
reservists who are deployed to the Gulf to fight the Nation's
fights. Employers make a tremendous contribution to making sure
our force is stable and that the men and women who serve in the
Guard and Reserves are well taken care of. To the employer
community out there who may be listening, we understand what
you do. We appreciate what you do, and help is on the way.
I do want to underscore the role of the Guard and Reserves.
Fifty percent of the combat forces and 40 percent of all U.S.
military forces in Iraq are members of the Guard and Reserve,
the highest use of these forces since World War II. The demands
on the Guard and Reserve have never been greater, but they are
meeting the challenge, and this subcommittee must continue to
carefully assess the tools that the Reserve component may need
in ensuring its ongoing ability to succeed.
I have been, along with most Members of the Senate, pushing
for full-time TRICARE coverage for the Selected Reserves to
help retention, recruiting, and readiness, and that fight
continues. I appreciate the compromise that Senator Warner was
able to establish last year where, if you were called to
Active-Duty for 90 days, your family received a year of
TRICARE. I think that is a good start that can be built upon.
As to the Active-Duty Forces, we will do everything in our
power to make it so that you and your family can be well taken
care of. When you decide to sign up, tough conditions can come
your way, and no one is going to over-promise on this
subcommittee. That is the one thing that Senator Nelson and I
are committed to doing, to try to improve the quality-of-life
the best we can. There is a certain hardship that comes with
serving one's country, particularly in time of war. We will try
to ease that hardship the best we can.
Saying thank you is never enough, but it needs to be said
as much as possible. To those who serve in the Guard and
Reserve on Active-Duty, thank you for the sacrifices that you
are making.
With that, I will allow Senator Nelson, if he wishes, to
make an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR E. BENJAMIN NELSON
Senator Ben Nelson. Well, thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman. I certainly welcome you as the new chairman of the
Personnel Subcommittee. I am looking forward to working
together with you this year.
In past years, this subcommittee has led the way in
authorizing measures to improve the quality-of-life for our
servicemembers and their families. We have authorized pay
increases above the rate of inflation for the last 5 years, and
we raised the housing allowance to eliminate average out-of-
pocket housing costs for military personnel unable to live in
Government housing. Each year we have reviewed and revised
special pays and allowances, as well as recruiting and
reenlistment bonus authorities to provide meaningful financial
incentives to those who serve in our military forces.
Over the last several years, as the chairman has noted, we
have improved health care for military personnel and their
families by expanding health care coverage by authorizing
TRICARE for Life and by making the TRICARE health benefit
available to members of the Reserve components and their
families before and after mobilization. I am confident that
under your leadership, Mr. Chairman, we will continue to look
at expanding health care coverage for members of our Reserve
components and their families.
This subcommittee has taken the lead in helping the
Department of Defense (DOD) address significant issues such as
spouse and family abuse, and we want to continue to work with
the Department to address the very serious issue of sexual
abuse in our military forces. Your leadership on this
subcommittee comes at a very opportune time.
Obviously, your service in the Air Force Reserve will be
invaluable as we craft measures to address the serious
recruiting and retention issues that are currently and will be
facing our Reserve and National Guard Forces.
The subcommittee will also address significant issues
facing our Active-Duty Forces this year. While the Army
struggles to maintain and, in some cases, increase its Active-
Duty end strength, the Navy and Air Force will be making
sizeable reductions in their authorized end strength. This
subcommittee needs to ensure that the Services have the tools
which they need to effectively manage their personnel programs.
Mr. Chairman, I am really looking forward to working with
you as we address these personnel issues and others this year.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. I welcome
Dr. Chu back, and ask all of you to feel as though this is less
a hearing and more of a discussion period so that we can better
understand the challenges that you face, and together, we can
work to improve the lives of those who are under your command.
We thank you very much.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
Dr. Chu, your full prepared remarks and those of the other
witnesses on the first panel will be entered into the record.
You may now make an opening statement, if you would like.
STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID S.C. CHU, UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
FOR PERSONNEL AND READINESS
Dr. Chu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Nelson. Thank
you both for your warm welcome. It is a great privilege to
appear before you this afternoon with my colleagues to describe
our personnel programs, Active, Reserve, and civilian.
Just 32 years ago this summer, the United States returned
to its great tradition through most of the Republic, and that
is the decision to staff the military entirely with volunteers,
both the Active Forces and the Reserve Forces of the United
States. That decision was implemented in the summer of 1973.
The early years of the volunteer were often difficult
years. It took us a while as a country to set the right
parameters and the right combination of policies to secure the
new success of the volunteer force, but by the 1980s, we had
achieved that success. I think in the operations in the first
Persian Gulf war in 1990-1991 and again most recently in
Afghanistan and Iraq, as you have noted, the benefit of a well-
motivated, highly-trained, volunteer force is clear for all to
see. That superb performance of our young men and young women
in the field has, I think properly, earned them the praise of
their elders as the newest ``greatest generation.''
It does, as my comments suggest and as you suggested also,
Senator Nelson, in your opening remarks, require a dynamic
adjustment of our policy and programs to sustain that success.
We are very grateful for the support of this subcommittee in
making those adjustments over time. Permit me, if I may, to
highlight six of the most important things that we are seeking
with this year's authorization bill.
First and foremost, of course, is a pay raise of 3.1
percent. That is a half a percentage point above the so-called
Employment Cost Index (ECI), continuing our conformance with
the guidance of Congress that this should be our metric through
fiscal year 2006. We believe this is the right pay raise for
the year ahead.
Second, we would like to see the maximum amount allowed
under the so-called selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) raised
to $90,000 to give us more leeway as we seek to retain certain
hard-to-fill skill areas.
We seek likewise an increase in the ceiling for hardship
duty pay from the current level of $300 a month to $750 a
month. This allows us, as difficult circumstances accrue to
particular assignments, to adjust the compensation accordingly.
For the Reserve Forces, we would like to see greater
parallelism with the Active Force. We would like a critical
skills retention bonus authority, similar to the Active Force,
with the ceiling of $100,000 to recognize the differential
nature of the service.
We likewise seek a more modern affiliation incentive, for
those leaving active service to join a Selected Reserve unit.
We think that will be very helpful in terms of the recruiting
challenges we face on the Reserve front.
Finally and I think very importantly for the long term, we
are seeking in this authorization bill limited authority for
the Secretary to carry out a small number of demonstration
projects regarding the management of officers, recognizing that
one size does not fit all and that we have specific communities
where a little different approach might be meritorious. We
would like authority to carry out some limited pilot projects
in the years ahead, subject to your oversight and guidance.
My colleagues and I look forward to working with you again
this year, just as you both suggested, in ensuring that we
sustain the success of this All-Volunteer Force which has
brought so much success to the efforts of the United States, as
Senator Graham so nicely outlined in his remarks.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Chu follows:]
Prepared Statement by Hon. David S.C. Chu
introduction
Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished subcommittee, thank
you for the opportunity to be here today.
For a number of years we have talked about transformation at the
Department of Defense (DOD). This effort continues, and today I will
review with you some initiatives we are working on within all
components of the Total Force: Active-Duty, Reserve, DOD civilians, and
the families who support our Armed Forces.
There is no disputing the fact that the Force is facing challenges.
Where it does, particularly in the areas of recruiting, retention, and
stress, we carefully monitor the current status and take measures to
resolve problems. We continually review compensation packages to ensure
that they are adequate to meet the needs of the recipients, whether the
need be for basic pay, housing allowances, or survivor benefits. We
work jointly in many areas to take full advantage of the strength that
comes from combining resources and knowledge, for example in joint
training, partnerships with State and local governments, and the new
Military Severely Injured Joint Support Operations Center.
We are guided by the understanding that people are more than just
numbers and budgets are more than just sums in columns. The decisions
made about funding for the next fiscal year matter a great deal to real
people. I am happy to be here to answer your questions and discuss the
programs that we believe are essential to building and sustaining the
Total Force that will meet our national security requirements.
transforming the total force
End Strength and Relieving Stress on the Force
The Department of Defense continues to review its military end
strength to ensure that the Nation's security needs can be met and is
making progress in alleviating the current high demand on U.S. forces
caused by operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on
terror. By focusing attention on efforts to reduce stress on our
forces, we believe we can negate any need for an increase in military
end strength above what is authorized in the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2004.
Transformation of how the U.S. military is structured--especially
the increase in combat units in the Army and Marine Corps--is the
biggest way in which the Department is working to reduce the demand on
U.S. forces. The fiscal year 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) will
further refine our strategy for future military operations and for a
more responsive, lethal, and agile force.
The old force structure, designed to respond to Cold War threats,
did not provide us with the best balance of capabilities in the Active
and Reserve components. Rebalancing the force into one that is based on
capabilities rather than threats improves responsiveness and eases
stress on units and individuals by building up capabilities in high
demand units and skills. This will be accomplished by converting
capabilities in both the Active and Reserve components that are in
lesser demand, to a higher priority structure.
As outlined in the report Rebalancing Forces: Easing the Stress on
the Guard and Reserve, which was published January 15, 2004, the
rebalancing effort also sought to establish a limit on involuntary
mobilizations to achieve a reasonable and sustainable rate. This
produced a force structure planning goal of limiting the involuntary
mobilization of individual reservists to 1 year out of every 6 years.
The Services are improving their posture with respect to Active
component/Reserve component mix by rebalancing about 50,000 spaces
between fiscal years 2003 and 2005. The Services have planned and
programmed additional rebalancing initiatives for fiscal years 2006
through 2011. The amount and type of rebalancing varies by Service. The
Army, as the largest Service and the one most stressed by the global
war on terror, will have the bulk of the additional rebalancing.
Military-to-civilian conversions are also helping to alleviate
stress on the force. In fiscal year 2004, the Department converted over
7,600 military billets to DOD civilian or contractor performance. The
Department currently has plans to convert over 16,000 additional
billets in fiscal year 2005 and around 6,400 billets in fiscal year
2006 and is identifying additional conversions for fiscal year 2007-
fiscal year 2011. Military end strength made available from these
conversions is being used to reduce high demand/low density units,
alleviate stressed career fields, demobilize National Guard units, and
assist with Army modularity.
The Department is investing in new information age technologies,
precision weapons, unmanned air and sea vehicles, and other less
manpower intensive platforms and technologies to relieve stress on the
force. This is already being utilized by the U.S. Air Force in meeting
their demands for installation security throughout the world. We are
also increasing the jointness of our forces, (creating capabilities
that exceed the sum of the individual Services) to reduce stress. To
ease the burden on some high demand, low density units and skills, we
have employed innovative joint concepts to spread mission requirements
across the force where possible in order to meet mission requirements:
for example, Navy and Air Force personnel are augmenting ground forces
in Iraq.
The Air Force and Navy project decreases in their authorized
military end strength. The Air Force plans to reduce its end strength
by turning in military authorizations no longer needed as a result of
military-to-civilian conversions. The Navy's reduction is attributable
to technological advancements in the ships in the fleet, altering the
workforce mix and instituting new manning practices. In summary, the
Department does not see the need for additional permanent end strength
at this time. The statutory limits provided for in the NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2004, along with Service's stress reducing initiatives, provide
adequate manpower to meet the national security requirements.
The Reserve Force
Purpose, Missions, and Policies of the Reserve Components
The purpose of the Reserve components has changed and a mission-
ready National Guard and Reserve is a critical element of our national
security strategy. The Reserve components support day-to-day defense
requirements and portions have been an operational force since they
were called up for Operation Desert Storm. This force is not a
strategic Reserve that we use only during and after planned
mobilization or in the event of a major war, but a force that
contributed between 12 and 13 million duty days annually from fiscal
year 1996 to fiscal year 2001 in support of operational missions. In
fiscal year 2002 Reserve Force contributions increased to over 43
million duty days of support, and increased again in fiscal year 2003
and fiscal year 2004 to over 60 million man duty days of support
annually.
The Reserve components support the Kosovo KFOR mission, the
Guantanamo GITMO mission, the MFO-Sinai mission and, the most demanding
of the operations, Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi
Freedom (OIF). OEF and OIF have resulted in the Reserve components
currently furnishing about 30 percent of the troops in theater. The
Reserve components are performing a variety of non-traditional missions
in support of the global war on terrorism, such as providing command
and control and advisory support teams in support of the training that
will allow Iraqi and Afghan forces to assume a greater role in securing
their own countries. The National Guard will remain an integral player
in homeland defense and Operation Noble Eagle and will remain dual-
missioned under both titles 10 and 32.
Personnel policy guidance published in September 2001 established
the guidelines for using the National Guard and Reserve to support
combatant commander requirements. In July 2002, the personnel policy
guidance was expanded to require proactive management of Guard and
Reserve members, particularly focusing on husbanding Reserve component
resources and being sensitive to the quality-of-life of mobilized
personnel and the impact on civilian employers of reservists. Our
assessment is that adhering to these policy guidelines, specifically
limiting the mobilization period to no more than 12 months and limiting
the frequency with which Reserve component members may be involuntarily
mobilized (e.g., to no more than 1 year in every 6 years), and
completing the initiatives the Department has undertaken--particularly
the rebalancing effort--will allow the Reserve components to sustain a
utilization rate not to exceed 17 percent per year in the near future.
Under the old rules, constraints in end strength and grade
accounting hindered the use of Reserve volunteers. We are extremely
grateful that last year Congress removed barriers to volunteerism with
a new strength accounting category for reservists performing
operational support. Because reservists were counted as Active-Duty end
strength and were required to compete for promotion against Active-Duty
personnel, reservists were reluctant to volunteer for extended periods
of Active-Duty. The new continuum of service construct maximizes the
use of volunteers, provides greater opportunities for reservists who
are able to contribute more to do so, and offers accession and
affiliation programs to meet specialized skill requirements.
These policies and initiatives were developed to preserve the
nature of the ``Citizen Soldier'' while still allowing us to meet
operational requirements. This will provide reservists with reasonable
tour lengths and give reservists, their families and their employers a
reasonable expectation of the Reserve service requirements. We believe
that with these parameters, we can sustain a viable Reserve Force and
preserve the citizen-soldier. Predictability and reasonable limits on
frequency and duration of mobilization are key elements of our
policies, which are designed to not only support reservists, but also
sustain the support of employers and families, and ultimately enable
the components to meet recruitment and retention objectives. Similarly,
the emphasis on volunteerism is designed to allow servicemembers who
want to shoulder a greater burden of mobilization to do so.
Reserve and National Guard Utilization
There has been considerable discussion about the stress that the
global war on terror is placing on the force--both Active and Reserve.
A repeated question is: what level of utilization can the Guard and
Reserve sustain while still maintaining a viable Reserve Force?
Recognizing that the global war on terrorism will last for a number of
years, the Department established a strategic approach to ensure the
judicious and prudent use of the Reserve components in support of the
war effort. We will continue to assess the impact mobilization and
deployment have on the Guard and Reserve and adjust our policies as
needed to sustain the Reserve components.
There are two ways to look at rates of mobilization for the Guard
and Reserve. The first is the cumulative approach which looks at all
Reserve component members who have served since September 11, 2001.
This approach includes gains but does not account for losses. Under the
cumulative approach, a total of just over 412,000 Guard and Reserve
members have been mobilized between September 11, 2001 and November 30,
2004. That represents just under 36 percent of the 1,157,200 members
who have served in the Selected Reserve during this period. Of the
total number of Guard and Reserve members who have been activated,
63,700 (or 5.5 percent of all members who have served in the Selected
Reserve Force since September 11, 2001) have been mobilized more than
once. Of the 63,700, a total of 52,800 (4.6 percent) have been
mobilized twice, 8,400 (less than 1 percent) have been mobilized three
times and just over 2,500 (two tenths of 1 percent) have been mobilized
more than three times. However, no reservist has been involuntarily
mobilized for more than 24 cumulative months.
The other way to look at mobilization is in terms of today's
force--those who are currently serving in the force. This approach
reflects gains and losses--the currently serving approach. Looking at
today's force of 849,100 Reserve component members using the currently
serving approach, we have mobilized 355,400 Reserve component members,
representing 42 percent of the current force.
Compared to Operation Desert Storm when we mobilized 30,000
Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) members, we have not used the IRR in an
overly aggressive manner to support the global war on terrorism. In the
past 3 years, we have mobilized 8,000 IRR members. The further
utilization of the IRR remains a viable option for meeting both near-
term and long-term commitments. We must establish the proper
expectations for our Reserve component members, their families, their
employers, and the public in general. We are undertaking a program to
establish those expectations: reasonable service requirements for the
21st century based on the frequency and duration of military duty and
predictability to the greatest extent possible.
The National Guard is an integral part of the Air Force and Army
total force mission capability, yet as evidenced by the three
devastating hurricanes that hit Florida or the wildfires that blazed
through our western States during 2004, the National Guard is a crucial
element in a Governor's response to natural disasters. Similarly, the
National Guard has a prominent role in supporting local and state
authorities in their efforts to manage the consequences of a domestic
terrorist attack. Their roles are vital to the survival of the Nation
and therefore the National Guard will remain a dual-missioned military
force.
The centerpiece of responding to domestic terrorist attacks is the
fielding of 55 Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD
CSTs), one in each State, Territory, and the District of Columbia.
These 55 teams are to support our Nation's local first responders as
the initial state response in dealing with domestic chemical,
biological, radiological, nuclear, or high yield explosives (CBRNE) by
identifying the agents/substances, assessing current and projected
consequences, advising on response measures and assisting with
appropriate requests for additional State support. Each team is
comprised of 22 highly-skilled, full-time, well-trained, and equipped
Army and Air National guardsmen. To date, the Secretary of Defense has
certified 32 of the 55 congressionally authorized teams as being
operationally ready. The WMD CST funding for fiscal year 2005 is $214.2
million, and the budget request for fiscal year 2006 is for $214.6
million. The Department is preparing 12 teams for certification in
fiscal year 2005. The final 11 teams are being prepared for
certification in fiscal year 2006. Any of these planned certifications
can be affected by lack of available equipment or fully trained
personnel; however, we do not anticipate problems with either.
The fight against terrorism and the protection of our homeland will
be protracted endeavors. To that end, many outside policy experts,
independent panels, and analytic studies have advocated expanded roles
for the National Guard in homeland security. Some have even suggested
that the National Guard should be reoriented, reequipped, and retrained
solely for the homeland security mission. However, there has been no
national strategy change to justify the need to establish a separate
role for the National Guard to only perform homeland security related
missions under new statutes and administrative guidelines. There are
already sufficient legal mechanisms in place that enable State and
territorial governors to employ their National Guard forces in support
of local authorities to meet a wide range of these existing missions.
Reserve Component Recruiting and Retention
We have been monitoring the effects of Reserve utilization and the
stress on the force since 1996. The key factors we track are end
strength attainment, recruiting results, retention, attrition, and
employer/reservist relations.
As we have seen in the first 5 months of this fiscal year, we are
facing a very challenging recruiting environment in the Reserve
components. With the exception of the Marine Corps Reserve, the Reserve
components got off to a slow start in October, but we are seeing steady
improvements with overall attainment of recruiting objectives
increasing from 75 percent in October to 82 percent, year-to-date, in
February. The Air Force Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve are leading
the Reserve components with the Air Force Reserve at 119 percent of its
goal through February and the Marine Corps Reserve at 99 percent of its
goal. The Air Force Reserve has exceeded its recruiting goals for each
of the past 4 months. The Marine Corps Reserve performance is quite
remarkable since, of the six DOD Reserve components, it has had the
greatest proportion of its force mobilized since September 11, 2001, in
support of the global war on terrorism.
To address the recruiting challenges the Reserve components, as a
whole, are expanding their recruiter force and using the new incentive
enhancements in last year's authorization act that best meet their
needs. The Army National Guard is working closely with the various
states and territories to rebalance structure as needed to ensure the
states are properly sized to meet their strength objectives. The Air
Reserve components are taking advantage of the downsizing of the
regular Air Force, and they are examining their incentive structure to
ensure that they can attract and retain sufficient manpower resources.
The Defense Advisory Commission on Military Compensation will be
looking at incentive structures and may make suggestions for
improvements that they believe will assist us in meeting our recruiting
and retention objectives. The Commission on the National Guard and
Reserves will review personnel pay and other forms of compensation as
well as other personnel benefits. We look forward to working with these
Commissions as they assess the compensation and benefits package needed
to sustain a healthy National Guard and Reserve.
In fiscal year 2004, the Reserve components recruited 59,187 first-
term enlistees and an additional 57,494 individuals with previous
military service for a total of 118,177 recruits, attaining 96 percent
of the total Reserve component goal of 123,304 accessions. In addition,
all of the Reserve components remained under their programmed attrition
ceilings.
We anticipate that recruiting challenges will continue in 2005. The
Army National Guard and the Army Reserve are at risk of falling short
of their recruiting objectives. They are addressing this problem with
aggressive use of enhanced recruiting and retention incentives and
large increases in their recruiting forces. The Army National Guard is
adding 1,400 recruiters for a total recruiting force of 4,100, and the
Army Reserve is adding 734 recruiters for a total force of 1,774. In
addition, the Army is detailing 250 Active Army recruiters to Reserve
recruiting while the new Reserve recruiters are being hired and
trained. The other four DOD Reserve components are projecting that they
will achieve their 2005 objectives, even though three of the four got
off to a slow start. However, we have seen steady improvement in
results for each of those three components and even the Army National
Guard has steadily accessed more new recruits each month.
We are closely monitoring the effects of mobilization on recruiting
and retention, especially for the Reserve components. In the aggregate,
the Reserve components fell short of their end strength objective,
achieving a strength of 851,395 against an authorized strength of
863,330, largely due to a significant shortfall in the Army National
Guard. However, the recruiting shortfall was not as significant as it
could have been due to very low attrition. This is quite remarkable
given the increased use of the Reserve components in the global war on
terrorism. A strong attrition posture continues through January.
The trend of an increasing percentage of Reserve component recruits
without prior military service continues. Approximately 50 percent are
now expected to come directly from civilian life. This is a result of,
among other factors, high Active component retention contributing to a
smaller IRR population. For 2005, all Reserve components are continuing
to focus their efforts on maintaining aggressive enlistment programs by
using enhanced enlistment and re-enlistment incentives in critical
skill areas.
Attention to the prior service market will continue. The Reserve
components will expand their efforts to contact personnel who are
planning to separate from the Active component and educate them on the
opportunities available in the Guard and Reserve. In addition, the
Reserve components will continue their efforts to manage departures.
All Reserve components are achieving success in retention, with year-
to-date attrition at or below our base line year of 2000.
The mission of the National Committee for Employer Support of the
Guard and Reserve (ESGR) is directly related to retention of the Guard
and Reserve Force. Employer support for employee service in the
National Guard and Reserve is an area of emphasis given the continuing
demand the global war on terrorism has placed on the Nation's Reserve
component and the employers who share this precious manpower resource.
Nationwide support for our troops by employers has been and continues
to be superb.
ESGR has established a Customer Service Center hotline (800-336-
4590) to provide information, assistance and gather data on issues
related to Reserve component employment. We have established the
Civilian Employment Information (CEI) database so Reserve component
members may register their employers in the Defense Manpower Data
Center (DMDC). The synergy derived from linking these databases enables
ESGR to measure and manage employment issues.
Misunderstandings and conflicts between employers and Reserve
component members do arise. ESGR Ombudsmen provide ``third party
assistance'' and informal mediation services to employers and Reserve
component members. Major initiatives undertaken by the ESGR National
Staff include: a Defense Advisory Board (DAB) for Employer Support to
provide advice on issues critical to shared human capital; employing
information technology systems to create ESGR volunteer manpower
efficiencies; initiating a scientific survey of employer attitudes;
enhancing strategic relationships with employer organizations such as
the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Federation of Independent
Business, Society for Human Resource Management, and professional
associations; implementing a follow-up process to promote the mission
of ``gain and maintain'' employer support; building on marketing
successes achieved in the National Employer Outreach program; gaining
significant national exposure in traditional and new media with the
singular focus of defining the American employers' role in national
security.
The number of complaints filed with the Department of Labor under
the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act declined
each year from 1995 through 2000. While complaints filed during the
first 3 years we have been involved in the global war on terrorism have
increased, the ratio of complaints compared to the total number of duty
days of operational support provided by the Reserve components actually
declined during the past 3 years. For example, between 1996 and 2001,
reservists performed an average number of 15,500 duty days for every
complaint filed with the Department of Labor. Compared to the last 3
years with the Reserve components supporting the global war on
terrorism, reservists performed an average of 43,000 duty days for each
complaint filed with the Department of Labor. We are answering every
call and complaint we receive from an employer, family member or
individual guardsmen or reservist.
Reserve Component Health Benefit Enhancements
The Department is moving forward expeditiously to implement recent
benefit enhancements for Reserve component members and their families.
Recent legislative action dramatically improved health benefits. The
Department has implemented the permanent earlier TRICARE eligibility
(up to 90 days prior to activation) for certain Reserve component
members and the extension of post-mobilization coverage for 180 days,
and authorized waiver of TRICARE deductibles and higher provider
payments for activated Reserve members and their families consistent
with the approach in the Reserve Family Health Care Demonstration, in
effect since 2001.
In April 2005, the Department will implement the premium-based
``TRICARE Reserve Select'' program, offering medical coverage to
reservists and family members who have served in support of contingency
operations since September 11, 2001 and who commit to continued service
in the Selected Reserve. The benefit will be similar to TRICARE
Standard, the fee-for-service option of TRICARE.
These new authorities give us the tools to fully address the health
care needs of reservists and their families. Assuring the medical
readiness of reservists when they are called to Active-Duty registers
as one of our highest priorities. In addition, providing excellent
benefits to the families of activated reservists and supporting them in
the transition to and from Active-Duty are vitally important
responsibilities. It will be important to assess the effect of the new
entitlement for reservists who are not on Active-Duty. A key issue will
be the effect of a new entitlement on recruitment and retention of both
Reserve and Active-Duty component members.
The Active Force
Force Management
As with the Reserve components, we look to recruiting and retention
results, benefits packages, and force-shaping initiatives when
measuring progress and shortcomings in the management of the Active-
Duty Force. Some issues, such as the prevention of sexual assault and
rest and recuperation, affect all Service members equally, whether they
belong to an Active or a Reserve component; but there are also
requirements unique to the permanent, All-Volunteer Force. We strive to
ensure that the men and women who have chosen to be a part of the
Active-Duty Force are satisfied that their commitments are fairly
rewarded and always appreciated.
Compensation
Prosecuting the global war on terrorism requires top quality,
highly skilled men and women whose compensation package must be
competitive enough to recruit them and retain their voluntary service.
Basic pay, housing and subsistence allowances, bonuses, special and
incentive pay and other key benefits must serve to sustain these
warfighting professionals. We are grateful to Congress for its work in
improving each of these areas, especially over the past several years.
Military pay raises, reducing out-of-pocket housing costs for
servicemembers and their families, bonuses, and special and incentive
pays send a clear signal that our Nation values the courage and
sacrifice required of our military members.
Since September 11, 2001, the Department and Congress have worked
together to increase military basic pay by more than 21 percent. The
across-the-board 3.1 percent pay raise in this year's budget represents
the last year in which the law calls for a military pay raise equal to
\1/2\ percent greater than the Employment Cost Index (ECI).
In addition to maintaining efforts to achieve competitive pay, the
Department has accomplished its goal of eliminating average out-of-
pocket housing costs by 2005. The success of this effort is a direct
result of the close cooperation of the Department and Congress,
resulting in housing allowances that are more than 41 percent greater
than they were in 2001. Servicemembers view the housing allowance as
one of the key elements of their total compensation package and can be
confident they can afford adequate housing when they move in the
service of their country. Further, the Department will continue its
efforts to improve our data collection to ensure the allowance
accurately reflects the current housing markets where servicemembers
and their families reside.
The Department is committed to taking care of servicemembers and
their families through appropriate compensation while members are
deployed and serving their country in dangerous locations around the
world. Military personnel serving in OIF and OEF in a designated combat
zone, as well as members serving in direct support of these operations,
receive combat zone tax benefits that exclude all the income of our
enlisted members from Federal income tax. These servicemembers also
receive $225 per month in Imminent Danger Pay (IDP) and $250 per month
in Family Separation Allowance (FSA), amounts made permanent in the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005. Additionally, these individuals qualify for
Hardship Duty Pay-Location at the rate of $100 per month and $105 per
month in incidental expense allowance. This results in pay increases
for a typical married member of over $700 per month and over $500 per
month for a typical single member, while deployed. These pays and
allowances acknowledge the hardship and danger involved at these
deployment locations as well as the sacrifice associated with tours
away from family.
In recognition of deployment frequency and excessive duration, the
Department has authorized payment of Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP) to
members serving longer than 12 months in Iraq or Afghanistan. These
payments are as much as $1,000 per month for members in units serving
necessary but involuntary extensions beyond 12 months. The Department
is grateful to Congress for its substantiation of AIP as a flexible and
responsive means for Services to appropriately compensate members who
are called on to extend their service in demanding assignments. We
again seek an increase in the ceiling for Hardship Duty Pay to further
increase our flexibility with additional options to better address
these pressing issues.
Retention of Special Operations Forces presents another critical
compensation challenge as a result of the war on terror. The United
States Special Operations Command force structure is projected to
increase through September 2008. Increased retention of current Special
Operations Forces members, in the face of ever demanding requirements
and lucrative alternatives, is critical to the success of that growth.
In December, the Department authorized a robust retention incentive
package that includes extensive use of the Critical Skills Retention
Bonus, Special Duty Assignment Pay, Assignment Incentive Pay, and the
Accession Bonus for New Officers in Critical Skills. For example, we
are offering bonuses of up to $150,000 for highly-skilled senior
noncommissioned officers to serve an additional 6 years. The Department
continues to monitor Special Operations Forces retention and review
initiatives to leverage Special Operations Forces readiness through
high return investments in military compensation and benefits designed
to sustain these highly valued professionals.
Shaping the Force
As we transform to a more flexible, lethal force for the 21st
century, the Department of Defense is exploring various alternatives to
ensure the force has the proper balance and mix of skills and
experience. We are looking at developing an integrated package of
voluntary separation incentives--we do not want to ``break faith'' for
their loyal and dedicated service and create significant recruiting and
retention risks. These voluntary incentive tools are of particular
importance when the Air Force and Navy are decreasing in size while the
Army is increasing operating strength.
In practice, we see the military departments implementing the least
expensive tools appropriate to their circumstances, progressing to more
expensive tools only as their force shaping requires. Only if voluntary
separations did not suffice would the military departments, as a last
resort, implement involuntary separation measures such as Selective
Early Retirement.
Death and Survivor Benefits
We realize that no benefits can replace a human life; the lost
presence of the family member is what survivors face. Nevertheless, we
must address the difficult issue of how to compensate these survivors.
Our system of benefits is generally good, but recent assessments
concluded that the overall package could be improved to honor properly
the contributions and sacrifices of our servicemembers. We are working
within the Department and with other agencies to address these
deficiencies, primarily in the area of immediate cash compensation, for
those whose death is the result of hostile actions. We are looking at
ways to improve the lump sum payments through increased insurance and
death gratuity payments. Our objective is to ensure that we fully
support our servicemembers when we send them into harm's way, and that
we properly support the family's needs if the servicemember dies on
Active-Duty.
Benefits for survivors vary significantly in purpose and method of
payment. Some are immediate cash payments or reimbursements for costs
incurred; others provide long-term monthly income. These benefits are
typically available whether the death is a result of hostilities, the
result of non-hostile duty-related activities, or even the result of
disease or off-duty injuries. Among the benefits currently available
are: the Death Gratuity benefit, funeral costs reimbursement,
Servicemembers Group Life Insurance (SGLI) proceeds, housing-in-kind or
cash allowance for housing, continued medical benefits, continued
military community privileges, Veterans' Administration (VA) monthly
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC), monthly DOD Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP) payment, Social Security survivor benefit, education
benefits from the VA, and financial counseling.
The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004 included a requirement for the
Department to study the totality of all current and projected death
benefits for survivors of deceased members of the Armed Forces. The SAG
Corporation completed the study in June 2004 and concluded that the
system of benefits provided to survivors of members who die on Active-
Duty to be adequate, substantial, and comprehensive. However, it
identified areas where improvements could make the benefits more
comparable to benefits provided by other employers. The Government
Accountability Office (GAO) was required to conduct a similar study.
The GAO report, dated July 2004, made no recommendations, but reached
findings similar to the SAG report.
We agree with the findings of the SAG and GAO reports that our
benefits, while substantial, do not provide specific recognition of
deaths that occur when our members are sent into harm's way in the
service of their Nation; so we propose increasing the cash benefits for
deaths that occur under these circumstances. We support the principle
that a servicemember be able to elect a benefits package that would
provide up to $500,000 to the surviving family. This compares to the
approximately $262,000 they are able to receive today. The President's
recent death benefits proposal includes improvements to the SGLI and
death gratuity programs.
Active Duty Recruiting and Retention
The success of our All-Volunteer Force starts with recruiting.
During fiscal year 2004, the military Services recruited 176,026 first-
term enlistees and an additional 6,799 individuals with previous
military service into their Active-Duty components, for a total of
182,825 Active-Duty recruits, attaining over 100 percent of the DOD
goal of 181,308 accessions.
The quality of new Active-Duty recruits remained high in fiscal
year 2004. DOD-wide, 95 percent of new Active-Duty recruits were high
school diploma graduates (against a goal of 90 percent) and 73 percent
scored above average on the Armed Forces Qualification Test (versus a
desired minimum of 60 percent).
Through February, fiscal year 2005, all Services except Army
continued to meet or exceed both quantity and quality objectives. Army
has achieved 27,438 of their 29,185 accession goal through February,
for a 94-percent accomplishment. Preliminary figures suggest that Army
missed its March goal for Active-Duty enlisted accessions by about
2,100. Army quality levels remain strong, in excess of DOD quality
benchmarks.
We do not expect to see improvement in the Army recruiting
situation during the traditionally challenging February-March-April-May
(FMAM) recruiting season. However, the Army is aggressively attacking
any potential shortfall through three avenues of approach: (1) growth
in recruiters in all components, with an additional 250 Active
recruiters programmed over the next 60 days; (2) stronger incentives,
with increased enlistment bonuses, and an increase in the Army College
Fund; and (3) more targeted advertising, focusing on influencers,
particularly parents. With the Army aggressively shifting resources to
respond to recruiting challenges, we are cautiously optimistic that it
will achieve its year-end recruiting and end strength goals. However,
achieving these goals will require funding and policy adjustments such
as targeted funding increases included in the supplemental budget and
market expansion pilot programs now in effect.
The Services accessed 16,431 commissioned officers to Active-Duty
in fiscal year 2004. The Army, Navy, and Marine Corps met their
numerical commissioning requirements. The Air Force finished with a
shortfall of 12 percent, almost exclusively in medical specialty direct
appointments. In fiscal year 2005, Active-Duty officer accessions are
on track in all Services for numerical success this year.
Army and Marine Corps met or exceeded fiscal year 2004 retention
goals. Navy and Air Force were retaining high at the outset of the
year, but force shaping initiatives aimed at balancing manpower skills
and assisting with force reduction caused them to retain fewer members
during the last quarter of fiscal year 2004.
For fiscal year 2005, retention is on track. Over the past 3 years,
the Department has worked to improve servicemembers' quality-of-life.
We continue to work with Congress to achieve needed military pay raises
and to develop flexible and discretionary compensation programs. We
have every confidence that funding and policy modifications will be
sufficient to ensure continued success in achieving authorized strength
levels.
FISCAL YEAR 2005 ACTIVE DUTY ENLISTED RETENTION THROUGH FEBRUARY 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reenlisted Fiscal
Active Duty Enlisted Retention (Through February Mission Performance of Mission Year 2005
(Preliminary Through February) 2005) Goals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army
Initial............................... 11,165 12,094 92.3 percent............... 26,935
Mid Career............................ 9,991 10,378 96.3 percent............... 23,773
Career................................ 7,180 5,874 122.2 percent.............. 13,454
Navy
Initial............................... 59 percent 53 percent Exceeded................... 53 percent
Mid Career............................ 69 percent 69 percent Met mission................ 69 percent
Career................................ 85 percent 85 percent Met mission................ 85 percent
Air Force
Initial............................... 55 percent 55 percent Met mission................ 55 percent
Mid Career............................ 59 percent 75 percent Short...................... 75 percent
Career................................ 94 percent 95 percent Short...................... 95 percent
Marine Corps
Initial............................... 4,953 2,972 Exceeded................... 5,944
Career................................ 3,072 2,540 Exceeded................... 5,079
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stop-Loss
The Army is the only Service currently executing stop-loss. In
January 2005, stop-loss programs impacted 6,657 Active soldiers, 3,016
Army Reserve soldiers, and 2,680 Army National Guard soldiers. Active
Army Unit Stop-Loss Program takes effect 90 days prior to unit
deployment or with official deployment order notification and remains
in effect through the date of redeployment to permanent duty stations,
plus a maximum of 90 days. Reserve component unit stop-loss begins 90
days prior to mobilization or with official mobilization alert
deployment order notification, and continues through mobilization, and
for a period up to 90 days following unit demobilization.
The Army will terminate stop-loss as soon as it is operationally
feasible. Army initiatives of modularity, restructuring, and
rebalancing the Active/Reserve component mix, and force stabilization
will over time eliminate any need for stop-loss. Until those
initiatives are fully implemented, stop-loss must continue if we are to
meet strength, readiness and cohesion objectives for units deploying to
OIF and OEF.
Joint Officer Management
The nature of war and warfighting has undergone significant change
since 1986, when the Goldwater-Nichols Act was passed. Since that time,
our warfighters have risen to meet new and increasingly complex
challenges with superior joint doctrine, enhanced joint warfighting
capabilities, and a new joint effectiveness enabled by the cultural
revolution this visionary piece of legislation brought about. The data
gives evidence that our officer corps has become more joint with each
passing year. Likewise, Service missions are increasingly joint.
Unfortunately, we have a growing sense, supported by recent reports
or studies, that joint officer management is following this trend more
slowly. Just as our force structure was a legacy of the Cold War, joint
officer management policies need to be updated to better serve the
intent of Goldwater-Nichols in the 21st century. Some aspects of the
current statutory management policies were designed to force jointness.
In today's environment where the Department embraces jointness, the old
rules are impeding progress. A 2002 GAO report and a 2003 independent
study conducted by Booz Allen Hamilton, both suggested that the
Department needed a strategic approach to joint officer management and
joint professional military education (JPME) to better address this
issue.
In late 2003, the Department, in partnership with the Joint Staff
and with the assistance of contractors, began a comprehensive,
strategic review of joint officer management and JPME in the Active-
Duty Force. A strategic approach was developed for the Active-Duty
officer force, and an initial tactical analysis of the current joint
duty assignment list was undertaken to better understand the ``kinds''
of joint that currently exist. This effort has now progressed to the
data gathering and analysis phase from which we hope, once completed,
to better understand the need and availability of joint characteristics
in the strategic environment.
We have also started down the path to develop a strategic approach
to joint officer management in the Reserve components to ensure our
total force remains effective and able to seamlessly integrate. As a
result of direction in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005, we are further
broadening the scope to include an assessment of, and recommendations
to improve, the performance of senior DOD civilians, senior
noncommissioned officers, and senior Reserve component leadership in
joint matters.
Another area of emphasis is to ensure officers with skills specific
to the joint environment are recognized with promotions commensurate
with their potential. It is unreasonable to expect Military Department
promotion practices will adequately address unique joint requirements.
The Department is researching alternative methods to current promotion
policies that will enhance our capabilities in this area.
Through all of these efforts, we hope to develop a comprehensive
slate of legislative and policy initiatives that will change the way we
manage human capital in the joint realm. Our goal is to build on the
tremendous progress made since the Goldwater-Nichols Act was enacted
and to ensure our management of the joint warfighter adequately
prepares him or her to meet the challenges he or she will face in the
future.
Expanding Our Foreign Language and Regional Expertise Capabilities
The demand for increased foreign language and regional expertise
capabilities is increasing and the skills are needed for the entire
spectrum of the Department's operations. Current operations and the
global war on terrorism require capabilities in a growing number of
languages and at higher proficiencies, not only in intelligence, but
also in activities such as stability/reconstruction operations and
maritime intercept operations. At the same time, gaining knowledge of
the psychology and cultures of those who oppose us is a mandate.
We are committed to creating foundational language and cultural
expertise in the force; creating the capacity to surge foreign language
and regional expertise skills to operational units on short notice;
establishing a cadre of language specialists possessing a level 3
ability; and establishing a process to track the accession, promotion
and separation rates of language professionals and Foreign Area
Officers.
We have formed a committee of General Officer and senior civilians
to oversee the Defense Language Program, address problems, and affect
systemic changes. We have conducted several studies to inform our
decisions. In response to Congress, we are conducting a study on how to
integrate foreign language and regional expertise training into
Professional Military Education curricula. To strengthen the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (OSD) oversight and improve management of our
language assets, we have written a Defense Language Transformation
Roadmap. The Roadmap is based on thorough review of lessons learned and
research and was developed with the Services, combatant commands, and
defense agencies having language requirements. It will serve as the
guide to incorporate foreign language and regional/cultural competency
into doctrine, operational planning processes, and readiness
assessments. When completely implemented, the Roadmap will embed force
language and regional expertise as a necessary skill set for the 21st
century soldier, sailor, airman, and marine.
In the fiscal year 2006 budget, we increased the language training
budget at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California by
$44.7 million to improve language training. These funds sustain the
budget increase in fiscal year 2005, allowing us to continue
improvement of testing, curriculum material, and ``crash courses'' for
deploying forces. These funds will also allow us to aggressively move
forward to improve the proficiency of graduates from the Defense
Language Institute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC) to meet the
identified needs of the Intelligence Community.
We also have an initiative in the Army to immediately enhance our
language expertise. The Army is implementing a pilot program to recruit
Iraqi-Americans into the IRR for deployment with operational forces as
translators and interpreters. To date, 44 soldiers have been deployed,
19 await deployment, and an additional class of 14 soldiers will
graduate in March and 26 will be entering the training pipeline in
June.
You have helped us in our efforts and I thank Congress for raising
the cap on Foreign Language Proficiency Pay (FLPP). We are now
rewriting our FLPP policy to better incentivize foreign language
learning within the force.
The need for language and cultural expertise is vital for a robust
military, but we recognize this need reaches beyond DOD. Language and
cultural expertise are necessary for national security, the ability to
compete in a global economy, and the stability and well-being of our
communities. We alone cannot fix the national shortfall in these
necessary skills, but we can lead the effort. The Department convened
the National Language Conference: A call to action this past year,
bringing together Federal agencies, academia, and business for the
first time to address the need for greater foreign language
capabilities in the U.S. workforce. With their help, we constructed a
White Paper outlining a proposed national strategy. We are in
continuing dialogue with leaders in other Federal agencies and academia
about ways to encourage more young Americans to learn a foreign
language, particularly the less commonly taught languages. Such skills
will serve our youth and our Nation very well.
Sexual Assault
Sexual assault is a crime that tears at the bonds of trust and
respect that unite men and women in uniform. The Department has taken
aggressive action to combat this crime. Our efforts are paying off, as
evidenced by the 1995 and 2002 congressionally mandated surveys. These
indicate that sexual assaults within the military have decreased by
almost half since 1995. Although we are making progress, even one
assault is too many.
Over the past year, the Department has been working collaboratively
with the Services, Members of Congress, and national experts to address
the crime of sexual assault within the Armed Forces. As a result, the
Joint Task Force for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response was
established in October 2004 as the single point of accountability for
the Department's sexual assault policy. Its initial task was to develop
policy incorporating the criteria set forth in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2005, which directed the Department to have a sexual assault policy in
place by January 1, 2005.
I am pleased to report that the Department has made great progress.
We have developed a comprehensive policy to strengthen our prevention
efforts, enhance the support and care for victims of sexual assault,
and increase system accountability. The Department's new Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response policy demonstrates our commitment to building
a climate of confidence, one that assures victims will receive the care
they need, and one that instills in our servicemembers that this crime
will not be tolerated.
A cornerstone of the Department's sexual assault policy is the
establishment of guidelines for confidential, restricted reporting by
victims of sexual assault. Restricted reporting allows a sexual assault
victim, on a confidential basis, to disclose the details of his/her
assault to specifically identified individuals and receive military
medical treatment and counseling, without triggering the official
investigative process. This fundamental change will encourage more
victims to come forward to receive needed medical care and support,
while providing commanders more situational awareness of the command
climate.
Other core areas of the policy include specific guidelines for
referring reports of sexual assault to investigative authorities;
medical treatment and care for victims; a commander's checklist for
response actions; enhanced reporting of sexual assault information; and
expanding access to care through collaboration between military
installations and local community support.
The Department's sexual assault policy will ensure there is
uniformity in the standards of care and support for all victims of
sexual assault throughout the military services, as well as rigorous
training and education on how to prevent it. To further improve the
Department's response to this critical issue, we will soon send you our
report containing recommendations for amending the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ) for sexual assault offenses.
The next steps for the Department will be conducting oversight and
coordinating with the Services on the implementation and roll out of
the different components of the new policy. We will continue to keep
Congress informed on the progress being made as we meet key milestones
in the Department's effort to fully implement our new Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response policy.
Citizenship
The Department works closely with the Department of Homeland
Security's Citizenship and Immigration Service to expedite citizenship
applications for immigrants who serve honorably as members of our Armed
Forces. Approximately 30,000 Active-Duty and 11,000 Guard and Reserve
personnel are non-U.S. citizens. Over 20,000 military personnel have
become U.S. citizens since September 11, 2001 and approximately 5,000
military personnel have citizenship applications currently being
processed. The average time for processing expedited citizenship
applications has been reduced from 9 months to approximately 60 days.
We have worked closely with the Citizenship and Immigration Service to
conduct naturalization interviews and swearing-in ceremonies in
Afghanistan, Iraq, Germany, Korea, and Japan. The Department has also
implemented a new policy to authorize emergency leave for
servicemembers who need to finalize their naturalization.
Rest and Recuperation (R&R) Leave
Almost 160,000 servicemembers and DOD civilians have participated
in the R&R Leave Program in support of OIF and OEF. The R&R Leave
Program is vital to maintaining combat readiness when units are
deployed and engaged in intense operations. Feedback from
servicemembers participating in the R&R Leave Program indicates it is a
successful program offering servicemembers a respite from hostile
conditions, an opportunity to leave the Area of Responsibility (AOR),
release stress, spend time with their family/friends and return
reenergized. R&R Leave will continue to be offered to military members
and DOD civilians deployed in Central Command (CENTCOM) AOR in support
of the global war on terrorism at the discretion of the theater
commander.
DOD Civilians
Human Capital Planning
It is only through the integration of DOD civilian employees that
we can realize the potential of a total force. The Department continues
to make strides in our strategic human capital planning, by ensuring
that human capital investments are focused on long-term issues. These
guiding principles are continually reviewed and refreshed in the
Department's Human Capital Strategic Plan. Our 2002-2008 plan
identifies the tools, policies, programs and compensation strategies
needed for the future. This allows us to position the Department as the
employer of choice by identifying new ways of doing business based on
new missions and technologies, thus ensuring the right programs are in
place to develop the leaders necessary to meet evolving needs. This is
reflected in the Department's 2004 President's Management Agenda
scorecard results, where ``green'' (a ``success'' grade) was achieved
in progress toward human capital implementation.
The role of the Defense civilian is changing. Thousands of civilian
employees have voluntarily put themselves in harm's way to support the
global war on terrorism. Civilians are an integral and essential part
of our total force structure. The Department depends on their skills
and expertise. Agile military forces need agile support from DOD
civilians. The Department will maximize this agility through
implementation of the National Security Personnel System (NSPS). NSPS
provides an opportunity to improve the effectiveness of the Department
through a modern civilian personnel system that will improve the way we
hire and assign, compensate and reward our employees. This modern,
flexible, and agile human resource system will be responsive to the
national security environment, while preserving employee protections
and benefits, as well as the core values of the civil service.
The Department will begin to implement NSPS as early as July 2005.
NSPS design and development has been a broad-based, participative
process involving key stakeholders, including employees, supervisors
and managers, unions, employee advocacy groups, and various public
interest groups. Employees slated for conversion will be included in
groupings called Spirals. Spiral One will include approximately 300,000
General Schedule, U.S.-based Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and
other DOD civilian employees and will be rolled out in three phases
over an 18-month period beginning as early as July 2005. The labor
relations and appeals provisions of NSPS will be implemented across the
Department this summer as well.
Acquiring, Developing, and Retaining Civilians
The Department's civilian workforce is a unique mix of employees
providing support to DOD's national security and military mission. The
Department continues to face an enormous challenge in recruiting talent
in a highly competitive labor market. Our challenge is not attracting
sufficient applicants, but attracting the right applicants.
Technological advances, contract oversight, and complex missions have
generated the need for more employees with advanced education and
greater technical skills. Inability to hire the right civilian talent
quickly and efficiently would put at risk the vital capabilities needed
to support our military. Additionally, there must be a very active
campaign for recruitment of a diverse workforce. We take seriously the
responsibility to foster and promote an environment that is attractive
to individuals from all segments of society. Our strategic plan focuses
on the recruitment of entry-level, minority, disabled, and female
applicants.
This year, the Department has launched a special campaign to reach
the disabled men and women who bravely fought and served on behalf of
our Nation. We are committed to providing every disabled veteran who
wants to serve our country as a DOD civil servant the opportunity to do
so. The Department offers over 700 diverse, challenging, and rewarding
occupations for those who want to continue to serve their country as a
DOD civilian employee. We introduced a new Defense Web site especially
for disabled veterans--www.DODVETS.com. This Web portal serves as a
resource of employment information for veterans and their spouses as
well for managers. We are also working with the Department of Labor's
Veterans' Employment and Training Service's (VETS) REALifelines
initiative, which is designed to provide individualized job training,
counseling, and reemployment services to veterans seriously injured or
wounded in the global war on terrorism.
We have dedicated an office within the Department to help us
transform the way we attract and hire talented civilian employees. Our
nationwide recruitment campaign takes us to college and university
campuses where we personally invite talented individuals to serve the
Department. Through technology, largely the Internet, we educate and
interest talent from a variety of sources. Our exciting internship
programs, while still too modest, continue to entice and infuse
specialized and high-demand talent into our workforce.
Workforce planning takes on a special importance with the expected
exodus of Federal employees over the next decade. Significant to this
equation are DOD career Senior Executive Service (SES) members, 67
percent of whom are eligible to retire in 2008.
The Defense Leadership and Management Program (DLAMP) is important
to DOD readiness, providing a vehicle to mature a cadre of future
civilian leaders with a joint perspective on managing the Department's
workforce and programs. Through a comprehensive program of Professional
Military Education, formal graduate education, and courses in national
security strategy and leadership, DLAMP ensures that the next
generation of civilian executives has the critical skills to provide
strong leadership in a joint environment in challenging times. To take
maximum advantage of DLAMP results, DOD is working with the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) toward final approval to establish DLAMP as
the DOD Candidate Development Program (CDP). This achievement will
provide a major benefit to our SES candidate pool.
As we work toward an environment where safety is paramount for our
employees, the Department is establishing the Pipeline Reemployment
Program. The program enables partially recovered employees with job
related injuries and illnesses to return to work. The program supports
the President's Safety, Health, and Return-to-Employment (SHARE)
initiatives by assisting each Department installation in reducing lost
days resulting from injuries. DOD organizations will have resources and
funding to reemploy partially recovered injured employees for up to 1
year. Returning injured employees to suitable productive duty, as soon
as they are able, improves that employee's sense of value to the
organization while minimizing the cost of workers' compensation
disability payments.
Civilian Force Shaping
A number of initiatives are and will impact the size and shape of
the Department's civilian workforce. The most significant items are
upcoming Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC), global repositioning of
deployed military and civilians, competitive sourcing, and military-to-
civilian conversions. To mitigate the impact of these force-shaping
initiatives on our civilians, we are reviewing our transition
initiatives to ensure drawdowns and reorganizations are handled
strategically, not only to take care of our employees, but to make sure
we maintain and continue to recruit the talent needed to support the
Department's mission.
To date, the Department has accounted for the vast majority of the
downsizing of the Federal workforce. Between the beginning of fiscal
year 1989 and through the end of fiscal year 2004, DOD has reduced its
civilian employment by over 421,000 positions. In support of these
upcoming initiatives the Department will build and improve upon current
transition tools, including the Priority Placement Program, Voluntary
Separation Incentive Pay, the Voluntary Early Retirement Authority
program, and Voluntary Reduction in Force authority.
The Department will continue to seek regulatory and legislative
changes to assist employees affected by these actions in transitioning
to other positions, careers, or to private life. We are establishing
employment partnerships with Federal agencies, State, county, and local
governments, trade and professional organizations, local Chambers of
Commerce, and private industry. Our goal is to provide comprehensive
transition tools and programs that take care of our employees and their
families.
keeping the force healthy and ready
A servicemember's career in the Armed Forces is book-ended by his
or her accession and separation (or retirement). In between, while a
part of the force, the Department is responsible for planning for his
or her health, safety, readiness, and training. The preparation,
forethought, and funding required to see that every soldier, sailor,
airman, and marine is fit and ready to fulfill his obligation, is
absolutely essential.
Readiness and Training
Readiness Assessment and Reporting
Today we face the challenge of sustaining a significant demand for
our forces without inflicting undue stress. To do so effectively, we
need visibility into the current status and capabilities of forces
across the Department. This year we deployed the first spiral of our
new Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS) that provides the first
step toward this visibility. DRRS contains near real time assessments
of military capabilities in terms of the tasks or missions that they
are currently able to perform to the availability of specific personnel
and equipment. Our partnerships with United States Joint Forces Command
(JFCOM), United States Pacific Command (PACOM) and the Navy have
produced working, scalable versions of measurement, assessment and
force management tools over the past year. This year we will continue
to add more data describing the structure, status and location of
military forces. DRRS will integrate inputs from the training
transformation initiative's joint assessment and enabling capability to
capture joint training readiness. We will also expand our force
management tool suite including more robust capability query tools.
Development of DRRS will continue through 2007.
Secretary Rumsfeld's Mishap Reduction Initiative
Since taking office, Secretary Rumsfeld has sought to change how
the Department of Defense views the safety of its military personnel
and civilian employees. Our goal is zero preventable mishaps and we
have taken a major step in that direction. In a May 2003 letter to the
Department's leadership, Secretary Rumsfeld challenged the Department
to reduce the number and rate of mishaps by 50 percent by the end of
fiscal year 2005.
The USD(P&R) chairs the Defense Safety Oversight Council. The
Safety Council is an assembly of the Department's upper management
focusing on reducing preventable accidents and increasing the
Department's operational readiness. Our Council meets bimonthly to
provide governance to our accident reduction efforts and ensures that
the senior leadership is personally involved.
The direct cost of accidents in the Department is over $3 billion
per year. These costs are attributable to aviation and ground
accidents, civilian workers' compensation claims, and military injury
treatments. Even modest reductions in the mishap rate provide enormous
savings across the board. For example, in fiscal year 2004, 26 fewer
aircraft were destroyed than in fiscal year 2002; saving both lives and
millions of dollars. We still have more work to do in reducing military
injuries, and have a special focus on our number one category of
military non-combat fatalities, i.e., private motor vehicles.
With your support, we strive to provide the best military equipment
in the world and ensure that it is safe to operate. We believe that
body armor, helmets and protective vests, are reducing both hostile and
accidental serious injuries. Historically, about half of the Army 's
wartime losses were due to accidents; in OIF, about 26 percent of the
losses result from preventable mishaps. I believe our goal of zero
preventable mishaps is achievable and we will continue to pursue an
accident free culture. We are a world-class military and preventable
accidents will not be tolerated.
Range Sustainment
Continued and assured access to high-quality test and training
ranges and operating areas plays a critically important role in
sustaining force readiness. Urban sprawl, loss of frequency spectrum,
restrictions on air space, and expanding environmental regulations on
training lands increasingly restrict test and training flexibility.
Over the past several years, we have discussed these problems with
Congress, and we appreciate your concern and assistance in achieving
meaningful solutions. We will continue to work closely with you as we
grapple with how best to sustain our training capabilities at the same
time we seek to transform our Armed Forces.
The DOD Range Sustainment Integrated Product Team (IPT), a
cooperative defense-wide effort, is pursuing a comprehensive agenda to
relieve encroachment pressures on test and training ranges and ensure
their long-term sustainability. Through the IPT, DOD is developing
policy, overseeing range programming, assessing organization and
leadership challenges, conducting outreach, and pursuing legislative
and regulatory clarification. In addition, by partnering with state and
local governments, conservation groups, and other like-minded
organizations, the Department is committing energy and resources to
creating buffers and ensuring compatible land use around our ranges to
provide lasting protection against incompatible development. This work
is beginning to show results, and the Department is committed to
following through on this cooperative approach.
Transforming DOD Training
Our ability to successfully defend our Nation's interests relies
heavily upon a military capable of adapting to rapidly changing
situations, ill-defined threats, and a growing need to operate across a
broad spectrum of conventional and unconventional missions. The
operational environment of the 21st century demands that we build upon
these capabilities in a joint environment. Joint training reflects our
expanding efforts to train more effectively with interagency,
intergovernmental and multinational partners.
The Department's training efforts must be focused on melding world-
class individual Service competencies into a cohesive, joint
capability. Training is a key enabler of force transformation and the
Training Transformation (T2) Program is vital to the Department's
overall transformation efforts. We have implemented three supporting
joint capabilities which, when mature, will enable DOD to build
unparalleled, knowledge-superior and adaptable, joint forces.
First, the joint national training capability (JNTC) is preparing
forces by providing command staffs and units with an integrated live,
virtual, and constructive training environment, with joint global
training and mission rehearsals in support of current operational
needs. We achieved initial operational capability in October 2004 and
our 18 fiscal year 2005 events will keep us on track to achieve full
operational capability in 2009. We completed our first overseas JNTC
mission rehearsal exercise in January in U.S. European Command.
We have conducted JNTC training events since January 2004. The top
priority for JNTC events is mission rehearsal training. As a result,
the training is replicating the real-world, increasing the number and
diversity of opposing threats (civilian insurgents, improvised
explosive devices); adding missions of increasing importance (joint
information operations); and incorporating higher fidelity training
environments through the use of Arab speaking role-players and other
enhancements. Through the leadership of U.S. Joint Forces Command's
Joint Warfighting Center, we are adaptively inserting lessons learned
from OEF and OIF into events. During our next JNTC event, our forces
will hone their joint warfighting skills in joint fire support
operations, joint air and missile defense operations and other
challenging joint training tasks that were and are being used on the
battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Second, the Joint Knowledge Development and Distribution Capability
(JKDDC) is working to prepare individuals for assignment to combatant
commands by developing and distributing joint knowledge via a dynamic,
real-time, global-knowledge network that provides access to joint
education and training. JKDDC's foundation is anchored in the successes
we have achieved with our advanced distributed learning initiative and
the sharable content object reference model (SCORM) standard. We
declared initial operational capability this January. The JKKDC Joint
Management Office will distribute our initial 12 courses in August 2005
and complete another nine courses by this December. Two representative
courses are COCOM Staff Officer 101 and Joint Task Force (JTF) 201--the
combatant commands' two top priorities for fiscal year 2005.
Third, the joint assessment and enabling capability (JAEC) will
enable us to determine the training value provided by JNTC and JKDDC
with regard to combatant commander needs; how well T2 is integrated
with Defense-wide policies, procedures, and information systems; and,
to what degree are the outcomes of T2 aligned with the Department's
strategic force transformation goals. In 2005, we will conduct the
first of three block assessments to determine the state of our initial
T2 efforts. The assessments will evaluate training and management
initiatives and activities, and recommend strategic and programmatic
changes to better enable training readiness.
Finally, the Training Transformation Interagency,
Intergovernmental, Multinational Mission Essential Tasks (TIM2) Task
Force is a collaborative effort between my staff and the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense (Policy) to better integrate DOD
capabilities in support of other Federal entities, including the
Departments of State and Homeland Security.
The Military Health System
Funding
Defense Health Program (DHP) costs will continue to grow during
fiscal year 2006 when eligible beneficiaries who previously did not use
the Military Health System (MHS) start to use the TRICARE benefit. This
increase in new users will be coupled with increases in health care
inflation, increases in the utilization of health care services by DOD
beneficiaries, and new benefits enacted in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2005.
The Department has initiated several management actions to use
resources more effectively and thus help to control the increasing
costs of health care delivery. The MHS is implementing performance-
based budgeting that focuses on the value of health care provided
instead of the cost of health care delivered. An integrated pharmacy
benefits program, including a uniform formulary based on relative
clinical and cost effectiveness, is being established. Discounted
Federal pricing of pharmaceuticals in the TRICARE retail pharmacy
program will be used to generate cost avoidance. We have established
new TRICARE regional contracts to streamline our managed care support
contracts and reduce administrative overhead. Utilization management
programs continue to ensure that all provided care is clinically
necessary and appropriate.
We need your assistance by restoring the flexibility to manage DHP
resources across budget activity groups. Our new health care contracts
use best-practice principles to improve beneficiary satisfaction,
support our military treatment facilities (MTFs), strengthen
relationships with network providers and control private sector costs.
Our civilian partners must manage their enrollee health care and can
control their costs by referring more care to our MTFs in the direct
care system. In concert with the new contracts, we are implementing a
Prospective Payment System to create the financial incentive for our
MTFs to increase productivity and reduce overall costs to the
Department. Funds will flow between the MTFs and the private sector
based on where the patient care is delivered. Currently, MTFs' enrollee
care funds (revised financing funds) are in the private sector budget
activity group. Fencing DHP In-House Care funds inhibits the
Department's ability to provide the TRICARE benefit in the most
accessible, cost effective setting, particularly during time of war
when MTFs frequently lose health care providers to support contingency
operations. We understand and appreciate the congressional intent to
protect direct care funding; however, congressionally imposed
restrictions fencing the DHP funds adversely affects both the MTFs and
care in the private sector. We urge you to allow the MTFs and the MHS
to manage the DHP as an integrated system. Funds must be allowed to
flow on a timely basis to where care is delivered.
TRICARE
The TRICARE military health plan is a key component in the
Department's readiness mission, providing essential services to ensure
continuity of health care services to all beneficiaries as the needs of
the military and the Nation change.
Throughout 2004, we successfully completed the consolidation of 12
geographic regions and seven regional managed care contracts into three
regions and three managed care contracts. We ``carved out'' some of the
major elements of the old TRICARE contracts into separate contracts to
take advantage of contractors' core competencies. Specialized companies
with extensive experience in pharmacy, dental, marketing and claims
processing have successfully assumed these responsibilities from the
old legacy regional contracts. These changes allowed us to streamline
our management and put performance improvements in place.
This design introduces an even stronger customer service focus,
provides beneficiaries with easier access to care through expanded
networks, addresses portability issues, applies best commercial
practices, supports optimization of our MTFs and strengthens
relationships with network providers, bringing world-class benefits to
more than 9 million beneficiaries.
Military medical facilities remain at the core of the MHS, and the
new TRICARE structure promotes increased involvement of the military
commanders in determining the optimum approach to health care delivery
within each region. Military commanders' accountability has been
enhanced with increased responsibility for patient appointing, after
hours assistance, and local telephone advice lines. The three new
Regional Directors have been appointed, either a Flag officer or a
Senior Executive, and are actively engaged in managing and monitoring
regional health care with a dedicated staff of both military and
civilian personnel. They are strengthening existing partnerships
between the Active-Duty components and the civilian provider community
to help fulfill our mission responsibilities.
Although during the transition to the new contracts, TRICARE
experienced some initial start-up problems, all of the contractors
worked diligently to ensure that beneficiaries continued to have access
to health care. I am happy to say that performance in all critical
aspects of health care delivery is returning quickly to the high
standards our beneficiaries deserve and have come to expect.
We believe that with these improvements in our health care delivery
system, we can continue serving our beneficiaries with increasing
efficiency to meet the growing health demands of Active-Duty members,
the retiree population, the Reserve components and all eligible family
members.
Force Health Protection
Force Health Protection has a broad compilation of programs and
systems designed to protect and preserve the health and fitness of our
servicemembers from their entrance into the military, to their
separation or retirement, and follow-on care by the VA. Preventive
measures, environmental surveillance and advances in military medicine
have supported our worldwide operations with remarkable results.
Despite deployments to some of the most austere environments in the
world, we have seen far-forward surgical care save many lives, as well
as the lowest rates of non-battle illnesses and injuries in the history
of warfare. This is the result of increased focus, resources, line
commitment and servicemember education.
Health Assessments. We ensure a healthy force through high medical
standards at the time of accession, periodic medical and dental
examinations, routine and special-purpose immunizations, and ready
access to high quality health care. Servicemembers receive pre-
deployment health assessments to ensure they are fit for deployment and
post-deployment health assessments to identify any health issues when
they return. Deployment health records are maintained in the
individual's permanent health record and electronic copies of the
health assessment are archived centrally for easy retrieval. We have an
aggressive quality assurance program to monitor the conduct of these
assessments. Most recently, we have laid the groundwork for a post
deployment health reassessment to be conducted 3 to 6 months after
deployment.
Immunization Programs. Protecting our forces involves countering
potential health threats. The most important preventive health measures
in place for our servicemembers today--immunization programs--offer
protection from diseases endemic to certain areas of the world and from
diseases that can be used as weapons. These vaccines are highly
effective and we based our programs on sound scientific information
that independent experts have verified. They are essential to keep our
servicemembers healthy.
Medical Technology on the Battlefield. Last year we introduced
elements of the Theater Medical Information Program and Joint Medical
Work Station to OIF. These capabilities provide a means for medical
units to electronically capture and disseminate near real-time
information to commanders. Information provided includes in-theater
medical data, environmental hazards, detected exposures and critical
logistics data such as blood supply, beds and equipment availability.
New medical devices introduced to OIF provide field medics with blood-
clotting capability while light, modular diagnostic equipment improve
the mobility of our medical forces, and individual protective armor
serves to prevent injuries and save lives.
Medical Hold. We are committed to deploying healthy and fit
servicemembers and to providing consistent, careful post-deployment
health evaluations with appropriate, expeditious follow-up care when
needed. A consequence of this commitment is more servicemembers under
medical treatment focused on returning them to a medically-qualified
status for military service.
Individual Medical Readiness. Among the many performance measures
tracked within the MHS is the medical readiness status of individual
members, both Active and Reserve components. For the first time, the
MHS will track individual dental health, immunizations, required
laboratory tests, deployment-limiting conditions, Service-specific
health assessments, and availability of required individual medical
equipment.
Mental Health Services. Care is available for all servicemembers
and to their families before, during, and after deployment.
Servicemembers are trained to recognize sources of stress and the
symptoms of depression, including thoughts of suicide, in themselves
and others that might occur during deployment. Combat stress control
and mental health care is available in theater. Before returning home,
servicemembers are briefed on how to manage their reintegration into
their families, including managing expectations, the importance of
communication and the need to control alcohol use. During redeployment,
the servicemembers are screened for signs of mental health issues,
including depression and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The
screening process will be repeated at 3-6 months after return; Service
implementation plans are due in mid June 2005 and the survey process is
expected to begin by mid August 2005. After returning home, help for
any mental health issues that may arise, including depression and PTSD,
is available through the Military Health System for Active-Duty and
retired servicemembers, or through the VA for non-retired veterans.
TRICARE is also available for 6 months post-return for Reserve and
Guard members. To facilitate access for all servicemembers and family
members, especially Reserve component personnel is the Military
OneSource Program--a 24/7 referral and assistance service available by
telephone or on the Internet.
Transition to VA. I am especially pleased with our work with the
Department of Veterans Affairs for the seamless, responsive and
sensitive support to soldiers and marines as they return to duty or
transition from Active-Duty to veteran status. An important aspect of
this transition is having the individual medical records available when
a separated servicemember presents at a VA hospital for the first time.
We made significant strides forward by transferring to DOD electronic
health information of servicemembers who leave Active-Duty to a central
repository at the VA Austin Automation Center. Through this repository,
VA clinicians and claims adjudicators have access to DOD laboratory
results, radiology results, outpatient pharmacy data, allergy
information, discharge summaries, consult reports, admission,
disposition and transfer information, elements of the standard
ambulatory data records and demographic data. To date, we have
transferred this electronic health information on more than 2.9 million
separated servicemembers to this repository, and the VA has accessed
more than 1 million of those records. We believe that this
collaborative effort with the VA has been going extremely well and
together, the DOD and VA are improving services to our veterans.
DOD-DVA Sharing
DOD works closely with the VA at many organizational levels to
maintain and foster a collaborative Federal partnership. We have shared
health care resources successfully with the VA for 20 years, but many
opportunities remain. In the past year, DOD and VA have developed and
improved a number of joint planning efforts. For instance, the 2005
Joint Strategic Plan (JSP) builds upon success of the April 2003 JSP.
Each goal, objective and strategy in the previous plan was reviewed to
reflect the current climate of DOD/VA joint collaboration.
DOD and VA are implementing the Demonstration Site Projects and the
Joint Incentive Fund (JIF) required by Sections 721 and 722 of the NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2003. The demonstration sites are submitting quarterly
interim project reviews to the VA/DOD Joint Utilization/Resource
Sharing Work Group and are finalizing their business plans. In this
past year, the Financial Management Work Group under the VA DOD Health
Executive Council (HEC) recommended 12 projects to the HEC for JIF
funding for a total combined cost of $29.9 million.
To ensure OEF and OIF veterans experience continuity of care, DOD
participates on the VA's Seamless Transition Task Force. DOD is
coordinating with VA's Seamless Transition Office to finalize a
memorandum of understanding to define protected health information data
sharing activities between DOD and VA.
In the coming year, the VA DOD Joint Executive Council will focus
on achieving greater collaboration, service and assistance to our
severely injured veterans from OIF and OEF, as well as on our capital
planning and facility life-cycle management efforts to benefit all of
our beneficiaries and the American taxpayer.
taking care of the force and their families
The Modernized Social Compact
The first Social Compact, published in 2002 reiterated the compact
between the Department, its warfighters, and those who support them--it
affirmed the Department's commitment to underwrite family support.
Since the Social Compact is a living document, we continue to identify
and address emerging American social changes where support to
servicemembers and their families must be redefined. Now the updated
Modernized Social Compact is the first effort to measure and publish
outcomes for troop and family support programs. These measures are in
support of the Secretary's Balanced Scorecard.
The global war on terrorism places new demands on every aspect of
military life. From the anxieties of nation building in hostile
environments to the significant increase in family separations, the
stress currently impacting the military has not been of this magnitude
since the inception of the All-Volunteer Force. We rely more heavily on
the Reserve and Guard components and stress relationships with
employers, and families in an unprecedented fashion.
The Social Compact lays out a 20-year strategic plan for DOD to
ensure that quality of life keeps pace with the changing expectations
of the American workforce and addresses the needs of the two-thirds of
military families living off the installation as well as the Reserve
component. DOD is refocusing family support with state-of-the-art
technology to connect to a wide array of quality of life support
programs and organizations. One of the most exciting new developments
is Military OneSource, a toll-free telephonic, Internet and e-mail
information and referral service available 24 hours a day, every day of
the year, from anywhere in the world.
Support to the Severely Injured and Their Families
Each of the Services has initiated an effort to ensure that our
seriously injured servicemembers are not forgotten--medically,
administratively, or in any other way. To facilitate a coordinated
response, the Department has established a Joint Support Operations
Center. We are collaborating, not only with the military Services, but
also with other departments of the Federal Government, nonprofit
organizations, and corporate America, to assist these deserving men and
women and their families.
The center, operated under the aegis of the Office of Military
Community and Family Policy, provides personalized assistance, tailored
to meet an individual's unique needs during recovery and
rehabilitation, to include:
Education, training, and job placement
Personal mobility and functioning
Medical care and rehabilitation
Home, transportation, and workplace accommodations
Personal, couple, and family issues counseling
Financial resources
Twenty-four hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, we are a
toll-free phone call away. We provide a venue for each of the separate
programs to be successful, while ensuring that there is no gap--that
all severely injured servicemembers and their families receive the
necessary support. The Center provides a central point of contact for
information and support.
In addition to the support provided through the operations center,
advocates are assigned at or near major military and Veterans Affairs
medical facilities to provide any hands-on assistance with their
transition. These advocates are available to the severely injured and
their families as they make their transition into communities, helping
them connect with local agencies and community groups.
A number of our severely injured servicemembers will be able to
return to duty, thanks to their dedication and commitment, and the
phenomenal quality of military medicine. Some, however, will transition
from the military and return to their hometowns or become new members
of another civilian community. These are capable, competent, goal-
oriented men and women--the best of our Nation. We are ensuring that
during their rehabilitation we provide a ``case management'' approach
to advocate for the servicemember and his or her family. From the joint
support operations center here, near the seat of government, to their
communities across America, we are with them. This will continue
through their transition to the VA, and the many other agencies and
organizations providing support to them.
Military Casualty Assistance
When a military member dies, our first concern is to inform the
next-of-kin in a manner that is accurate, timely, efficient, and highly
respectful. Our military casualty assistance program is highly
developed and well suited to perform this difficult task effectively.
Notification is made in person by Casualty Assistance Office (CAO)
personnel who are customarily accompanied by a chaplain.
Casualty Assistance Office personnel stay with the family following
notification of the loss, through funeral preparations, burial, and the
entire process of determining benefits and compensation. They provide
valuable counsel and support to the families, arranging for the
military funeral (if desired), offering solutions when problems arise,
and ensuring that the families receive the benefits and compensation
due them. The families know that they can contact their CAO
representative at any time, even long after the servicemember's death.
We often hear from the families that they consider their CAO
representative ``part of the family.''
The Department continues to explore new methods and procedures to
better support family members during the most tragic of times, the loss
of their loved one in service to our Nation. One initiative is the
expedited claims process in partnership with the Social Security
Administration. It has been extremely successful in providing swift
financial assistance to our families. A special toll free number allows
applicants and casualty assistance officers to call when they are ready
to file. The final results of the pilot program show the average claims
processing time dropped from several weeks to an average of just over 2
days time. We established a similar arrangement with the Department of
Veterans Affairs several years ago. That program, has also
significantly expedited the delivery of compensation and benefits to
our families who have suffered the greatest loss.
Taking Care of Families of the Deployed
The fiscal year 2005 emergency supplemental funding request
includes $83 million to provide family support to Active-Duty members
and their families and to assist severely injured servicemembers and
their families during recovery and rehabilitation. The Department
received $108 million in emergency supplemental funding in fiscal year
2003 and fiscal year 2004. This funding was combined with other funds
to support families in a variety of ways.
As the number one service families require during deployment, the
Department provided $53 million, over 2 years to help thousands of
families manage work schedules while one parent was gone, to extend
child care to cover additional work shifts, and to offer a parent time
to take care of other family business.
In the past 2 years, the Department used $64 million of
supplemental funding to institute non-medical counseling for
servicemembers and their families experiencing the normal stress of
frequent deployments, family separation and reunion. Access to
counseling assists Active-Duty, Guard, and Reserve family members
during this time of high perstempo and lengthy deployments. Families
who need face-to-face assistance can schedule counseling from a
licensed counselor within their immediate geographic area in the
continental United States. This is particularly important for remote
families of mobilized Guard and Reserve units who may also have a
deployed servicemember and may live a great distance from the programs
provided on installations. We were flexible enough to also deploy teams
of professional counselors to 10 locations outside the continental
United States as we did to support the families of the 1st Armored
Division (AD). In fiscal year 2004, when families from the 1st AD were
informed their spouses would be extended in theater, $1.9 million in
supplemental funding was provided to help ameliorate the stress on
families. Funding was used to provide family group support, youth
programs, family day care, extended hour child care, and youth summer
hire program.
Military OneSource
``Military OneSource'' provides a customized approach to individual
information and referral services for military families. ``Military
OneSource'' is an augmentation, not a replacement, for the family
centers, and it brings services to all members of the Armed Forces.
This includes Reserve and National Guard members and families who do
not live on military installations, and often can't take advantage of
what DOD has to offer. This service provides all of our servicemembers
and families with immediate information concerning support available on
the installation or in their community. The toll-free telephone, e-
mail, and Web site all include information and referrals on parenting
and child care, education, deployment and reunion, military life,
health, financial, relocation, everyday issues (i.e. pet care,
plumber), work and career to name a few. Each of the military Services
has fully implemented the Service. The Marine Corps was first to stand-
up the program and now all the Services enjoy positive feedback and
results.
Family Assistance Centers
Most of the stress faced by military families prior to and during
deployment involves expectation management and revolves around accurate
and timely information. To address the stress of mobilization,
deployment and reunion, the Services have developed Web sites, provided
information materials, and reached out to families through family
center staff, chaplains, and unit-based volunteers.
Each of the military departments has a highly responsive family
support system to help families cope with the demands of military life.
The cornerstone is a worldwide network of installation family centers.
Located at roughly 300 Active military installations worldwide, the
centers provide a wide range of services supporting commanders,
military members, and families. There is information and education on
family well-being, assistance for families with special needs,
resources for spouse employment, and support during deployment.
Today, families have multiple sources that may support them while
their servicemember is deployed. Thanks to the National Guard Bureau,
over 400 family assistance centers provide outreach not only to Guard
and Reserve families that are not located near an installation, but
they also support the large number of Active service and family members
who reside off the installation. Unit Family Readiness Groups, staffed
by volunteers, actively maintain communication with families in
outlying areas through newsletters, websites, and direct communication
to enhance unit-to-family communication
In my travels, I make it a point to meet with family support staff
and volunteers. Across the board, whether talking to Army Family
Readiness Groups, Air Force Readiness Noncommissioned Officers in the
Family Support Centers, Navy Ombudsmen or Marine Corps Key Volunteers,
I find a cadre of dedicated professionals who can address the needs of
family members.
Domestic Violence/Victims Advocacy
Domestic violence will not be tolerated in the Department of
Defense. It is a crime and an offense against our institutional values
and commanders at every level have a duty to take appropriate steps to
prevent it, protect victims, and hold those who commit such acts
accountable. We have initiated implementation of 82 of the nearly 200
Domestic Violence Task Force recommendations, focusing first on
recommendations pertaining to victim safety and advocacy, command
education, and training key players who prevent and respond to domestic
violence such as law enforcement personnel, health care personnel,
victim advocates, and chaplains.
We worked closely with Congress to create or change legislation
pertaining to transitional compensation for victims of abuse, shipment
of household goods for abused family members, and a fatality review in
each fatality known or suspected to have resulted from domestic
violence or child abuse. During the past year the Department issued
additional domestic violence policy including protocols for
establishing effective command and law enforcement responses to
domestic violence and established protocols for the Domestic Abuse
Victim Advocate program.
In partnership with the Office on Violence Against Women of the
Department of Justice, we accomplished several joint initiatives that
include training for literally hundreds of law enforcement
professionals, victim advocates, chaplains, and fatality review team
members who will positively influence the lives and behavior of
thousands of individuals. As a part of our collaboration with the
Department of Justice, we are conducting demonstration projects in two
communities near large military installations. The goal of the projects
is to develop a coordinated community response to domestic violence
focusing on enhancing victim services and developing special law
enforcement and prosecution units. MacDill Air Force Base and Lackland
Air Force Base are participating in the President's Family Justice
Center Initiative. We know that military and civilian collaboration is
critical to an effective response to domestic violence since the
majority of military members and their families live off the
installations.
We are also working with the Family Violence Prevention Fund to
develop a general domestic violence public awareness campaign and with
the National Domestic Violence Hotline to increase awareness of the
Hotline as a resource for victims and their families. Finally, $7.5
million (fiscal year 2004) was used to provide access to on-call victim
advocates and emergency shelters to assist victims of domestic
violence.
We are pleased with the progress we have made but realize there is
more work to be done. We are working to ensure that the policies we
implement are viable across all Services in the continental United
States and overseas, and minimize the possibility of unintended
consequences that compromise the safety of domestic violence victims
and their children. We collaborate closely with those who are
responsible for implementing the policies we write to maximize their
effectiveness across the Department.
Financial Stability
DOD has embarked on an initiative that combines educating
servicemembers and their families on using their finances wisely with
expanding employment opportunities for military spouses. Designed to
enhance education and awareness, with the support of 26 Federal
agencies and non-profit organizations we have begun to see positive
changes in the self-reported assessment of the financial condition of
servicemembers. The lessons learned through this campaign will be
shared with the National Commission for Financial Literacy and
Education to assist the Commission in developing a financial literacy
strategy for the Nation.
In addition to these collaborative efforts, we have worked with
State representatives and several have introduced legislation to
protect servicemembers and their families from the predatory and usury
aspects of payday lending. For example, in 2004, Georgia enacted
legislation that limits the maximum annual percentage rate that can be
charged, prevents payday lenders from using out-of-State bank charters
to go around interest rate limits, and protects servicemembers and
their families from certain predatory collection practices. Legislation
has passed the Virginia Assembly that will parallel the servicemember
protections enacted in Georgia. The California Department of
Corporations has instituted a program called ``Troops Against Predatory
Scams,'' to assist servicemembers and their families residing in the
state avoid predatory activities and assistance if they become
involved.
We are employing a similar collaborative approach to improve
employment opportunities of military spouses by partnering with
Federal, state and local governments to address legislative and
regulatory barriers that may inhibit financial stability and
portability of jobs, and developing partnerships with government, non-
profit and private sector organizations to increase the number of
opportunities available to spouses to develop careers. Through these
initiatives the Department seeks to enhance financial stability by
promoting consistent reliable sources of income and the ability to use
it wisely to support quality of life needs and for attaining future
life goals.
Spouse Employment
Spouse employment is important to both family finances and spouse
career aspirations, not unlike non-military families. Military spouses
are required to frequently relocate, making flexibility and reciprocity
that honors licensing from other States all the more critical. Many of
our spouses are qualified teachers and nurses and can meet a growing
need for these professionals. The Department is engaged on numerous
fronts to assist spouses in their careers, but States can propel and
create links within this effort to ensure mutual success.
Military families often require two incomes to achieve their
aspirations, similar to the needs of American families as a whole.
Frequent moves can inhibit military spouses' ability to start and
sustain a career, even though approximately 80 percent of military
spouses have some college experience. Differing state requirements can
limit advancement or deter re-entry into the workforce at a new
location. Spouses often suffer long periods of unemployment and,
therefore, loss of income. The Department has identified where there
are licensing barriers and is developing policy recommendations for
licensing/credentialing requirements across States for high demand, or
shortage of, careers and jobs.
Quality of life for our military families is also defined by the
successful employment of spouses. To succeed we will need the help of
corporate America. Sixty-one percent of the 700,000 spouses of Active-
Duty personnel are active in the workforce contribution to the family
income.
An historic partnership agreement, signed by Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld and Secretary of the Department of Labor (DOL) Elaine Chao in
July 2003, affords both Departments a unique prospect to increase
employment opportunities for military spouses while enhancing the
competitiveness of the American work force. DOD and DOL have made great
strides in collaborative use of DOL's One-Stop Career centers and in
creating a broad spectrum of Web-based services exclusively for
military spouses, including the online Military Spouse Resource Center,
www.milspouse.org. Additional enhancements are planned as a new
``Military Spouse Career Center'' will bring the vast job bank of
Monster.com to the easy use of military spouses. Employers with a
military-friendly focus, especially those that see military spouses as
an important talent pool, will have their jobs spotlighted here. We are
especially focused on teaching, nursing, real estate, and medical
assistant fields careers of choice for many military spouses. Through
Military OneSource, spouses will now have access to career counseling
and personal assessment that will encourage them to reach for their
dreams, as they identify their opportunities for more education,
training or a new or advancing career options.
State Liaison
The Department has been collaborating with the Council of State
Governments, the National Governors Association and others to address
the needs of the military, Guard and Reserve members and families. Many
States have recognized school transition and in-State tuition policies,
spouse employment, and financial well-being as important to
servicemembers and families, and have enacted legislation to better
accommodate their needs.
Over half of the military is married and has children.
Consequently, military often weigh assignments based on the quality of
education offerings from the local school systems for their children.
The mobile lifestyle creates tough challenges for children who often
attend as many as 6 high schools or 13 schools in 12 years. This, added
to the anxiety of parental separation during deployments, challenges us
to ease transitions from school to school.
Support of children of military families is about ensuring
educational opportunities are available to all and that current
policies and practices do not penalize them. For example, providing
some flexibility in accepting academics achieved in other school
systems and in tryout times for teams and extra curricular activities.
Transferring students need their records in a timely manner so that
class assignments are properly made and the road to graduation is not
interrupted. We are looking for collaboration between States, school
districts, and military communities to facilitate these opportunities.
Since the mission of the military requires frequent moves,
servicemembers come under numerous state policies that may hinder their
educational choices. The cost of college attendance can be as much as
four times in-State rates making education progression unaffordable.
Twenty-five States (up from 10) currently have adopted state education
policies for troops and families that allow in-State tuition to
continue for children after military parents depart. In-State tuition
is a great incentive to encourage servicemembers and their families to
engage in higher learning.
Voluntary Educational Opportunities
We are proud of our commitment to fund to the fullest extent
possible voluntary educational opportunities for servicemembers and
their families. For military personnel, increased levels of coverage
for the traditional off-duty, voluntary education program helped fund
just under 900,000 enrollments last fiscal year and generated over
33,000 diplomas and college degrees. DOD reduced voluntary education
out-of-pocket costs for troops attending college in their off duty
time. Servicemembers now have up to 100 percent assistance or about
$250 per semester hour of credit. Working with major book distributors,
we have launched an effort, to reduce expenditures for the ever-
increasing cost of books, which average about $800 to $900 annually per
student.
To help spouses attend college at a reduced cost, we are working
closely with the colleges and universities that provide degree programs
for DOD overseas, to offer more scholarships, grants and reduced
tuition to spouses who would like to pursue a degree while in theater.
Collateral efforts continue to encourage existing relationships with
the Service aid organizations and United Services Organization (USO).
Spouses want access to educational opportunities that generate
degree and certificate programs that prepare them for enduring
professional careers rather than just jobs. Frequent moves often
preclude military spouses from achieving career advancement. DOD
partners with the private sector and other government agencies to
enhance spouse employment and career opportunities. The new ``Spouses-
to-Teachers'' program, which is similar to the very successful Troops-
to-Teachers program, helps military spouses achieve career goals, and
helps local school districts meet their hiring needs. DOD works with
States to expand reciprocity for credentialing requirements. A Spouses-
to-Teachers test program provides information on degree and
certification requirements from State-to-State, guidance on reciprocity
for currently held certification, access to certification programs on
line, information on teaching jobs in the States their family will be
transferring to, as well as sources to contact for grants and
scholarships to pursue a teaching career or recertification. If this
test program proves as successful as we think it can be, we plan to
expand it into new states this coming year.
Department of Defense Education Activity
The Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) has been an
active partner in supporting students and families during the war. All
schools within DODEA have crisis management teams to assist students
and teachers during stressful times. Working in collaboration with
military and civilian communities, they provide support before, during
and after each deployment. Summer school was customized to meet the
needs of the children of deployed members, and parents were very
appreciative of the video-streaming of high school graduations for
deployed members to view in Iraq. DOD schools are a model for the
Nation and have embraced the President's ``No Child Left Behind''
initiative. Our students continue to perform well above the national
average on standardized tests in all subjects (reading, language arts,
math, science, and social studies).
The Department is proud of our school system and we continue to
address quality issues in the areas of curriculum, staffing,
facilities, safety, security, and technology. Our dependent schools
comprise two educational systems providing quality pre-kindergarten
through 12th grade programs: the DOD Domestic Dependent Elementary and
Secondary Schools (DDESS) for dependents in locations within the United
States and its territories, possessions, and commonwealths, and the DOD
Dependents Schools (DODDS) for dependents residing overseas. Today,
approximately 8,800 teachers and other instructional personnel serve
more than 101,000 students in 223 schools. They are located in 13
foreign countries, 7 States, Guam, and Puerto Rico. Students include
both military and civilian Federal employee dependents. To meet the
challenge of the increasing competition for teachers, DOD has an
aggressive U.S. recruitment program. The program emphasizes diversity
and quality, and focuses on placing eligible military family members as
teachers in its schools.
Elementary and Secondary Education Outside the Gate
The Department recognizes that quality education is a key factor in
decisions to accept assignments for servicemembers and their families.
There are approximately 692,000 school age children in Active-Duty
families (1.3 million including the Reserves)--more than 101,000 in
DODEA and 590,000 in a variety of schools in America. Military children
move on average 2.5 times more often than their civilian counterparts.
The Department plans to work with Johns Hopkins University to
identify and disseminate proven educational best practices and policies
that can respond to the academic and affective needs of mobile military
children. Further, educational consultants are building an information
resource of educational options, such as home schooling, public,
private, and charter schools, around military installations to provide
military families a wide array of quality educational choices.
DOD has worked with renowned experts on terrorism, trauma and
children, regarding publications, website information and program
development for students of deployed families, their parents and
teachers. All publications are on a special website designed to meet
the needs of children of deployed parents, www.MilitaryStudent.org. We
continue to work to provide national, state and local education
agencies, schools, parents and health professions with an awareness of
the issues, current best practices, and services to promote academic
success.
Child and Youth Development Programs
The Department of Defense is the model for the Nation on employer
supported child care. Child care is the number one service that
families require in order to deploy and is also needed to allow spouses
to pursue their own careers. The Department of Defense works constantly
to ensure high quality child care is available and seeks ways to meet
the child care need.
With the return of troops for rest and relaxation or the end of
deployment, military installations with high deployment rates are
experiencing an increase in births. Analysis of the infant population
at military installations with high numbers of deployed servicemembers
indicate births have increased 15 percent to 53 percent as a result of
OEF/OIF. As a first priority, the needs of families living in high
personnel tempo and high deployment locations will be addressed. The
Services identified 4,403 spaces at 14 of these locations. The plan is
to use temporary facilities as a stopgap measure.
To support families impacted by rebasing and to reduce the total
child care shortfall, the Department is reviewing public private
partnerships with civilian child care providers and providing
incentives for in-home care providers on and off the installation. This
approach has a potential to yield as many as 9,000 spaces by fiscal
year 2011. Families are a critical deciding factor in retention and
reenlistment decisions. The Department recognizes an investment in
child care is also an investment in readiness and retention.
With the extensive number of parents deployed, it has been more
important than ever to stay connected. Computer-connectivity and
special kits help youth ``stay in touch'' and become involved in
understanding the stages of deployment and the emotional challenges
that they may experience. DOD recently developed a ``Guide for Helping
Youth Cope with Separation'' as an additional resource.
Each youth responds differently to the challenges of military life
and a variety of programs provide positive outlets and help youth
channel feelings into personal growth rather than violent or
destructive behavior. One supportive outlet is camping experiences,
with an emphasis on leadership and understanding the military better.
Private organizations such as National Military Family Association,
with funding from SEARS, created a series of camps throughout the
country, specifically for youth with a parent deployed. Boys & Girls
Clubs of America have opened their doors to our military youth and
provided wholesome recreation designed to help young people succeed in
school, stay healthy and learn important life skills. A partnership
between the Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture Extension
Services/4H provides outreach to those youth whose parents are Reserve
or National Guard or are not geographically located near a military
installation.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Initiatives
The Services have implemented a broad assortment of Morale,
Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) program initiatives specifically for
forces deployed to fight the global war on terrorism and their family
members. These include 170 free, MWR operated, Internet cafes in Iraq,
computers and Internet service at home station libraries and youth
centers to ensure families can send and receive e-mails from their
loved ones who are deployed. Additional recreation packages include
library book and periodical kits, recreation kits that with large
screen televisions, DVD/CD players, up-to-date video games and game
CDs, exercise equipment, sports equipment, pool and ping pong tables
and first run movies.
Keeping in touch with family and friends is an important quality-
of-life consideration for the deployed. It is a longstanding DOD
practice for servicemembers to be able to make subsidized or free
telephone calls home. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005 extended the
requirement that prepaid phone cards, or equivalent telecommunications
benefit, be provided without cost to servicemembers serving in OEF/OIF
until September 30, 2006. The frequency and duration of calls using
official phones for health, morale, and welfare (HMW) calls are
determined by the commander so as not to interfere with the mission. On
average, 32,000 HMW calls are made each day; servicemembers in the OEF/
OIF theaters generally average two calls per week.
The Armed Services Exchanges have mounted an information campaign
to assist servicemembers, their families and friends to understand the
unique challenges of communications during deployment, special programs
supporting HMW and unofficial telecommunications, and lowest cost
options available for communication during deployment. servicemembers
will continue to receive current service and rate information
throughout their deployment. Similarly, family members may access
updated information through various military channels, including Web
sites and family support programs. We expect that the ``Help Our Troops
Call Home'' program will increase the donated support that the
Secretary of Defense may accept in order to increase opportunities for
calls home.
AT&T is under contract to the Armed Services Exchanges to supply
the prepaid calling cards used in OIF/OEF and shipboard. On February
23, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rejected a petition
from AT&T to exempt its ``enhanced'' telephone calling cards from
Universal Service Fund (USF) contributions and intrastate access
charges. However, nothing in the FCC ruling requires increases in the
prices paid by consumers for prepaid calling cards. In fact, the FCC
pointed out that other companies contribute to the USF and offer
competitive rates.
Armed Forces Entertainment, in cooperation with the USO, continues
to provide much welcomed celebrity and professional entertainment to
our forces engaged in the global war on terrorism. Since May of 2002,
the Robert and Nina Rosenthal Foundation has worked closely with the
Country Music industry to provide celebrity entertainment at U.S.
military installations at no cost to military personnel and their
family members. The Spirit of America Tour provided 5 shows in 2002, 18
shows in 2003, and 21 performances in 2004. This initiative has been
greatly appreciated by the bases that have received Spirit of America
Tour performances, which are planned to continue through 2005.
Field Exchanges and Commissaries
There are 53 Tactical Field Exchanges, 33 exchange supported/unit
run field exchanges, and 15 ships' stores in the OIF/OEF theaters
providing quality goods at a savings, and quality services necessary
for day-to-day living. Goods and services offered include phone call
centers, music CDs, DVDs, laundry and tailoring, photo development,
health and beauty products, barber and beauty shops, vending and
amusement machines, food and beverages, and name brand fast food
operations. Goods and services vary by location based on troop strength
and unit mission requirements.
Our Reserve and Guard personnel have taken advantage of the full
commissary benefits extended to them by the fiscal year 2004 NDAA. The
commissary benefit is an important and valued component of non-pay
military compensation and it is vital to the quality-of-life of all of
our servicemembers.
Quality-of-Life in the Integrated Global Presence and Basing
Strategy
The quality-of-life of military members and their families is
considered a priority as the Department moves forward with rebasing and
BRAC. Unlike previous drawdowns when the Department lost almost a
million troops, this integrated global and basing strategy will not
reduce the number of troops.
To maintain the Department's commitment to families, the Secretary,
in a March 2003 memorandum to the Secretaries of the military
departments, directed that ``Candidate strategies must not concentrate
on the operational dimension alone, but also on how to best improve
quality-of-life.'' Service strategies must consider access to schools,
education centers/libraries, family support, child care, youth
programs, morale, welfare and recreation and fitness programs. From a
quality-of-life perspective, DOD's planning approach for rebasing and
BRAC is based on two principles: first, adequate quality-of-life
funding will be reprogrammed from the losing to the gaining
installations; and second, the military will look to civilian
communities to augment programs and services (since two-thirds of
families live in off-base communities). Service plans at the losing and
gaining installations will be evaluated using a model that takes into
account program specific operational funding requirements (baseline and
enhancement per capita), capital investment, deficiencies, community
support structures, unique Service characteristics, and civilian
manpower requirements. The Department's goal is to ensure quality-of-
life for servicemembers and families is not diminished during
transformation efforts.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I want to thank you and members of
this subcommittee for your advocacy on behalf of the men and women of
the Department of Defense. Whether the career of a member of the Total
Force is measured in months or years, whether that career is spent in a
Reserve component, an Active component, a combination of the two, or as
a Department of Defense civilian, the Nation's gratitude for dedicated
service is proved in your continued support and funding for the
programs that keep the force strong and healthy.
Senator Graham. General Hagenbeck.
STATEMENT OF LTG FRANKLIN L. HAGENBECK, USA, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
STAFF FOR PERSONNEL
General Hagenbeck. Chairman Graham and Senator Nelson,
thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before you
this afternoon on behalf of America's Army.
The United States Army owes its success to the All-
Volunteer Force, which provides the high quality, versatile
young Americans we depend on to serve as soldiers. This is the
first time in our history in which the Nation has tested the
All-Volunteer Force during a prolonged war.
Determining what kind of All-Volunteer Army we need and
developing the environment, the compensation, education, and
other incentives to keep it appropriately manned may be our
greatest single strategic challenge.
The soldier is the centerpiece of all that the Army is and
will be doing. For those brave men and women, I want to express
my sincere gratitude for your continued and committed support.
To win this war, we must recruit and maintain a quality
force, soldiers who have a warrior's ethos ingrained in their
character. Last year the Active and Reserve met their
recruiting goals and the National Guard missed its goal. The
global war on terrorism, lower propensity to serve, and
negative feedback from influencers, coupled with the improving
economy and the lower unemployment, present a very challenging
recruiting environment for all of us.
Recruiting incentives such as the enlisted bonus program,
the Army college fund program, the loan repayment program, and
the National Call to Service (NCS) combined with an increase in
recruiters, incentives, and advertising will help improve our
ability to make our annual mission.
In the previous year, the Active Army achieved all its
retention goals, a result that can be directly attributed to
the Army's SRB program. The Reserve and the National Guard
nearly achieved their overall retention objectives, both
finishing around 99 percent of the yearly mission goals.
An important component of the Army's ability to retain
quality soldiers is the selective reenlistment bonus. The bonus
is offered to all soldiers deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, and
Kuwait, and it has been increased to a maximum of $15,000, and
it has been very well received by our soldiers.
Congress supported needed pay raises and increases in
special pays, such as hostile fire pay, as you mentioned,
family separation pay (FSP), and critical skills retention
bonuses. These increases significantly contribute to the
soldier's overall well-being. With your support, the Army has
the flexibility to encourage soldiers to serve in difficult-to-
fill positions and less desirable assignments, as well as
retaining soldiers who hold critical, high-demand skills. These
tools ultimately provide the Army the ability to continue to
fight the war on terrorism and recruit and retain our quality
force.
With your continued support, we will be able to compensate
soldiers and their families wherever they serve and under all
conditions. We will continue to care for our troops and their
families whether they are healthy, injured, or suffering the
loss of a loved one who has paid the ultimate price for
freedom. We appreciate all your efforts on behalf of our
soldiers.
In April 2004, the Army introduced the disabled soldiers
support system (DS3) initiative to provide our most severely-
disabled soldiers and their families with a system of advocacy
and follow-up services. Now the DS3 program works closely with
the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) and the new Military
Severely Injured Joint Support Operations Center located in
Arlington, Virginia to aid the severely-disabled soldiers. This
combined effort on behalf of the DOD and each Service ensures a
consistent level of support to severely-injured and wounded
servicemembers and their families.
In closing, even though we have been very successful the
last few years in recruiting and maintaining quality soldiers,
to achieve the required temporary increase, the Army will
continue to need broad incentive packages to shape the force
and a renewed recognition that raising and maintaining an Army
is a shared responsibility among all Americans.
Once again, thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you today, and I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Hagenbeck follows:]
Prepared Statement by LTG Franklin L. Hagenbeck, USA
Senator Graham, Senator Nelson, distinguished members of the
committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on
behalf of America's Army. The United States Army owes its success to
the All-Volunteer Force, which provides the high-quality versatile
young Americans we depend on to serve as soldiers. This is the first
time in our history in which the Nation has tested the All-Volunteer
Force during a prolonged war. Determining the kind of All-Volunteer
Army we need and developing the environment, compensation, education,
and other incentives to keep it properly manned may be the greatest
strategic challenge we face.
The soldier is the centerpiece of all that the Army is and does. On
behalf of those brave men and women, I want to express my sincere
gratitude for your continued and committed support. As I speak to you
today, approximately 640,000 soldiers are serving on Active-Duty. Of
those, 315,000 soldiers are deployed or forward stationed in more than
120 countries to support operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other
theaters of war, to deter aggression while securing our homeland. These
soldiers are from all components: Active (155,000), Army National Guard
(113,000), and Army Reserve (47,000). Soldiers participate in homeland
security activities and support civil authorities on a variety of
different missions within the United States. A large Army civilian
workforce (over 250,000), reinforced by contractors, supports our
Army--to mobilize, deploy, and sustain the operational forces--both at
home and abroad. Our soldiers and Department of Army civilians will
remain fully engaged across the full spectrum of the globe and we
remain committed to fighting and winning the global war on terrorism.
The Army continues to face and meet challenges in the human
resources environment. In recent years, congressional support for
benefits, compensation and incentive packages has ensured the
recruitment and retention of a quality force. Today, I would like to
provide you with an overview of our current military personnel policy
and the status of our benefits and compensation packages as they relate
to maintaining a quality force.
recruiting
Recruiting soldiers who are confident, adaptive, and competent;
able to handle the full complexity of 21st century warfare in this
combined, joint, expeditionary environment is highly competitive and
very challenging. The competition with industry, an improving economy,
and lower unemployment coupled with a decrease in support from key
influencers have added to the challenges of recruiting solid
candidates.
As we projected, we have experienced monthly goal shortfalls for
all components starting in February 2005. The Active component finished
February 2005 at 73 percent accomplished with a year to date
achievement of 94 percent. The United States Army Reserve finished
February 2005 at 75 percent accomplished with a year to date
achievement of 90 percent. The National Guard finished February 2005 at
69 percent accomplished with a year to date achievement of 74 percent.
Though we may miss some monthly goals, the active Army is projected to
make their annual mission. However, the annual missions for the Reserve
and Guard are at risk.
incentives include enlistment bonuses, the army college fund, and the
loan repayment program.
The Army's recruiters are most effective when given the proper
tools such as incentives and advertising. The recruiting environment
remains a challenge in terms of economic conditions and alternatives.
Therefore we have increased our resources, including additional
recruiters, incentives, and advertising as necessary to compete in the
current and future markets and to ensure annual goals are met.
Bonuses are the primary and most effective tool for MOS precision
fill. The Army must maintain a competitive advantage to continue to
attract high quality applicants. The Army offers a range of bonuses
that pay up to $20,000 to qualified recruits. These bonuses are geared
to the special needs of the Army and our applicants. The bonuses help
us react to current market conditions and competitors, today and
tomorrow. We are able to use the bonuses to target critical skills, the
college market, and ``quick-ship'' priorities.
The Army College Fund is a proven expander of the high-quality
market. College attendance rates are at an all-time high and continue
to grow, with 68 percent of the high school market attending college
within one year of graduation. The Army College Fund allows recruits to
both serve their country and earn additional money for college.
The Army College fund primarily targets those who have not yet gone
to college, the Loan Repayment Program is the best tool for those who
have college education credits and student loans. The Loan Repayment
Program, maximum of $65,000, is another expander of the high-quality
market. In fiscal year 2004, 24 percent of our recruits had some
college education credits.
enlisted retention
Worldwide deployments and an improving economy potentially affect
retention. All components closely monitor leading indicators including
historic reenlistment rates, retirement trends, first term attrition,
Army Research Institute Surveys, and Mobilization/Demobilization
Surveys, to ensure we achieve total success.
Moreover, all components are employing positive levers including
force stabilization policy initiatives, updates to the reenlistment
bonus program, targeted specialty pays, and policy updates to
positively influence retention program. Ultimately, we expect to
achieve fiscal year 2005 retention success in the Active Army, the Army
National Guard, and the United States Army Reserve.
The Active Army has achieved all retention goals for the past 5
years, a result that can be directly attributed to the Army's Selective
Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) program and the patriotism of our soldiers.
The Active Army retained 60,010 soldiers in fiscal year 2004, finishing
the year 107 percent of mission. Both the Army Reserve and Army
National Guard came in at 99 percent last year.
In fiscal year 2005, the Active Army must retain approximately
64,162 soldiers to build to desired manning levels. This is an increase
of 8,000 over last year's mission and we are on glide path and ahead of
last year's pace. We remain confident that we will achieve all assigned
retention goals. Thus far, the active Army has achieved 101 percent of
year-to-date mission, while both the Army Reserve and the Army National
Guard have achieved 97 percent of year-to-date missions. A robust bonus
program will facilitate achievement of our retention goals.
The Army fully supports a requested update to the Reserve component
affiliation bonus. Current authority has been in force for several
decades where a soldier receives $50/month to affiliate with a Reserve
component unit. To incentivise soldiers when leaving the Active
component to join a Reserve component unit, a supplemental request to
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (NDAA) was
submitted asking for an increase to the RC Affiliation Bonus to $10,000
for at least a 3-year commitment. This bonus will help the Reserve
component meet end strength requirements with seasoned, prior service
soldiers and in many case, battle-tested, combat veterans. Legislative
Budget proposal package to include the same legislative change to NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2006.
We continue to review our Reenlistment Bonus Programs and its
association with the retention of sufficient forces to meet combatant
commander and defense strategy needs. It is imperative for the Army to
receive complete future funding of the SRB program to ensure program
flexibility during the foreseeable future. Developing ways to retain
soldiers directly engaged in the ongoing global war on terrorism is
critical. We are now using an SRB-deployed as a tool to attract and
retain quality, combat veteran soldiers. The SRB-deployed aggressively
targets eligible soldiers assigned to units in Afghanistan, Iraq, and
Kuwait. Soldiers can receive a lump sum payment up to $15,000 to
reenlist while deployed to Afghanistan, Iraq, or Kuwait. All components
are benefiting from this program and we are realizing increased
reenlistments among deployed soldiers.
officer retention
The Army continues to monitor officer retention rates as an
important component of readiness. Overall retention of Army competitive
category officers in fiscal year 2004 decreased slightly at both the
company grade and field grade ranks. The aggregate fill rate is at
101.3 percent. There was an increase in attrition for lieutenants and
captains in fiscal year 2004, after a historically low attrition year
in fiscal year 2003. The fiscal year 2004 attrition rate for
lieutenants and captains was 8.5 percent, slightly above the average
7.3 percent but lower than the attrition witnessed in fiscal year 1999
and fiscal year 2000. I am encouraged that 1st quarter attrition in
fiscal year 2005 came in slightly lower than fiscal year 2004.
The Army has steadily increased basic branch accessions beginning
in fiscal year 2000 with 4000, capping at 4,600 for fiscal year 2005 to
build a sustainable inventory to support Captain and Major
requirements. We accessed 4,484 officers in fiscal year 2004. The Army
can meet current and projected Active Army officer accession needs
through current commissioning sources (Reserve Officer Training Corps,
Officer Candidate School, United States Military Academy, and United
States Army Recruiting Command). Reserve component lieutenant
accessions present near- and long-term challenges, but the numbers have
improved significantly over the past few years, and are expected to
continue to improve.
stop-loss
Based on the commitment to pursue the global war on terrorism and
provide our combatant commanders with the cohesive, trained and ready
forces necessary to decisively defeat the enemy, required us to re-
institute the Active Army Unit Stop-Loss Program and to retain the
Reserve Component Unit Stop-Loss Program currently in effect.
Department of Defense (DOD) guidance to the Services is to
discontinue stop-loss policies as soon as operationally feasible.
Consequently, our policy requires a quarterly review to determine
continuation or termination. As of January 2005, the current stop-loss
program affects a total of 13,445 soldiers of all components. We
understand the stress this puts on individual soldiers and are
employing force stabilization to reduce that number.
military benefits and compensation
Maintaining an equitable and effective compensation package is
paramount in sustaining a superior force. A strong benefits package is
essential to recruit and retain the quality, dedicated soldiers
necessary to execute the National Military Strategy. In recent years,
the administration and Congress have supported compensation and
entitlements programs as a foundation of soldier well-being. An
effective compensation package is critical to efforts in the global war
on terrorism as we transition to a more joint, expeditionary, unit-
centered, and cohesive force.
We have made tremendous strides in reducing median out-of-pocket
housing costs for our soldiers. Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) is
intended to provide sufficient recompense to meet the average basic
housing needs of all soldiers based on their regular military
compensation. The fiscal year 2005 BAH reduces the median out-of-pocket
expenses to zero. Thank you for your support. Our commanders have been
instrumental in ensuring BAH program estimates and housing cost data
collection are accurate thereby generating allowances to cover the
average cost of adequate housing. This ensures our soldiers and their
families receive adequate allowances which makes housing in safe,
prosperous communities affordable.
The Reserve components represent a significant portion of the
capability of the Total Force, an essential element in the full
spectrum of worldwide military operations. Both the Department and
Congress recognize the importance of appropriate compensation and
benefits for these soldiers. The National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005 amended many of the Reserve component bonus
authorities allowing the department to offer programs similar to those
for Active-Duty Forces to these critical soldiers. We continue to look
for ways in working with Congress to provide compensation for the
unique sacrifices these soldiers are asked to make in service to our
Nation.
The Army continues to develop programs that address the unique
challenges we face as an expeditionary force. The legislation
authorized by Congress provides the flexible tools needed to encourage
soldiers to volunteer for difficult to fill assignments in less
desirable places or to extend their tours in these places. This past
year the Department of the Army implemented Assignment Incentive Pay
(AIP) for soldiers assigned to Korea. This program has been a
tremendous success in providing soldier stability while enhancing
readiness for units stationed in Korea. To date, over 12,000 soldiers:
officer, warrant officer, and enlisted, applied to serve an additional
1 or 2 year tours resulting in increased stability, predictability and
improved readiness in Korea while reducing personnel turbulence Army-
wide.
The Army has used AIP as an incentive for voluntary and involuntary
extensions for soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Using AIP in
this manner provides flexibility in maintaining unit stability and
retaining the necessary soldier experience gained from serving in these
countries.
The Army is using Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB) to retain
the valuable experience of our senior soldiers who are in high-demand,
low-density critical skills such as explosive ordnance and special
operations.
Congressional authorization for increased special pay for our
warfighters has allowed the Army to take care of soldiers and their
families serving in the most difficult and stressful duties. The
increases to Hostile Fire Pay, Family Separation Allowance and
authorization of per diem for family members of injured soldiers,
offers comfort and stability to our soldiers while they serve in combat
and recover from serious injury.
We continue to look for ways to compensate our soldiers for the
hardships they and their families endure and we appreciate your
commitment in this regard.
fiscal year 2006 personnel and budget & manning
The fiscal year 2006 budget for the Active Army provides military
pay to support a 482,400 end strength consisting of 79,900 officers,
398,300 enlisted, and 4,100 cadets. For the Reserve component, the
fiscal year 2006 budget supports 555,000 end strength. It funds Army
Reserve Annual training (101,000 out of 118,000 participating
soldiers), Active Guard and Reserve (AGR)--14,998 out of 15,270, and
Individual Manning Augmentees (IMA)--6,000 soldiers. The budget funds
the Army Reserve at 76 percent for the Inactive Duty training (IDT)
program (89,000 soldiers out of 117,000 participating soldiers). The
fiscal year 2006 budget funds the Army National Guard annual training
at 79 percent (177,000 out of 214,000 participating soldiers), IDT
program at 74 percent (194,000 out of 244,000 participating soldiers),
and Active Guard and Reserve (AGR 27,300 out of 28,100 soldiers)
including 102 Ground Missile Defense (AGR) and 76 AGRs for four
additional Civil Support Teams (CST).
The fiscal year 2006 budget also continues the Residential
Communities Initiative (RCI) program, bringing the number of RCI
locations operating under the program to thirty four with an end state
of 71,000 homes. This initiative improves the well-being of our
soldiers and families and contributes to a ready force by enhancing
morale and retention.
disabled soldier support system
In April 2004, the Army introduced the Disabled Soldier Support
System (DS3) Initiative to provide our most severely disabled soldiers
and their families with a system of advocacy and follow-up services.
This initiative is a cooperative effort with organizations external to
the Army, like the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), that provides
these soldiers a single focal point for personnel support and liaison
to resources as they transition through the myriad of medical and
administrative processes associated with their injuries. To date, 313
soldiers are enrolled in DS3 and they are supported by a full-time
staff, projected to grow to 47 to meet the demands of newly injured/
wounded soldiers are enrolled in the program.
The DS3 program also works closely with the new Department of
Defense Military Severely Injured Joint Support Operations Center
located in Arlington, Virginia. This is a combined effort on behalf of
the DOD and each Service to provide the same level of support to
severely injured/wounded servicemembers and their families. The
operations center staff provides a variety of services such as,
financial support, counseling, information on resources in the local
community and many other resources. They have a toll free number, 1-
888-774-1361, that servicemembers and their families may call at
anytime to discuss their needs. The Military Severely Injured Joint
Operations Center Staff have greatly assisted the DS3 program with
contacting and interviewing potential DS3 soldiers. Their assistance
greatly enhanced the efforts of DS3 in providing right level of support
at the right time, ensuring that soldiers and their families get the
support they need.
sexual assault prevention and response
Sexual assault is a crime that cannot and will not be tolerated in
the United States Army. The Acting Secretary of the Army's Task Force
Report on Sexual Assault Policies as well as the DOD Joint Task Force
identified several areas for improvement. We are in the process of
implementing those recommendations and taking aggressive actions to
prevent sexual assault, ensuring perpetrators are held accountable, and
that victims are provided sensitive care whether deployed in support of
ongoing operations or serving anywhere in defense of our Nation. The
Army is correcting areas requiring improvement through an integrated
team approach involving military and civilian resources with emphasis
on a measurable program focused on awareness, prevention education,
advocacy, intervention and direct victim services. This prevention and
victim centered approach is being communicated throughout the Army
community to commanders, soldiers, and staff ensuring all know where
available military and civilian resources exist and how to use them in
garrison (Active and Reserve) and in the operational theater. Specific
actions include fostering a positive command climate, where victims
feel free to report.
Army policy demands sensitive care for sexual assault victims;
aggressive, timely, and thorough investigations of all reported sexual
assaults; and accountability for those who commit these crimes. To
achieve these objectives, similar to DOD, the Army policy prefers
complete reporting of sexual assaults to activate both victims'
services and accountability actions. However, recognizing that a
mandate of complete reporting may represent a barrier for victims to
gain access to services when the victim desires no command or law
enforcement involvement, there is a need to provide an option for
confidential restricted reporting. Therefore, the Army fully supports
the new DOD policy for confidential restricted reporting by victims of
sexual assault. Restricted reporting will allow sexual assault victims,
on a confidential basis, to disclose the details of their assault to
specifically identified individuals, receive medical treatment and
counseling, and participate in a forensic medical examination and
evidence collection without triggering the official investigative
process. Restricted reporting is intended to give victims additional
time and increased control over the release and management of their
personal information, and to empower them to seek relevant information
and support to make more informed decisions about participating in a
criminal investigation. We are writing procedures into our sexual
assault prevention and response policy to implement the new DOD policy.
army well-being
All of the initiatives I've discussed above are in support of one
of the Army's top priorities, the quality-of-life and well-being of our
soldiers, civilians, and their families. In the past, the Army's
programs concentrated only on the quality of life of our people--
defined as a standard of living to which individuals, communities, and
nations strive to meet or exceed. Army well-being organizes and
integrates those quality of life initiatives and other programs into a
well-being ``framework'' that support four individual strategic goals:
to serve; to live; to connect; and to grow, for each member of the Army
family. Your support of our programs that take care of the Army family
before, during, and after deployments will ensure their preparedness to
perform and support the Army's mission.
conclusion
To ensure our Army is prepared for the future, we need full support
for the issues and funding requested in the fiscal year 2005
supplemental and the fiscal year 2006 President's budget to support the
Army manning requirements given the current operational environment. In
the event the Department determines additional resources are needed in
an fiscal year 2006 supplemental request--we would also ask for your
full consideration and support of that request.
We would like your support to permanently amend the Reserve
affiliation bonus authority, which is proposed in the 2005 supplemental
budget request. Increasing this bonus will significantly help us
attract already trained and experienced soldiers for continued service
in the Guard and Reserve.
Once again thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today. I look forward to answering your questions.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
Admiral Hoewing.
STATEMENT OF VADM GERALD L. HOEWING, USN, CHIEF OF NAVAL
PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES NAVY
Admiral Hoewing. Thank you. Senator Graham, Senator Nelson,
thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before you
today. On behalf of the men and women of the United States
Navy, I would like to express our gratitude for your continued
support of the programs and the initiatives that provide our
sailors with a high quality of service, better growth and
development, and ever-increasing opportunities to serve.
From record retention and recruiting, to enhanced
compensation and quality of service, the fleet is the most
capable and talented that we have ever observed. Our Navy's
performance in OIF and OEF demonstrate more than just combat
excellence. It reaffirms the single greatest advantage that we
hold over every potential adversary, the genius of our people.
I visit them in the fleet, and I can tell you that they are
proud. They want to serve, and the tone out there in the fleet
has never been better.
This is a direct result of your support, but it also
reflects innovative organizational and operational changes, as
well as technology investments, that have improved and will
continue to improve the way we get work done.
Through our fleet response plan (FRP), we can, like never
before, support the National Security Strategy with persistent,
rotational, and surge-capable naval capabilities, capabilities
enhanced by innovative new manning constructs and practices
derived from fleet experimentation, such as our optimal manning
experiments and our sea swap experiments.
We are investing in technology, designing affordable, next-
generation ships and aircraft, engineered with systems that
maximize the performance of our sailors, while decommissioning
the legacy platforms burdened by manpower-intensive programs.
These changes present us with a rare, if not historic,
opportunity to redefine the manpower requirements at sea and
ashore for the Navy of the 21st century. The truth is we have
been hampered by a Cold War, Industrial Age manning construct
that simply will not suffice in the information and
technologically-rich world we live in today or against the
diverse and transnational threats that we now face. We can and
must do better, and we need your support.
To that end, our Chief of Naval Operations' (CNO) number
one priority for 2005 is the development and implementation of
a modern Total Force, human resource strategy that will deliver
an even more capable Navy, but with fewer and more talented
people. Just this morning, I had the opportunity to address the
All Navy Flag Officer and Senior Executive Service Panel at the
Naval Academy where we talked about this strategy. Our approach
to creating this smaller and smarter work force is a deliberate
and careful process built on three supportive tasks.
First, is to determine the true Total Force manpower
requirements. We must evaluate not only the relevance of every
task that takes place out there and how it responds to that
combat capability, but also if that task is best performed by
an Active sailor, a Reserve sailor, a civilian, or even a
contractor. We are eliminating the nonproductive work before
the personnel numbers are being reduced. We are not placing
more on the backs of fewer sailors.
Second, we are shaping the force smartly and precisely to
better meet those requirements. ``Perform to Serve'' has
already resulted in the conversion of more than 4,000 sailors
from overmanned skill sets into those skill sets where we have
too few sailors to meet the demand.
Our SRB program remains our most effective retention and
shaping tool, but we need your support to raise the SRB cap to
provide the incentive necessary to retain our most talented and
technically trained sailors such as nuclear plant systems
operators and maintainers.
Our assignment incentive pay (AIP) program has been hugely
successful with more than 3,000 sailors moving into jobs and
taking orders to critical billets in order to meet the
readiness needs of the Navy. We request your support of a lump
sum payment of this assignment incentive pay option to capture
the positive effect of net present value, effectively giving us
more bang for less dollars.
Third, as we continue to evaluate our progress in getting
the right person to the right job, we need your support and are
requesting new legislative authorities to shape the force which
provide market-based, flexible tools designed to encourage
people to join, encourage the right people to volunteer to be
retained, and encourage the right people to transition into the
civilian work force while preserving our final talents without
breaking faith with our people.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, let me thank you again and the
subcommittee for the extraordinary support that you have
provided to our sailors. It has enabled the dedicated men and
women of the world's strongest Navy to continue to defend
freedom in the far corners of the earth, taking the sovereignty
of this great Nation with them on our ships, our submarines,
and our aircraft. I thank you and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Hoewing follows:]
Prepared Statement by VADM Gerald L. Hoewing, USN
introduction
Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank
you for this opportunity to appear before you today to talk about the
wonderful things the men and women of the United States Navy are doing,
the challenges that face us, and what we are doing to further enhance
Fleet personnel readiness as we move forward in the 21st century. I
want to express, on behalf of sailors serving around the world, our
collective gratitude for your exceptional and sustained support. This
subcommittee is a partner in, and has contributed in a dramatic way to
the remarkable achievements of the last 5 years in Navy manpower,
readiness and our ability to generate capabilities we will need to
fight and win the global war on terrorism.
forward presence
Our talented workforce, comprised of Active and Reserve sailors,
Federal employees and contract personnel, is taking the fight to our
adversaries each and every day. Collectively, they comprise the most
capable and lethal naval force this world has ever known. We are
continuing to transform this maritime expeditionary force, while
concurrently maintaining our forward presence, further enhancing our
warfighting capabilities and maximizing the benefits of a world-class
pool of talent.
There are now approximately 19,000 sailors deployed to the Central
Command area of responsibility (AOR) in support of Operations Enduring
Freedom (OEF) and Iraqi Freedom (OIF). In addition to the more than
8,000 men and women of the U.S.S. Harry S Truman Carrier Strike Group
(CSG) and the U.S.S. Bonhomme Richard Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG),
that number includes some 7,000 Navy personnel on the ground throughout
the theater. Among them are more than 370 Naval Special Warfare
personnel conducting combat operations, 2,600 medical personnel
directly supporting ground combat missions, particularly those
operating with Marine Corps units, and more than 1,000 Construction
Battalion (Seabees) personnel managing construction projects for new
Iraqi schools, bridges, roads and facilities. They are also teaching
construction skills as part of the Iraqi Construction Apprentice
Program.
In the past 2 months, as our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan
continued their heroic and historic contribution to establishing new
found freedom and democracy for the peoples of those countries, 24 U.S.
naval ships were on station as part of Combined Support Force 536, a
contingent of over 15,000 sailors, marines, soldiers, and airmen who
rapidly and selflessly responded to an urgent need for humanitarian
assistance and disaster relief to the earthquake and tsunami-stricken
areas of the Pacific region. Through an unprecedented level of
international cooperation, Operation Unified Assistance has
demonstrated the willingness and ability of America's military to work
hand-in-hand with international government agencies, nongovernment
organizations (NGOs) and the United Nations in the largest relief
effort in history.
Rotating elements in Unified Assistance have included the ships and
squadrons of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and its
embarked Carrier Air Wing TWO, which conducted over 1,600 helicopter
missions, transporting 3,000 people and distributing nearly five
million pounds of supplies. The U.S.S. Essex Expeditionary Strike Group
was on hand providing over 1 million pounds of humanitarian aid to the
Sumatra region of Indonesia by helicopter and landing craft, air
cushion (LCAC) hovercraft. Twelve ships of the U.S. Military Sealift
Command (MSC) provided food, fuel, medical supplies, construction and
road-building equipment, electrical power generating equipment and
airfield matting. Among those MSC ships, the 1,000-bed hospital ship
U.S.N.S. Mercy, which, along with its crew of 69 Navy civilian mariners
and 419-member hospital support staff, 100 embarked civilian volunteers
of Project Health Opportunities for People Everywhere (HOPE) and 6
uniformed members of the U.S. Public Health Service, remains on station
today providing an array of health care to the vast number of victims,
primarily suffering from illness and infections.
Clearly, at the heart of everything good happening in our Navy
today is the vital fact that we are continuing to win the battle for
people. We are attracting, developing, and retaining a talented cadre
of dedicated professionals who have committed to a lifetime of service.
Our ability to challenge them with meaningful, satisfying work, which
allows them to make a difference, is fundamental to leadership's
covenant with them. To better fulfill our promise, we are developing a
21st century Human Capital Strategy (HCS) that will deliver the right
skills, at the right time, for the right work. We would not be
positioned to do that today had we not first tackled the fundamentals
of accessing the right people, significantly reducing post-enlistment
attrition, and then retaining highly qualified and motivated sailors in
historically unprecedented numbers.
``We must do all we can to increase the speed and agility of
our great institution to get the right people with the right
skills to the right place at the right time, and provide them
with the professional and personal tools to succeed--A
comprehensive Human Capital Strategy will do that and is a
crucial deliverable for our Navy.''
Admiral Vern Clark, Chief of Naval Operations
human capital strategy
Military (Active and Reserve) and civilian (Federal civilian
employees and contractor personnel) manpower constitutes approximately
65 percent of Navy's annual investment in national security. To meet
the challenges of the global war on terrorism and sustain our
traditional warfighting capabilities, consistent with the National
Security Strategy, Navy must develop and implement a ``Total Force''
HCS. Its purpose will be to implement the warfare capabilities and
operational readiness strategies of the 21st century Navy. A thoughtful
and time-phased investment plan, including manpower, is fundamental to
the cost-effective generation of combat power today and in the future.
We must be able to carefully balance risk and sufficiency. Today, we
lack the agile processes, knowledge, and focal points of accountability
necessary to understand and make visible the capability/readiness
trade-off decisions and risks associated with manpower resourcing
decisions. A robust and strategic HCS is key to getting on the right
course.
``The Demands of the 21st century security environment are
markedly different from those that shaped the manpower
requirements and personnel systems and policies that are used
in the (Defense) Department today. The current set of human
resources policies and practices will not meet the needs of the
21st century if left unchanged.''
The Defense Science Board Task Force on Human
Resources Strategy
We have long been stove-piped into Active and Reserve, uniformed
and civilian, sea and shore, officer and enlisted components . . . our
HCS must transform these stovepipes into complementary parts of a
coherent Total Force Alignment Strategy. Moreover, our vision for the
future is a truly integrated workforce wholly committed to mission
accomplishment . . . a Total Force approach that can functionally
assess missions, manpower, technology and training and produce an
enterprise-wide resource strategy. Total Force refers to the collective
workforce of Active and Reserve officers and enlisted, Federal civilian
employees and contractor personnel. Our strategy must incentivize
innovation in the workplace and implement tools and techniques that
enable the workforce to challenge existing assumptions, eliminate
unnecessary costs, and increase efficiency and effectiveness.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Navy's HCS will provide both senior leadership and sailors and
civilian partners with a mutual set of expectations of how Navy will be
manned, trained and educated to accomplish its missions. It will
establish the framework to capture the transforming effect on work and
the workforce, of emerging technologies, mission, delivery systems and
risk taking. It will focus on continuing to attract and sustain a high
performing workforce--and recognizing and rewarding the talents of our
people--all elements critical to our success. We must also recognize
that a commitment to diversity will permit us to fully leverage the
skills and potential inherent across the spectrum of our society.
The Human Capital Strategy will be comprised of five pillars. At
the foundation of these pillars is leadership. These pillars encompass
the themes, goals, and objectives to deliver the best value team of
military and civilian personnel to provide for the Nation's defense.
They will define the alignment of manpower, personnel training and
education (MPT&E) and planning, programming, budgeting and execution
(PPBE) processes to create the critical mass to achieve Total Force
governance. They will focus our efforts towards increasing the
operational availability of our workforce and determining the well-
reasoned and fiscally informed Total Force requirements.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The strategy and its pillars will set the goals for defining:
(1) Future work environment;
(2) Establishment of competencies and skill-sets to accomplish
the work;
(3) Linkages of work to capabilities;
(4) Best-value manpower mix;
(5) Training and education requirements;
(6) Human capital information systems functionality; and
(7) Modeling tools necessary to support the performance of high
productivity work by a highly-valued workforce.
Increasing the speed, agility, and productivity of Navy's
workforce, coupled with providing work-life balance, are strong demand
signals on an HCS aligned with Navy's mission. Robust testing of new
and innovative ideas like the DECATUR pilot, multi-crewing, and
Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP), along with opportunities for innovation
under the newly authorized National Security Personnel System (NSPS),
exemplify the effort we must carry forth each year to discover
tomorrow's best practices. Concurrently, flexible, discretionary, force
shaping tools will enable us to set the stage for achieving a more
efficient and cost-effective workforce.
Ultimately, strategic development and management of human capital
is the right thing to do--critical to mission success. The strategic
plan is intended to be useful and responsive to long-term, as well as
short term, changes within the Navy and Department of Defense--to be
agile, flexible and resilient--to accommodate not only today's
challenges, but future ones, as well. It provides a strategic roadmap
to enhance Navy's workforce ability to accomplish its mission.
sea warrior
The manpower component of Chief of Naval Operation's (CNO) Sea
Power 21 initiative, implements Navy's commitment to the growth and
development of our people. It is a capabilities-based, best value,
transformational set of business processes that provide a high quality
workforce to meet fleet warfighting effectiveness. Sea Warrior, a key
element in the delivery of our emerging HCS, ensures the right skills
are in the right place at the right time, and is a major contributor to
speed and agility of our Navy. Historically, our ships have relied on
relatively large crews to accomplish their missions. Today, we are
developing new combat capabilities and platforms that feature dramatic
advancements in technology and reductions in crew size. The All-
Volunteer Force crews of modern warships are streamlined teams of
operational, engineering and information technology experts who,
collectively, operate some of the most complex systems in the world. As
we reduce crew size, we will increasingly need sailors who are highly
educated and expertly trained. Sea Warrior is designed to enhance the
assessment, assignment, training and education of our sailors.
Despite technological advances, Navy depends, and will always
depend, heavily on human capital to fulfill mission requirements. In
fact, the vision presented of Navy's future in CNO's Sea Power 21
initiative emphasizes the critical role of the Sea Warrior in enabling
Navy to operate more sophisticated weapons systems, in an agile and
speedy manner, to meet the challenges that will be brought about by
changes in warfighting tactics. Simultaneously, we recognize that
budget pressures will not abate, so that the goal of placing ``the
right sailor in the right job, with the right skills, at the right
time'' will become increasingly important. Therefore, it is essential
that Navy's various human capital organizations be aligned to operate
as efficiently and effectively as possible in recruiting, training,
educating, distributing, and retaining the Total Force required to
fulfill Navy's future needs.
The foundation of Sea Power 21 is our people--the Sea Warriors.
Project Sea Warrior, as linked with the Navy's Human Capital Strategy,
is how we are going to develop sailors to run the Navy our Nation
requires. Shaped by the demands of the Cold War and more than a decade
of draw down, our current processes and systems understandably are not
designed with the human capital at the center. Despite the many
misalignments and inefficiencies within the current MPT&E operational
environment, transformation is within our grasp.
The goal of Sea Warrior is to integrate Navy's manpower, personnel,
training, and education functions--Active and Reserve--into a single,
efficient, information-rich human capital management system. Its focus
is on growing individuals from the moment they walk into a recruiting
office through their assignments as master chiefs or flag officers,
using a career continuum of training and education that gives them the
tools they need to operate in an increasingly demanding and dynamic
environment. Through Sea Warrior, we will identify sailors' precise
capabilities and match them to well-articulated job requirements that
far exceed the simplistic criteria used today. Additionally, we will
implement more responsive incentives and flexible rotation dates and
move Navy toward a competency and performance-based compensation
system.
Advanced technology plays an integral part behind the process
improvements fostered by Sea Warrior. Sea Warrior will take advantage
of off-the-shelf, corporate-tested, products and methodologies such as,
knowledge management programs, PeopleSoft, and SkillsNet, all acting as
enablers, to provide increased options and information for career
managers, commands and individual sailors. It will provide a one-stop
information source through a single, Web-enabled portal. Sea Warrior
provides every sailor with the tools to achieve their personal goals
and provides human capital managers with powerful tools to shape the
force.
As a human capital enabler, Sea Warrior is focused on providing a
combat capability to the Strike Group Commander in the form of an
optimally trained sailor who is battle ready. This transformation will
be accomplished through a comprehensive manpower, personnel, and
training integration effort targeted at producing a single integrated
human resource system providing each Sea Warrior with defined
capabilities.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
shaping the force
As mentioned earlier, the success of Navy's vision for future
combat effectiveness and employment is tied to our ability to properly
shape the force--get all Navy members with the right skills to the
right place at the right time. Our ability to do so hinges on
availability of broad, flexible, authorities to facilitate required
realignment within fiscal constraints. As Navy becomes increasingly
technology-intensive, vice manpower-intensive, we are leveraging
advances in platform and system design to shed non-essential functions
and improve productivity and warfighting readiness. Navy is refining
the shape and skill-mix of the force to provide specialized skills
needed to respond to new technology and missions. As we continue to
shed ``excess work,'' we are confronted with statutory constraints/
inflexibilities, inhibiting our ability to reduce, align, and balance
the workforce in a selectively targeted manner to ensure skill-mix and
workforce levels match valid requirements. Current statutory
authorities help recruit and retain high quality personnel but we have
limited means to stimulate voluntary separation among personnel in
overmanned skill areas. Therefore, we are currently evaluating
initiatives that would provide voluntary separation incentives to help
shape our force in the short-term while maintaining a positive tone
that will not detract from recruiting and retaining talented
professionals over the long-term.
End Strength Request
The fiscal year 2006 President's budget supports and the Defense
Authorization Request seeks a Navy Active-Duty strength authorization
of 352,700 sailors. Planned end strength reductions are an outcome of:
Efforts to identify ``excess work'' no longer required
or that need not be accomplished by uniformed personnel (alters
the workforce mix, e.g., military-to-civilian conversions),
Decommissioning older, manpower-intensive platforms,
Improved training and employment processes,
Infrastructure manning efficiencies,
Technology-related efficiencies, and
New manning practices.
Changes in operational concepts and investments in technology
require that we recruit, train, and retain a warrior force that is more
educated and technically savvy than in the past. Smart ship
technologies embedded in future-design ship classes, capital-for-labor
substitutions for performing manpower-intensive tasks, and condition-
based maintenance with systems that identify when maintenance is
required, will fundamentally change the nature of our work.
Consequently, we will need to reassess and modify the fundamental
elements of our personnel structure to maximize the benefits of that
change. Technology, innovation, and outsourcing are changing Navy's
strength requirements. Collectively, this means that we are not
reducing strength by placing more work on the backs of sailors.
Technology continues to change the nature of work, allowing us to
optimize the number of personnel who once performed more manpower-
intensive tasks. Ongoing piloting of innovative manning methods such as
optimal manning and sea swap, present enormous potential for savings
and enhanced readiness. Additionally, outsourcing non-war-fighting
functions and increasing military-to-civilian conversions further
reduce military strength requirements.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Targeted Separation Incentives
Navy remains committed to shaping the force to fit current and
future manpower requirements while optimizing personnel readiness.
Strength reductions are being targeted so that Navy retains the skills,
pay grade, and experience-mix required to meet transformation goals,
while providing mission-ready forces for real world requirements in the
global war on terrorism. Effectively addressing shortfalls requires a
broad array of flexible tools in addition to retraining to improve
manning. While we have a variety of statutory incentives to recruit and
retain, we have limited tools by which to reduce excess personnel in
overmanned skills, without forcing them to leave involuntarily, an
approach that carries significant long-term adverse recruiting and
retention risks for an All-Volunteer Force. Tools that incentivize
voluntary separation, when appropriate and necessary, will ensure our
ability to retain in our ranks those personnel we need, while
permitting us to stimulate voluntary separation among those no longer
filling validated requirements. Voluntary incentives will help maintain
a positive tone conducive to success in recruiting and retention.
Offering a reasonable severance package to those who voluntarily
separate, ``keeps faith'' with sailors who have long committed to a
military career, only to learn that circumstances dictate that we will
be unable to retain them until they would otherwise become eligible for
a regular retirement.
This does not mean that we would indiscriminately implement such
authorities, nor would we leave it up to the members to decide who
would qualify for such separation incentives. Prior to considering
sailors for separation (and selective application of voluntary
separation incentives), Navy would employ a progressive approach of
evaluating options for retaining sailors by:
Shifting personnel from overmanned to undermanned
skills through retraining and conversion,
Transferring from Navy's Active component to valid
Reserve component requirements, and
Interservice transfer (e.g., Army's Blue-to-Green
initiative).
Only after exhausting all logical retention options, would
consideration be given to releasing sailors whose service/skills are in
excess. Under no circumstances would we retain personnel in overmanned
skills if it were feasible and cost-effective to move them into
undermanned skills. To do so would be poor stewardship of taxpayer
dollars and would force Navy to endure gaps in undermanned skills to
remain within authorized aggregate strength levels, thereby adversely
impacting personnel readiness. Retraining and converting personnel from
overmanned skill areas to undermanned skills is our primary approach
for retaining highly trained personnel while simultaneously improving
the balance of the force. In many cases, however, retraining and
conversion is neither feasible nor cost-effective. Therefore, statutory
authorities that incentivize voluntary separation would help shape our
force, while maintaining a positive tone that will not detract from
recruiting and retaining highly educated and top performing
professionals.
fair and balanced compensation package
Military compensation (especially targeted bonuses/pay) is a key
enabler of Navy's emerging HCS. To remain an ``employer of choice'' in
an All-Volunteer Force environment, operating in a dynamic,
competitive, market place, requires a complete array of monetary
incentives with the flexibility to influence individual behavior. Such
tools have been, and remain, vital to our efforts to recruit and retain
high quality individuals with the right skills, in the right numbers,
at the right time; to motivate individuals to perform to their full
potential and productivity levels; to assign individuals with the right
skills/experience to the right jobs at the right time; and to stimulate
voluntary separation of the right individuals, those in overmanned or
obsolete skill areas, in a manner that will preserve force quality,
skill mix, and our reputation as an employer. As Navy becomes more
mission/sea-centric, success will hinge on having all the necessary
tools and resources at our disposal, when needed, permitting us to
employ them in tandem to specific populations they are intended to
influence, and having the resources needed to guarantee their
effectiveness. A fair and balanced pay package that offers a
combination of annual basic pay increases, which properly recognize the
unique, arduous, and inherently hazardous nature of military service,
coupled with broadly-based, flexible, and targeted special and
incentive pays, provide a full range of compensation tools for
effective, judicious and responsible motivation and management of our
human capital.
retention
Navy has experienced significant improvement in reenlistments
reaching a historical peak at the end of fiscal year 2003. In fiscal
year 2005, to date, strong reenlistment trends continue with attrition
rates at or near a 15-year low fostered by a new culture of choice and
a focus on professional development of our sailors. We are now able to
be more selective in recruiting and retaining high quality sailors and
ensuring the right numbers of strong performers reenlist in the right
ratings thereby effectively shaping the force of the future. At the
same time, we are developing a more educated and experienced group of
professionals to lead and manage an increasingly high-technology Navy.
Targeted and special pays continue to have the strongest impact on
reenlistments, while maintaining Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB)
funding is proving essential to sustaining retention of critical
skills. Another key to these successes has been Navy's aggressive
program to enhance quality of service, the combination of quality of
work and quality of life.
Fiscal year 2004 closed with favorable retention in all zones
achieving Navy manpower and force shaping requirements. In zone A, Navy
achieved a 54.1 percent reenlistment rate, against a goal of 56
percent. Numerically, we were short by only 524 reenlistments out of
27,500 transactions. Since reenlistment rate goals are point targets
and not floors, this was an acceptable deviation from the goal. Navy
achieved Zone B and C reenlistment rate goals.
Navy has set more restrictive targets for reenlistment rate goals
in fiscal year 2005. Developing IT resources has allowed us to perform
a more granular analysis of our goals at the individual rating level.
This allows us to mitigate reenlistments in overmanned ratings using
perform to serve and other policies. Based on this more rigorous
analysis and the mitigating effect of perform to serve, Navy
reenlistment rate goals are going to be more challenging than in
previous years. Navy is currently above target for Zone A reenlistments
at 58.5 percent, while we anticipate finishing slightly below the 53
percent target. Zone B and C reenlistment rates are currently near
their respective targets and are expected to remain so through year's
end.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As Navy continues transitioning toward a smaller and smarter force,
retention will remain a key issue. Historically, retention tends to
follow changes in strength requirements. During times of decreasing
strength, we must continuously monitor our efforts to ensure that the
right sailors are going to stay Navy.
reduced attrition
Since 2000, we have also reduced attrition by nearly 33 percent.
This past year alone, leaders throughout our Navy attacked the number
one cause for attrition: illegal drug use. Despite an increase in
testing of 9 percent Navy-wide, the number of positive samples was down
by 20 percent since 2003. In short, we now have the highest quality
workforce the Navy has ever seen.
perform-to-serve
In 2003, Navy announced a new Perform-to-Serve program, which
encourages sailors to reenlist for ratings that offer more advancement
opportunity. Perform-to-Serve features a centralized reenlistment and
extension reservation system giving sailors other avenues to pursue
success. Designed primarily with fleet input, to meet fleet readiness
needs, Perform-to-Serve offers first-term sailors in ratings with
stalled advancement opportunity, the chance to reenlist and retrain for
conversion to a rating where advancement opportunity is better and the
fleet most needs skilled people. We have already used existing
authorities and our Perform-to-Serve program to preserve the
specialties, skill sets and expertise needed to continue the proper
shaping of the force. To date, more than 4,000 sailors have been
steered to undermanned ratings, and more than 42,000 have been approved
for in-rate reenlistment since the program began. Our Perform-to-Serve
and early release programs are part of a deliberate, controlled, and
responsible strategy to become a more experienced, better trained, but
smaller force.
selective reenlistment bonus
SRB continues to be our most successful and effective force-shaping
tool to retain the right number of high quality sailors we need with
the right skills and experience. It is, undeniably, a key incentive
that directly supports Navy's emerging human capital Strategy and
enables us to selectively retain the sailors we need as we transform to
a lean, high-tech, highly capable, mission-centric force.
While we have enjoyed much success in our retention efforts of
recent years, we must not presume that we can rest on these
accomplishments or surrender to the notion that the tools that made
such successes possible can be allowed to atrophy. SRB, has been, and
continues to be, directly responsible for much of our retention success
in the key skill sets required to maintain our combat readiness, yet it
has come increasingly under fire because of the funding needed to
support it and the increased authority needed to ensure its
effectiveness. To make certain we are applying those increasingly
scarce funds in the most cost-efficient manner, Navy has recently
instilled even more analytical rigor in our use of SRB through the
Navy-wide expansion of a reenlistment-tracking tool. This tool
(previously only available within the enlisted nuclear field community)
displays established reenlistment requirements at a very granular skill
level by individual year group, and monitors actual reenlistment
behavior at the same very granular skill level by year group in
comparison to those requirements. Through inauguration of this
reenlistment tracker for every Navy enlisted community, each community
manager has available clear and unambiguous data to ensure SRB is
applied only when and where needed.
Enlisted nuclear field community managers have used the tool in
recent years to implement measured increases in SRB award levels that
significantly improved retention rates. However, Navy reached the
current $60,000 legislative limit in 2001 for 13 of 16 senior nuclear
skill categories while retention among senior, nuclear-trained
personnel remains significantly below requirements of 70-90 percent.
This indicates that the private sector job market for nuclear-trained
individuals remains strong despite a sluggish economy. Increasing the
SRB statutory limit from its current limit to $90,000 would provide the
Secretary of the Navy with enhanced incentives needed to compete with
the strong civilian market in such industries as electronics, computer,
and power generation for senior nuclear-trained personnel. The
screening requirements, advanced education, and high standards of
personal performance and integrity required for the Naval Nuclear
Propulsion Program produce some of the most highly trained enlisted
personnel in the military and help the program maintain an unparalleled
safety record in support of national security. Safe and reliable
reactor operations require the retention of sufficient nuclear enlisted
personnel in the program. In addition, improving the retention of
nuclear-trained personnel is critical to ensuring all nuclear-powered
carriers and submarines will be adequately manned and able to deploy in
support of Navy's Fleet Response Plan. Increasing the SRB limit would
be less costly than the $100,000 it would cost to train new personnel
to replace experienced personnel who leave for better-paying private
sector jobs. Furthermore, Navy primarily needs to retain senior
nuclear-trained sailors eligible for reenlistment in zones B and C
whose experience, if lost, would take 10 to 14 years to replace. In the
long term, an increase in the maximum SRB authority would result in
appreciable overall cost savings.
The direct cost avoidance associated with not having to access,
train and grow replacement personnel far outweighs the funds expended
to retain sailors in critical skills using SRB. Added to that is the
costs we would have paid in decreased personnel and military readiness,
had we not been so successful in retaining these outstanding
professionals in needed ratings. I strongly encourage your continued
support for this vital program by fully funding SRB at the President's
fiscal year 2006 requested budget levels of $183.6 million for
anniversary payments and $168.4 million for new payments. I cannot
overemphasize the importance that it continues to play in the readiness
and capability you observe in our Navy today.
assignment incentive pay
Another relatively new, but already highly successful force shaping
tool in Navy's incentive arsenal is AIP. Introduced to the fleet in
June 2003, it immediately demonstrated significant benefits to our
personnel system. The success of AIP in attracting volunteers to
difficult-to-fill locations and jobs, has led to progressive
elimination of awarding sea duty credit as an incentive for assignment
to hard-to-fill overseas shore duty billets. As a result, Navy will
ultimately be able to assign almost 10,000 additional sailors to sea
duty, who would have previously rotated to shore duty following a
qualifying overseas shore assignment. This will provide future
readiness benefits in the form of better sea manning and a more
efficient use of sailors' at-sea training and experience.
Currently AIP authority does not permit disbursement of lump sum
payments. We believe that expanded authority to allow for payment of
AIP in either a lump-sum, installments (including current monthly
installments), or a combination of both, would significantly improve
the flexibility and cost efficiency of this valuable assignment tool.
national security personnel system
The NSPS provides an additional opportunity to increase our
organizational speed and agility by improving the way we hire, assign
and compensate civilian employees. NSPS will make us more effective,
while preserving employee protections and benefits as well as the core
values of the civil service.
In November 2003, Congress granted the DOD authority to establish a
new civilian human resources management system to better support its
critical national security mission. DOD and the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) have spent the past year engaged in a design process
with input and participation from key stakeholders, including
employees, supervisors, managers, union representatives, senior
leaders, and public interest groups.
NSPS is a rigorous and broad-based effort to modernize the
personnel system for the Department, while preserving the core,
enduring values of the civil service. It offers new rules and processes
for pay and classification, performance management, reduction in force,
disciplinary matters and appeal procedures, and labor-management
relations. Some of the highlights of the proposal include the following
features:
Simplified pay banding structure, allowing flexibility
in assigning work
Pay increases based on performance, rather than
longevity
A performance management system that requires
supervisors to set clear expectations (linked to DOD's goals
and objectives) and employees to be accountable
Streamlined and more responsive hiring processes
More efficient, faster procedures for addressing
disciplinary and performance problems, while protecting
employee due process rights
A labor relations system that recognizes our national
security mission and the need to act swiftly to execute that
mission, while preserving collective bargaining rights of
employees
Recently proposed regulations for NSPS implementation were
published in the Federal Register and they are now open for 30 days for
comments and recommendations. At the end of the comment period, the
Department will initiate the statutory 30-day ``meet and confer''
process with employee unions to discuss, in consultation with the
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), their views and
concerns. In addition to reporting to Congress the results and outcomes
of the meet and confer period, we will also consolidate, review, and
consider comments made by the public to the proposal, make any
necessary adjustments and publish the final regulations.
Publication of final regulations triggers the implementation period
which will include development of detailed implementing issuances,
extensive training of our employees, supervisors/managers, and human
resources professionals, and the necessary modifications to our
personnel and payroll systems. Beginning in July 2005, employees will
be phased into NSPS using a ``spiral'' implementation approach. The
first group, known as ``Spiral One'' will include up to 300,000 General
Schedule (or equivalent) employees in selected organizations. After a
period of review, evaluation, and adjustment (if needed), successive
groups of employees will be spiraled into NSPS until the process is
complete.
civilian community management
Navy's approach to Total Force alignment is driving unprecedented
changes in the strategic management of our fighting force. We have not,
however, been as efficient as we must be at strategic workforce
planning for our civilian component. We believe that NSPS provides the
supporting structure to reform our human capital management processes.
Ongoing efforts in civilian community management support the NSPS
requirements structure. We are creating a methodology to provide an
environment conducive to personal occupational excellence and
commitment to mission accomplishment. These efforts will shape the
workforce that supports the warfighter and provides for a secure
future. Our civilians provide the technical depth, continuity,
corporate knowledge and linkage with private industries research
initiatives and its impact on Navy work efforts, all of which are
critical mission accomplishment.
During the post Cold War-era drawdown (1989-2000), we were remiss
in not ``proactively shaping the civilian workforce to ensure that it
had the specific skills and competencies needed to accomplish the
future mission'' (GAO). Despite the Navy's mission complexity and
technology advances, the civilian downsizing in the past decade
resulted in a smaller workforce doing essentially the same kinds of
work as it did in 1994. We are changing that with the launch of our
civilian community management structure, which is the first corporate
initiative to look at the entire Navy civilian workforce resources,
requirements, and skill gaps to recognize civilians as a Total Force
pillar. We have established 21 communities to provide us the capability
to baseline data about the current workforce, including the current
competency requirements that are critical to our success. This effort
establishes a base line of ``as is'' allowing leadership to begin
workforce planning for the future Navy. The competency identification
also initiates the view of career development for both the individual
employee and the corporate Navy.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Our civilians will see the results of these career road maps in
much the same manner that our sailors will chart their future. Our 5
Vector model will provide views for our Total Force. Civilians will be
able to look at their progress and identify what is needed to succeed
not only within their community, but they will have the opportunity to
compete for assignments in other communities, based on known skill
requirements.
The civilian workforce is part of the total team. We need to make
sure we have the right people with the right skills doing the right
job, and that includes our civilian team members. It's all about
accomplishing the mission, and our civilian workforce plays a major
role in providing our Navy with the capability to make it happen. As we
steam ahead, the Navy must be smarter and more creative in its civilian
recruitment, training, and performance management policies. Navy's
investment in Civilian Community Management will begin returning
results as we continue to gather and use strategic information about
our workforce. With this, the Navy will be better able to develop and
align its civilian workforce with our mission and provide the Total
Force structure.
officer community management
Aviation Warfare Officer Community
Naval aviation retention in fiscal year 2004 was 52.4 percent
through department head (12 years of commissioned service (YCS)),
surpassing last year's mark by 3.6 percent. Continued improvement can
partially be attributed to 5 consecutive years of Aviation Career
Continuation Pay (ACCP) program success and an economy that is slow to
recover. These factors combined with the retention surge experienced
post-911 and Naval Aviation force structure reductions have combined to
ensure that fleet requirements will be filled to 100 percent even as T-
Notch year groups progress to the department head milestone. The
combined effect of force structure reductions, accomplishment of
recruiting goals, and increased efficiencies in the naval aviation-
training pipeline has resulted in an excess of student naval aviators.
The Naval Aviation Enterprise is currently in the process of mitigating
this excess through a combination of United States Marine Corps (USMC)
interservice transfers, filling Navy Reserve requirements, and an
opportunity to compete for available aviation quotas.
ACCP continues to be our most efficient and cost-effective tool for
stimulating retention behavior to meet current and future requirements
and overall manning challenges. During periods of low retention, ACCP
is needed to simply ensure the minimum quantity of aviators is
available to fill department head (DH) requirements. While naval
aviation continues to enjoy unprecedented retention, the ACCP program
significantly contributes to ensuring that the best-qualified aviators
are available to fill department head requirements and ensuring the
health of naval aviation in the years ahead.
As the airline industry recovers and increases their passenger
capacity to meet rising demand, it is imperative that Navy continues to
provide credible incentives to encourage careers in naval aviation. As
naval aviation once again competes with the civilian sector airlines
for a limited human capital resource, ACCP is needed to maintain the
competitive edge in that market, reducing compensation deltas, and
ensuring that future department head requirements are met. Targeted,
stable, efficient, and judicious use of limited resources are hallmarks
of Navy's ACCP program, which continues to offer sufficient incentive
to stabilize our aviation manning profile; thereby sustaining
operational combat readiness within naval aviation.
Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) Community
Surface Forces are faced with many challenges midway through the
fiscal year, from maintaining readiness in the global war on terrorism
to standing up the first littoral combat ship (LCS) commissioning crew.
Nonetheless, the SWO Community continues its pursuit of innovative
retention and force shaping initiatives, development of a community
Human Capital Strategy, and improving the quality of leadership among
its officers.
SWO community junior officer retention requirements are based upon
manning at-sea DH billets. Community retention is based on the SWO
Continuation Pay (SWOCP) take-rate for a particular year group (YG),
which enables the community to determine the number of junior officers
available for assignment as SWO department heads, nominally at 7\1/2\
years of commissioned service. Junior officer retention continues to
improve with YG98 becoming the fourth consecutive year group to attain
over 31 percent retention. Department head school loading in fiscal
year 2005 is expected to be the highest ever, with over 300 SWOCP
takers filling DH school seats against an annual goal of 275.
SWOCP, initiated in fiscal year 2000 to help meet community
requirements for critical, trained and experienced department heads,
has favorably impacted retention decisions, encouraging healthy numbers
of quality officers committing to serve through their operational (at-
sea) DH tours. This program, targeted at an officer's first retention
decision, is typically effected at 5-8 years of commissioned service
while the officer is serving in a post-division officer shore tour.
Officers are paid $50,000 in total bonuses to complete the DH sequence,
an arduous and critical mid-grade operational tour series. A typical
SWO will begin the seventh year of commissioned service at DH school
and from 7\1/2\-10 years of commissioned service in an afloat DH
sequence. SWOCP take rate has improved from 23 percent to more than 34
percent, between fiscal years 1999 and 2004.
In June 2002, Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB) was authorized
for SWO for the first time. Up to $46,000 is currently authorized for
SWO lieutenants commander for Active obligated service through the 12
to 15 years. Prior to availability of CSRB, retention for CSRB-eligible
SWOs was 92 percent but improved to nearly 100 percent of eligible
officers upon CSRB implementation. As a result of CSRB, Navy has filled
many mid-grade billets in challenging at-sea assignments by retaining
officers with vital military skills, which were previously gapped as a
result of a shortage of mid-grade officers. Beginning this year, a
senior SWO CSRB of $15,000 to $20,000 annually has been authorized for
commanders and captains serving in certain critical operational and
overseas billets. The Senior SWO CSRB brings to $191,000 the total
amount of SWO Community incentives from DH through the rank of captain.
Despite CSRB implementation, the SWO Community continues to experience
a critical shortage in control grade inventory (319 O-4, 150 O-5, and
92 O-6).
The Specialty Career Path program was recently developed as an
element of Navy's emerging Human Capital Strategy to offer an
alternative career path for those choosing not to pursue the
traditional SWO command-at-sea career path. While providing these
officers with a viable alternative career path, it also helps reduce
accessions while helping to mitigate shortfalls in control pay grades.
New career paths exist in six specialty areas:
Antiterrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP)
Anti-Submarine Warfare
Missile Defense
Mine Warfare Specialist
Shore Installation Management
Strategic Sealift
This program offers interested officers many potential benefits and
opportunities, including:
Continued Service to our Navy and Nation
Post Graduate education and JPME
Improved geographic stability
Specialty training, education, and experience
Development of marketable skills for post-Navy
employment
Promotion opportunity to O-5 and O-6
To help reduce over-manning among SWO junior officers, caused by
over-accessions in year groups 1999 through 2003, the Secretary of the
Navy has authorized release of probationary officers prior to
completing their Minimum Service Requirements (MSR). We are currently
focused on releasing 300 officers, the majority of whom are in their
first or second division officer tour. Officers with approved MSR
waivers may request Voluntary Release from Active Duty (VRAD),
interservice transfer to the Army under the Blue to Green Program, or
may apply for civilian employment at NAVSEA/NAVAIR. To date, 166
officers have been selected for the MSR Waiver Pilot program. The
challenge is to execute this force-shaping program while maintaining
annual department head school throughput to support the force of record
and retaining the confidence that the community is retaining the ``best
and brightest.''
Submarine Warfare Officer Community
Since fiscal year 2003, submarine junior officer retention has
remained below requirements, and the submarine community continues to
experience poor retention of nuclear-trained Limited Duty Officers
(LDOs) beyond 10 YCS.
Within the Submarine Warfare Officer community, junior officer
retention requirements are based upon manning at-sea billets. The
submarine community measures retention as the continuation rate of
officers from 3-7 YCS for a particular YG, enabling the community to
determine the number of junior officers available for assignment to
submarine DH, nominally at the eight YCS point. Submarine officer
retention for fiscal year 2004 (41 percent) fell short of the fiscal
year 2004 requirement of 43 percent.
To improve retention, on 1 October 2004, the submarine officer
community executed a restructured Nuclear Officer Incentive Pay (NOIP)
Continuation Pay (COPAY), and the second phase of a two-stage increase
of Submarine Duty Incentive Pay (SUBPAY). Analysis indicates that these
changes will improve retention; however, it is too early to determine
the impact on fiscal year 2005 retention. Although fiscal year 2005
retention is improving (currently at 33.7 percent), the submarine
officer community is projecting that fiscal year 2005 retention will
finish short of the 39 percent requirement.
COPAY and SUBPAY changes were developed and implemented to counter
the declining retention trend seen early in fiscal year 2004, and were
designed to better incentivize junior officers to continue on to serve
as a DH. The SUBPAY change was targeted at officers beginning their DH
tour and in the control grades to incentivize junior officers to
continue through their DH assignment and beyond.
Over the last 5 years, the nuclear-trained Limited Duty Officer
(LDO) community cumulative continuation rate (CCR) from 10-15 YCS has
been 36 percent (e.g., approximately two-thirds of all nuclear-trained
LDOs who complete 10 YCS retire from the Navy prior to reaching 15
YCS). Nuclear-trained LDOs are critical to providing the necessary
technical oversight in nuclear maintenance, repair, nuclear refueling,
and new construction. Presently, the nuclear-trained LDO community is
short 27 control grade officers (e.g., a 20-percent manning shortfall
among pay grades O-4 to O-6). Additionally, Navy has experienced a
decline in the number of LDO Program applications received from
nuclear-trained, enlisted personnel, since the fiscal year 2001 LDO
Board. Although the number of applicants has recently increased, the
total number of applications remains insufficient to meet quality
requirements among nuclear-trained LDO accessions. While selection
opportunity has been approximately 14 percent in years past, it
increased to 26 percent for the fiscal year 2006 LDO Selection Board,
representing a 12-percent impact on selection quality. Continuation of
this low application rate trend will adversely impact LDO manning
requirements as a result of insufficient numbers of nuclear-trained
LDOs and declining quality standards.
Nuclear Officer Incentive Pay (NOIP) has proven to be an extremely
effective tool, over its 35-year history. Largely responsible for
improving and sustaining submarine officer retention, and is widely
viewed as DOD's model retention incentive program as a result of
judicious and responsible management in achieving specific retention
objectives. NOIP remains the surest, most cost-effective means of
sustaining required retention and meeting Fleet readiness requirements
by retaining the appropriate number of high-quality, highly-trained
officers, thereby ensuring continuation of an unparalleled historic
record of safe reactor operations.
NOIP rate increases in fiscal years 2001 and 2003 favorably
impacted 5-year average retention among junior officers, which improved
from 30 to 34.8 percent between fiscal years 2000 and 2004. Maintaining
statutory cap authority above current rates has allowed for more timely
response to unanticipated, rapidly emerging declines in nuclear-trained
officer retention than can be accommodated by established legislative
or budgetary cycles.
Maintaining the flexibility and agility to incentivize LDO
retention beyond the 10 YCS minimum requirement will correct the
nuclear-trained LDO community's control grade officer shortage.
Incentivizing enlisted personnel to apply for commissioning through the
nuclear-trained LDO community is critical to correcting the low
application rate trend, thereby enhancing quality selectivity standards
and, ultimately, improving attainment of necessarily stringent LDO
manning requirements.
Naval Special Warfare
Overall the Naval Special Warfare Officer (NSW) Community is
healthy, manned at 99 percent of assigned billets. Nonetheless we
remain faced with a number of manpower and personnel challenges. We
continue to work diligently to retain our most highly trained,
qualified and dedicated personnel in the face of increasing competition
from both civilian and other government agency sources as prosecution
of the global war on terrorism continues to increase the demand for
aggressive, intelligent, independent, and well trained warriors.
To meet increasing U.S. requirements for NSW forces around the
world, the community has reorganized into squadrons, with a self-
sufficient O-4 Task Unit organization as our ``maneuver unit'' on the
battlefield. The associated increased requirement for a lieutenant
commander and commander, as well as 76 Joint O-4 and O-5 staff jobs,
has strained our inventory. The NSW community is undermanned in pay
grades O-4 (86 percent) and O-5 (96 percent) and we are using Naval
Special Warfare (SPECWAR) Officer Continuation Pay to target these
shortfalls. SPECWAR pay targets the post platoon commander inventory
with a continuation bonus of up to $15,000 per year for a 5-year
commitment, and has dramatically improved cumulative continuation at 6-
11 YCS from 37.7 percent prior to its implementation to between 73.7
and 62.8 percent over the past 3 years. However, increasing competition
from the private sector combined with sustained high operational tempo
continues to inhibit the community's ability to close the gap. NSW is
working to improve mid-grade and senior officer retention by offering
command pay to select NSW O-5s, including LDOs junior officer manning
within the community remains healthy and we continue to assess 59
officers per year to meet 28 platoon commander tours (department head
equivalent). As future platoon commander requirements grow to 34
percent, beginning in fiscal year 2008, it becomes increasingly
critical that we improve mid-grade officer manning. NSW officers seek
opportunity for command in operational environments and the global war
on terrorism has presented that opportunity, which should improve
future retention among our most qualified and brightest officers.
navy reserve
Mobilization/Demobilization
Since the September 11 attacks, Navy has mobilized over 28,000
sailors in support of the global war on terrorism. Just over 4,000
Reserve component personnel are mobilized today. Navy has achieved an
exceptional level of mobilization readiness, with only a small
percentage of mobilized reservists being identified as medically unable
to deploy.
Our exceptional Reserve component sailors are integrally involved
in rebuilding Iraq and fighting terrorism worldwide. Over 40 percent of
construction battalion (Seabees) personnel deployed to Iraq are
reservists. Expeditionary Logistics Support Force sailors are filling a
vital combat service support role as customs inspectors. A detachment
from Helicopter Combat Support Special Squadron FIVE (HCS 5) is
providing direct support to ground forces in theater. Navy reservists
are actively engaged and serving with distinction in this monumental
endeavor.
Our commitment to Reserve component sailors continues through the
demobilization process. Our goal is to return the demobilizing sailor
to their home communities as quickly as possible. However, we remain
attentive to ensuring that any sailor with ongoing medical issues
receives all appropriate care prior to deactivation. Toward that end,
we send most demobilizing sailors who are medically-flagged to one of
two Navy Mobilization Processing Sites, Norfolk or San Diego, both co-
located with Navy Fleet Hospitals, capable of meeting the full range of
medical needs prior to a sailor's release from Active-Duty. In unique
circumstances, other NMPS sites may be used as long as they are
adequately equipped to meet required standards of care. Navy remains
committed to consistently meeting the needs of our sailors.
navy recruiting
Navy recruiting has consistently met, or exceeded, aggregate
recruiting goals since 2000, allowing more selectivity, resulting in
increased recruit quality. For example, 12 percent of current recruits
have college experience, a 300-percent increase since 2000. More than
95 percent of new recruits possess high school diplomas. Diversity
officer applications have increased by 16 percent since 2002.
Operational Single Force
Commander, Navy Recruiting Command (CNRC), in Millington,
Tennessee, has continued the process of consolidating Active and
Reserve recruiting that began in fiscal year 2003. In fiscal year 2004,
we conducted several pilot programs to evaluate the impacts of the
organizational change on Active and Reserve accession missions. As a
result, as of February 2005 all recruiting activity has been
consolidated under 31 Navy Recruiting Districts (NRDs). Additionally,
the fiscal year 2004 budget merged Active and Reserve component
recruiting Operations and Maintenance (O&M) accounts. Through this
unity of effort, we expect to maximize effectiveness and realize
operational efficiencies. Throughout fiscal year 2005, we will continue
the restructuring effort to produce enterprise-wide savings by
streamlining the organization and eliminating excess overhead.
Enlisted Recruiting
Navy recruiting experienced another highly successful year in
fiscal year 2004, by attaining our numerical accession goals and
improving upon recruit quality over the previous fiscal year. These
successes were aided by record retention, which enabled lower accession
missions, as well as favorable economic conditions and a professional
and well-resourced recruiting force. Nevertheless, the continued need
to improve the quality and diversity of new accessions to build our
future Fleet presents opportunities. Economic conditions that have
contributed to retention and recruiting successes are not expected to
continue. The national unemployment rate has declined from 6.0 percent,
at the beginning of fiscal year 2004, to 5.2 percent, in January 2005,
and is forecast to remain near that level. While the Middle East
situation has not yet adversely impacted Navy recruiting efforts,
prolonged operations could eventually harm retention, necessitating a
sudden surge in recruiting goal. While re-normalization of the Armed
Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), in July 2004, better
reflects the youth population, recruits who would have been eligible to
serve in the past are no longer eligible. The full impact of re-norming
will only begin to be felt next year as recruits who were
``grandfathered'' by policy pass through the system. With such
uncertainty looming on the recruiting horizon, it is critical that
advertising and recruiting budgets remain sufficiently robust to adjust
for changes to the recruiting environment and to support continued
pursuit of increasing recruit quality.
In fiscal year 2004, Navy Recruiting attained 100 percent of active
duty accessions, of which 95.6 percent were High School Diploma
Graduates (HSDG)--well above the DOD minimum standard of 90 percent--
and 69.9 percent scored in Test Score Categories (TSC) I-IIIA (i.e.,
upper 50 percent) of the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT)--again
well above the DOD minimum standard of 60. Additionally 12.5 percent of
recruits had some college experience prior to reporting to active duty.
CNO Guidance for 2005 is to maintain the same HSDG and TSC I-IIIA
quality while increasing the number of college accessions to 15
percent. Through January 2005, we are on track to meet accession
mission and HSDG and TSC I-IIIA objectives, but still have work to do
to meet the college objective. The College First Delayed Enlistment
Program, authorized in the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, will help penetrate the college
market in the future, but the rigors involved in starting the program
will prevent any accessions until fiscal year 2006. Of particular note
on the quality front, in fiscal year 2004, 51.3 percent of African-
American accessions were in TSC I-IIIA, which facilitates greater
diversity representation among Navy's more technical ratings. This is
the first year all diversity groups attained at least 50 percent TSC I-
IIIA.
In fiscal year 2004, Navy attained 102 percent of Selected Reserve
(SELRES) accessions. A 20 percent mission increase over last year makes
fiscal year 2005 very challenging and we have fallen behind our
recruiting goals through the first quarter. However, the newly
consolidated single recruiting force has enabled us to mitigate this
challenge by shifting 166 Active-Duty recruiters and $3.85 million in
advertising funding to support the Reserve mission. Because Navy
Reserve relies heavily on attracting prior-service sailors,
historically unprecedented retention successes among active enlisted
personnel have led to an inevitable decline in the number of available
prior-service veterans. To counter the effects on Reserve recruiting,
we are actively engaging the Fleet to help transition sailors, leaving
the active Navy, into the Reserve component. In fiscal year 2004, Navy
accessed 998 recruits under the National Call to Service (NCS)
Enlistment Incentive Program, and plans to access 1890 in fiscal year
2005. This program has successfully expanded the opportunity for young
Americans to serve our country. Likewise, it has presented a dual
benefit to Navy because NCS recruits have been high quality, scoring
six points higher than the average recruit on the AFQT, and because,
upon completing their training and Active-Duty commitment, the first of
which will be in fiscal year 2006, they will enter the ranks of the
Reserve Force.
Officer Recruiting
Fiscal year 2004 produced mixed results in the area of officer
recruiting. We met 22 of 24 Active-Duty officer community goals,
including all unrestricted line, restricted line, and staff corps
community goals. Dental Corps and Nurse Corps were the only officer
communities that did not achieve annual goal. For Reserve officers,
several communities that require prior-service experience did not meet
accession goals contributing to attainment of just 87.5 percent of the
overall officer SELRES accession mission. We continue our efforts to
increase diversity within the officer corps to more closely mirror
diversity representation among Americans receiving Bachelor's degrees.
We increased Active-Duty officer diversity new contracts from 21
percent in fiscal year 2003 to 22.6 percent in fiscal year 2004, while
Reserve new contract diversity declined from 22.3 percent in fiscal
year 2003 to 17.4 percent in fiscal year 2004. Meeting the goals for
medical officers will be difficult for both Active and Reserve
recruiting. Once again, officer communities that specifically require
prior-service accessions, such as aviation (pilots) and surface warfare
remain challenging, as continued retention successes in the Active
component reduces the pool of prior-service officers who are the
primary Reserve component target market.
Reserve Officer Retention
Retention for SELRES officers continues to be outstanding. Most
SELRES officer communities are at 100 percent manning while aggregate
SELRES manning is at 99.4 percent. Some shortages exist in junior ranks
of communities requiring prior-service personnel, such as aviation and
surface warfare. Accession goals for junior officers in these
communities will continue to be challenging because of high Active-Duty
retention rates. Among communities in which prior-service is not an
accession prerequisite, such as in the public affairs and Intelligence
Communities, requirements are being effectively met though direct
accession commitments. The downside of direct accessions is the
extensive training and experience required before these officers are
ready to become mobilization assets.
quality-of-life--community support programs
As fiscal year 2004 came to a close, we completed the successful
realignment of Morale, Welfare and Recreation (MWR), Child Care, and
Fleet and Family Support program management functions from the Bureau
of Navy Personnel (BUPERS) to Commander, Navy Installations (CNI)
Command. The realignment streamlined operational management, while
maintaining within BUPERS a significant policy and assessment arm for
MWR, Child Development, and Fleet and Family Support Programs. The
seamless transition was transparent to customers and field activities
with no disruption in support services.
MWR Fleet Readiness
Expanding MWR Fleet Readiness Support remained our top priority
program initiative in fiscal year 2004. In support of deployed units,
we realigned funds and used supplemental funding to enhance fitness and
recreation support, enabling us to upgrade and replace fitness
equipment aboard fleet units. As a result, nearly 130,000 pieces of
recreation and fitness equipment were delivered to the fleet to replace
worn, high-demand, equipment. An additional 1,250 pieces of
recreational gear were provided to 32 commands/units in isolated and
remote areas of the world to enhance morale and quality-of-life.
Our Civilian Afloat Program continues to thrive by providing
recreation (Fun Boss) and fitness (Fit Boss) professionals, who live
and work aboard various aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships
to provide positive leisure programming and support. We believe there
continues to be substantiated quality-of-life benefits from providing
fitness and recreational opportunities for deployed sailors and marines
and by ensuring they are afforded wholesome leisure opportunities both
aboard ships and in ports of call.
Sexual Assault And Victim Intervention (SAVI)
Sexual assault prevention and victim intervention are high priority
efforts throughout the Navy, especially at the highest levels of the
chain of command. Not only are such incidents illegal, but they are
particularly detrimental to mission readiness, including the retention
of servicemembers. While Navy has had a model SAVI program since the
early 1990s, we recognize the need to continue strong pursuit of a zero
tolerance environment while continually improving confidentiality for,
and support to, alleged victims.
Navy contributed significantly to the work of the DOD Care for
Victims of Sexual Assault Task Force. Furthermore, we commend and fully
support congressional direction, enacted in the Ronald W. Reagan
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, to implement
policy changes based on DOD Task Force recommendations. Navy has an
aggressive plan in place to adopt the revised definition, upgrade its
training, improve reporting and leadership awareness, strengthen
confidentiality and adopt a case management approach to improve sexual
assault response capability.
Casualty Assistance
There is no more noble a cause than that of rendering prompt and
compassionate care to a Navy family when one of our sailors dies or
becomes seriously ill or injured. While Navy has long supported this
most important role, we continually need to assess the strengths and
weaknesses of our program. Approximately 1 year ago, I directed a
detailed review of our entire casualty assistance process to ensure
that we were, in fact, taking care of our own. This initiative led to
the swift implementation of several program changes to offer better
assistance to Navy families in need.
A well-designed system exists for Casualty Assistance Call Officer
(CACO) assignments within the Navy structure. Under current operating
procedures, regional coordinators carry out the principal training of
CACOs and subsequent assignments to assist surviving family members
within their respective areas of responsibility. Generally, each region
trains a specific number active duty personnel from among the commands
in the region to serve as CACOs. Assignment as a CACO is a total force
mission requirement that assumes priority over all other assigned
duties.
When assigned to assist surviving family members following a
sailor's death, the CACO notifies the next of kin as soon as possible,
but typically within 24 hours of the death. Every effort is made to
arrange for a Navy chaplain to accompany the CACO to offer moral
support and pastoral care to the family during this important and
extremely sensitive mission. Initial information provided to surviving
family members about the death is limited to known facts, and as a
consequence, is often necessarily vague. The final cause/determination
of the death and related circumstances is conveyed to the family
consistent with a medical examiner's determination. During the initial
notification visit, or in some cases during the second visit to assist
the next of kin, the CACO presents the death gratuity to assist the
family with immediate expenses while awaiting disbursement of other
survivor benefits and final pay and allowances.
In the days following initial notification, the CACO assists the
family in making funeral arrangements, filing claims for benefits and
entitlements and, should the family so decide, relocation of the family
and household effects. The CACO's duties often last from a number of
weeks, but in some cases may continue for a number of months, as long
as the family requires and desires such assistance to adjust to the
tragic circumstances that have befallen them.
Throughout the process, the CACO is guided and mentored by a
worldwide network of certified as grief and bereavement facilitators
who serve as Regional Casualty Coordinators or on the Navy headquarters
staff in Millington, Tennessee. This mission requires an extreme degree
of sensitivity, focus and accuracy, in which there is no margin of
error. The ultimate mission is to minimize any additional pain and
anguish that already grief-stricken families must endure.
Similar procedures exist to lend support to families of sailors who
become seriously ill or injured. In these cases, our initial purpose,
beyond notifying the family, is to assist them in traveling to the
bedside of the sailor in as timely a manner as possible. Seriously ill
or injured patients tend to recover more quickly when nurtured and
bolstered by the physical presence of their loved ones. Navy provides
funding for travel (including per diem) and transportation costs to
transport three (or, in some cases, more) eligible family members to
the bedside of a sailor who is medically declared seriously ill/injured
or very seriously ill/injured. Should the member need additional time
to recuperate, they may be placed on convalescence leave and/or limited
duty. If placed on limited duty, they may serve in that capacity for a
period of 6 months, with a possible extension of 6 additional months
prior to referral, as necessary, to the Physical Examination Board
(PEB).
We have made great strides in achieving and enhancing our casualty
assistance mission. Improvements have been gained in our casualty
reporting process by streamlining the amount of information needed to
notify the loved ones of those reported as casualties. We have also
successfully integrated a Navy Reserve unit to augment the standing
Casualty Assistance Division to increase mission capability and to
reduce manpower requirements. We continuously review our casualty
assistance programs, initiating changes as appropriate to provide
timely and compassionate notification and assistance to sailors and
their families confronted with such tragic circumstances for as long as
they may require.
Transition Assistance Management Program (TAMP)
The Navy Transition Assistance Management Program (TAMP)
coordinates Transition Assistance Program (TAP) workshops at 65 shore-
based sites worldwide and, when requested, conducts TAP classes aboard
ships at sea. These specialized classes assist sailors, including
disabled members who are retiring or otherwise separating from the Navy
as they transition to civilian life or prior to a decision to return to
Active-Duty. During fiscal year 2004, we conducted 3,874 TAP workshops
for 78,108 military personnel. Another 103,170 military personnel
utilized other transition assistance training services, e.g., resume
writing, interview techniques and assistance in understanding benefits.
This program is estimated to have reduced unemployment insurance
compensation by $120 million since fiscal year 1993.
Program accomplishments during 2004 include:
Development of the first lifecycle approach to career
management that will parallel career development and career
change strategies. To complement this approach, workshops were
developed for first-term and mid-career sailors. They have been
well received by attendees.
Delivery of at-sea shipboard TAP workshops in
partnership with the Departments of Labor (DOL) and Veterans
Affairs (VA), which provided facilitators to deliver training.
Current TAMP initiatives include:
Expanded use of DOL TAP Facilitators at overseas
locations, including support on Diego Garcia and expanded VA
services to the Middle East.
Fitness Program--Cornerstone of Personal Readiness
The Navy Fitness program continues to improve and support the
fitness goals of the Chief of Naval Operations. Our goal is to provide
ready access, for sailors and their family members, to high quality
fitness programs and facilities dedicated to their total fitness needs.
Navy MWR is committed to providing support to every sailor in achieving
optimum fitness levels wherever they may be stationed. MWR maintains
about 142 fitness centers at 90 bases in addition to supporting Naval
Reserve Centers and various Defense Attache Offices in the Pacific Area
as designated by DOD policy.
Single Sailor--``Liberty Program''
Navy's Single Sailor Program, also known as the ``Liberty Program''
is a core MWR program designed to address the recreation needs of 18 to
25 year old single sailors, the majority of whom live aboard ship or in
barracks. We have 96 active installation-level programs, 88 of which
are located in dedicated facilities on piers and in barracks areas,
making the program readily available to those who use it the most. Our
objective is to provide a recreational environment free from alcohol
and tobacco for sailors desiring to relax, participate in healthful
leisure activities and have a quiet place to socialize with friends and
relax.
Navy Movie Program
Watching movies is one of the most popular recreational activities
for Active-Duty personnel and their families. Each ship receives a
monthly shipment of at least 16 new movies in 8mm format, generally 2
or more months before they are available stateside for video rental.
Ships can maintain a movie library with more than 800 titles. We also
provide movies in 35mm format to 46 bases that operate commercial style
theaters.
With the cooperation and support of the major motion picture
studios, Navy has been able to provide units the benefit of an
extensive early tape release service. Navy receives and distributes
newly released films to overseas ships and units ashore two weeks after
opening in commercial theaters.
Child Development and Youth
Sailors and their families continue to rank as very high child and
youth programs as an integral support system for mission readiness and
deployments. To meet the demand, multiple delivery systems are offered
to include child development centers, child development homes, child
development group homes, school-age care, and resource and referral.
In fiscal year 2004, we achieved 69 percent of DOD potential need,
100 percent DOD certification, and 97 percent accreditation of our
programs by the National Association for the Education of Young
Children (NAEYC). Our objective for 2005 is to ensure that all Navy
child development centers are accredited. This tells our Navy families
that their children are receiving top quality care that equals or
exceeds the highest national standards.
Families attending the 2002 and 2004 Navy Family Team Summits
expressed a need for extended hours for childcare to meet the needs of
shift workers and watch standers in support of the global war on
terrorism and other military operations. In fiscal year 2003, the Navy
launched pilot sites in Navy Region Mid-Atlantic and Hawaii. These
pilot programs include additional in-home care providers that offer
care around the clock as well as two new child development group homes.
In 2005, we are expanding these programs to Naval Air Station Sigonella
and Navy Region Southwest.
Fleet and Family Support Program
On the home front, Navy's Fleet and Family Support Program (FFSP)
ensures that sailors and their families are ready to meet the
challenges of deployments and the Navy lifestyle. Major FFSP services
include personal financial management, family advocacy, spouse
employment, transition assistance, and relocation assistance, crisis
intervention and individual, marital, and family counseling, all of
which have a direct and positive link to readiness. FFSP is accredited
through adherence to a Navy-wide system of quality and service delivery
standards.
Fleet and Family Support Centers (FFSC) and their satellite
activities provide convenient access for naval personnel and family
members. The range of services provided prepares family members to
anticipate and understand the demands associated with Navy lifestyle
and the mission responsibilities of their military spouses or parents
and provide personal counseling when they need help in coping with
issues which arise. Pre-deployment briefings are provided to military
members, spouses, and children prior to deployment. Special emphasis is
given to prepare families to cope with the suddenness of some
deployments.
Return from deployment and reunion with family members also
presents a range of needs for our military personnel and families. FFSP
staff met all fleet requests for return and reunion teams in fiscal
year 2004. These shipboard programs focus on the adjustment challenges
of returning to spouses and children, children's developmental stages,
and ``baby showers'' for sailors who became parents during the
deployment. Staff introduces new parents to infant care and parenting
skills during these events. Staff also provides information on car
buying and consumer education, as well as orientation to what's
happened at home while the ship or squadron was deployed. This year
information on combat related stress was added to the stress management
lectures. Similar programs are offered to the family support groups to
facilitate their reunions.
Navy ``OneSource''
In assessing our Navy deployment support efforts, we found there
was a need to improve our ability to provide accurate, timely and
easily accessible information and referral services. This was
particularly apparent for families of Reserve personnel called to duty.
We also recognized that all our personnel and families would benefit
greatly from improved communications. Therefore, Navy has partnered
with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to offer a
contracted, 24 hour-per-day, 7 day-per-week, 365 day-per-year, toll-
free telephone number and web-based ``OneSource'' service. Extensive
marketing and installation rollout briefings have been completed and
first-year usage has been consistent with expectations. In this second
year of the contract, Navy has requested more marketing, briefings and
outreach to Reserve families prior to mobilization.
Fleet Feedback
In assessing the quality and adequacy of quality of life programs
we use a range of surveys, program assessments, and certification
processes. We periodically survey sailors, spouses and Navy leaders to
ensure we offer a range of quality programs that address their
recreational and life-support service needs. In addition, customer
feedback is considered as we set program priorities for the continental
United States (CONUS), overseas, and shipboard support of sailors and
their families. The MWR/Navy Exchange Board of Directors provides a
forum with Navy senior leadership to oversee and assess program
requirements and needs of naval personnel.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this personnel
subcommittee, the dedicated men and women of the world's premier naval
force continue to sustain our forward worldwide presence on a daily
basis in this fourth year of the global war on terrorism. As the CNO
has made very clear, ``At the heart of everything good in our Navy
today is this: we are winning the battle for talent. This is the
highest quality Navy the Nation has ever seen.'' Your continued support
for our force-shaping initiatives and programs will maintain that high
quality and prepare us to better meet the challenges of the 21st
century. In this way, we will collectively set the stage to project
greater power and provide greater protection to our Nation--enhancing
our security in the dangerous and uncertain decades ahead.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
General Osman.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. H.P. OSMAN, USMC, DEPUTY COMMANDANT FOR
MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
General Osman. Mr. Chairman, Senator Nelson, I thank you
for this opportunity to appear before you today to give you a
report on the personnel status, as well as the future manpower
picture, of your Marine Corps. I want to thank you up front for
the great support that you have given to the individual marine
and, just as important, his family.
I think you know that today's marine is a marine of
character. He has a strong work ethic, sound moral fiber, and
desires to be challenged. On that last note, I think we have
been able to succeed in that the last couple years. He has been
challenged.
I would like to highlight a few points.
First, recruiting. The Marine Corps continues to makes its
accession mission as it has been doing for the last 10 years. I
will be honest. The last several months, we have actually
missed our contracting mission, but I am confident we will get
it back on track, and by year's end, we will have the pool that
we need to set us up for fiscal year 2006.
The retention picture is very good. We are ahead of last
year's retention statistics, and our military occupational
specialty (MOS) match, which is very important to make sure we
have the right skills, is actually ahead of last year's
standard. This is both for our first-termers, as well as our
careerists.
I want to thank the subcommittee for your hard work in
allowing us to increase our end strength from 175,000 to
178,000. This has been very important for the Marine Corps. It
has allowed us to add the marines to the operating forces, put
a few more recruiters on the street, and also establish a
foreign military training unit. This is an effort that we have
to bring ourselves closer to the special operations community
and help them in some of their tier 3 missions.
I will talk for a moment about compensation. That can be a
double-edged sword. I often say that compensation is one of the
issues that allows a marine to stay or it can be one of the
issues that drives him home. The key is to make sure that we
have a comprehensive compensation package, and I applaud Dr.
Chu for forming a compensation panel to take a look in a
comprehensive manner at our compensation needs.
I will talk for a minute about the Marine Corps Reserve.
Prior to coming to this job last August, I had served for
several years as the commanding general of the 2nd Marine
Expeditionary Force (MEF), a 46,000 marine and sailor force. As
large as it was, we could not have done the missions that we
were assigned had it not been for the Reserve establishment.
Every time I had an opportunity to talk, I made it very clear
that we could not have done what we did had it not been for the
Reserves. We really are a Total Force.
The final thing I would like to touch on is quality-of-
life. That is a force multiplier. The important pay, as well as
the non-pay, benefits to our marines and their families are
incredibly important. I often say that we recruit marines but
we reenlist families. We really appreciate the great support
that you have given us in that regard.
I am optimistic about the overall health of our corps from
a personal standpoint.
I look forward to your questions today and stand proud in
front of you today as a member of your Marine Corps. Thank you,
gentlemen.
[The prepared statement of General Osman follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. H.P. Osman, USMC
Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee, it is my privilege to appear before you today to provide
an overview of your Marine Corps from a personnel perspective. The
continued commitment of Congress to increase the warfighting and crisis
response capabilities of our Nation's Armed Forces, and to improve the
quality-of-life of marines, is central to the strength that your Marine
Corps enjoys today. Marines remain committed to warfighting excellence,
and the support of Congress and the American people is indispensable to
our success in the global war on terrorism. Supporting the global war
on terrorism and sustaining our readiness, while ensuring our forces
are prepared to respond to future challenges, is the core of our
readiness strategy. Thank you for your efforts to ensure that marines
and their families are poised to continue to respond to the Nation's
call in the manner Americans expect of their Corps.
recent operations and current status of forces
The emphasis on readiness enables your marines to be fully engaged
across the spectrum of military capabilities in prosecuting the global
war on terrorism. Our core competencies coupled with the integration of
our own organic capabilities produces an agile force capable of
fighting the prolonged fight against an adaptive enemy. Our scalable
combined arms teams integrate ground and aviation forces with adaptive
logistics to create speed, flexibility, and agility in response to
emerging crises. We must sustain our readiness and maintain the ability
to project our forces close to home, as in last spring in Haiti, and in
remote austere environments halfway around the world, as we do today in
Iraq and Afghanistan. The Marine Corps' role as the Nation's premier
expeditionary force-in-readiness, combined with our forward deployed
posture, enable us to fulfill a prominent role in joint operations. The
readiness of our forces and the quality of our training enabled our
marines to perform in the chaotic, unstable, and unpredictable
environments exploited by our adversaries.
Last year, we redeployed 25,000 marines to the Al Anbar province in
Iraq. Their focus on readiness, the quality of their training, and
their commitment to warfighting excellence enabled them to lead the
multi-national force west, which was responsible for providing
stability and security throughout the Province. Last spring, we
responded to an unplanned Central Command (CENTCOM) requirement in
Afghanistan where we provided a reinforced infantry battalion, and
aviation combat element, a regimental headquarters, and a Marine
Expeditionary Unit (MEU). The success of this force greatly assisted in
setting the conditions for the Afghan national elections later in the
year and the establishment of a secure and stable government. We
continue to provide both ground and aviation forces to provide
stability for this new democracy.
Over the last year, we also provided concurrent support for several
other regions including the operations in Horn of Africa, the Pacific,
peace operations in Haiti, and Tsunami relief in South Asia.
Today we are rotating our forces in Iraq. We expect to reduce our
commitment in Iraq to about 23,000 marines and sailors, with Marine
Corps Reserve Forces providing about 3,000 of these personnel. Your
support ensures their near-term readiness remains strong and our
training and equipment is matched to the evolving threat. The entire
Marine Corps is supporting the global war on terrorism, and the demand
on our force is high. In the past 2 years, we have gone from a
deployment rotation of one-to-three (6 months out/18 months back) to
our current one-to-one ratio (7 months out/7 months back) for our
infantry battalions, aviation squadrons, and other high demand
capabilities. Our operating forces are either deployed or training to
deploy. Despite this high operational tempo, the Marine Corps continues
to meet its aggregate recruiting and retention goals in quantity and
quality. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
providing a 3,000 marine increase to our end strength will assist in
reducing demands on marines as we increase manning of our infantry
battalions.
personnel readiness
The Marine Corps continues to answer the call because of our
individual marines and the support they receive from their families,
the Nation, and Congress. The individual marine is the most effective
weapon system in our arsenal. Our ranks are comprised of intelligent
men and women representing a cross section of our society. Our marines
must think critically and stay one step ahead of the enemy despite an
uncertain operating environment; their lives and the lives of their
fellow marines depend upon it. Morale and commitment remain high.
Marines join the Corps to ``fight and win battles'' and we are giving
them the opportunity to do that.
Force Structure Review
Last year, the Marine Corps completed a review of our Active and
Reserve Force structure. We are implementing those recommended force
structure initiatives with the majority achieving initial operational
capability in fiscal year 2006 and full operational capability by
fiscal year 2008. These initiatives are end strength and structure
neutral, but will require additional equipment, facilities, and
operations and maintenance resources to implement.
Structure changes include the establishment of two additional
infantry battalions, three light armored reconnaissance companies,
three reconnaissance companies, two force reconnaissance platoons, and
an additional Air-Naval Gunfire Liaison Company (ANGLICO) for the
Active component. Our existing explosive ordnance disposal,
intelligence, aviation support, civil affairs, command and control, and
psychological operations assets will receive additional augmentation.
The Reserve component's structure initiatives will further increase
the Marine Corps' capability to respond to the global war on terrorism
by establishing an intelligence support battalion, a security/anti-
terrorism battalion, and two additional light armored reconnaissance
companies. Civil affairs and command and control units will receive
additional augmentation, and some Reserve units structure will be
converted into Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) Detachments--
allowing more timely access to these Marine reservists in support of
contingency operations. These increased capabilities were ``brought''
at the expense of a like number of ``lesser'' required capabilities
where we believed risk could be taken.
End Strength
The Marine Corps appreciates the congressional end strength
increase to 178,000. A top priority will be to increase the manning in
our infantry units. We will also create a dedicated military training
unit to assist in the training of the Armed Forces of other nations. We
will also add to our recruiting force, our trainers, and other support
for the operating forces in order to reduce the tempo of operations on
marines and their families. The added end strength will complement the
force structure review initiatives.
Military-to-Civilian Conversions
The Marine Corps continues to pursue sensible military-to-civilian
conversions to increase the number of marines in the operating force.
We are on course to achieve 2,397 conversions in fiscal years 2005 and
2006.
Funding
The fiscal year 2006 budget provides for a total force of 175,000
Active-Duty marines, 39,600 Reserve marines, and 13,200 appropriated
fund civilian marines. Approximately 60 percent of our military
personnel funding is targeted toward military pay and retired pay
accrual. Essentially all of the remaining funds are committed to
regulated and directed items such as Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH),
Defense Health Care, Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS), Permanent
Change of Station relocations, and Special and Incentive pays. Only 1
percent of our military personnel budget is available to pay for
discretionary items such as our Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB),
Marine Corps College Fund recruitment program, and Aviation
Continuation Pay. Of the few discretionary pays that we utilize, the
SRB is crucial. We take pride in our prudent stewardship of these
critical resources. For fiscal year 2006, we are seeking an increase in
funding to $53.6 million, from $51.8 million in fiscal year 2005. This
remains just one-half of 1 percent of our military personnel budget,
and it is critical to effectively target our retention efforts. In
fiscal year 2005, the Marine Corps has derived great results from our
SRB efforts in the infantry MOSs. This proven application of SRB monies
is a sound investment. The Marine Corps prudent utilization of the SRB
reduces recruiting costs and retains experienced marines in the force.
Congresses continued support of our SRB program is critical to the
continued health of your Marine Corps. Military personnel funding, as a
whole, represents 61 percent of the U.S. Marine Corps' Total Obligation
Authority; 39 percent remains for all infrastructure, investment, and
operations and maintenance requirements.
Compensation
The Marine Corps appreciates the efforts by this committee to raise
the standard of living for our marines. Being a marine is challenging
and rewarding. America's youth continue to join the Marine Corps, and
remain, in a large part because of our institutional culture and core
values. However, it is important that the environment--the other
factors in the accession and retention decision--remain supportive, to
include compensation. Compensation is a double-edged sword in that it
is a principle factor for marines both when they decide to reenlist and
when they decide not to reenlist. Private sector competition will
always seek to capitalize on the military training and education
provided to our marines--marines are a highly desirable labor resource
for private sector organizations. The support of Congress to continue
increases in basic pay, and ensuring a sound comprehensive compensation
and entitlements structure greatly assists efforts to recruit and
retain the quality Americans you expect in your Corps. We look forward
to the comprehensive reviews of both the Defense Advisory Committee on
Military Compensation as well as the Quadrennial Review of Military
Compensation.
recruiting
Active Component
In fiscal year 2004, the Marine Corps achieved 103.6 percent of
enlisted contracting and 100.1 percent of enlisted shipping objectives.
Nearly 98 percent of those shipped to recruit training were Tier 1 high
school diploma graduates, well above the Department of Defense (DOD)
and Marine Corps standards of 90 percent and 95 percent, respectively.
In addition, 71.6 percent were in the I-IIIA upper mental testing
categories; again well above the DOD and Marine Corps standards of 60
percent and 63 percent, respectively. Thus far in fiscal year 2005, we
have assessed (shipped) 14,170 marines which represents 100 percent of
our accession mission to date. We fully anticipate meeting our annual
accession mission. We did fall 84 short in January and 192 short in
February, 277 short of our self-imposed contract mission, but overall
we are at 99.2 percent of contract mission for the year. As concerns
officers, we accessed 1,447 in fiscal year 2004, 100 percent of
mission, and we are on course to make our officer accession mission in
fiscal year 2005.
Reserve Component
Recruiting for our Reserves, the Marine Corps similarly achieved
its fiscal year 2004 enlisted recruiting goals with the accession of
6,165 non-prior service marines and 2,941 prior service marines.
Through February of fiscal year 2005 we have accessed 2,190 non-prior
service and 1,221 prior service, which reflects 36 percent and 54
percent of our year to date mission, respectively. Again, we project to
meet our recruiting goals this year. For our Reserve component, officer
recruiting and retention for our Selected Marine Corps Reserve units is
traditionally our challenge, and remains the same this year. This
challenge exists primarily due to the low attrition rate for company
grade officers from the Active Force. The Marine Corps recruits Reserve
officers exclusively from the ranks of those who have first served a
tour as an Active-Duty Marine officer. We are exploring methods to
increase the Reserve participation of company grade officers in the
Selected Marine Corps Reserve through increased command focus on
Reserve participation upon leaving Active-Duty, and Reserve officer
programs for qualified enlisted marines. The legislation to authorize
the payment of the affiliation bonus will help in this effort.
Accomplishing the Mission
The Marine Corps' recruiting environment is dynamic and
challenging, particularly with regards to market propensity. Part of
the challenge is due to an increased Active-Duty accession mission to
meet the additional authorized end strength in the Marine Corps. Our
success in the future will hinge on our ability to overcome our target
market's low propensity to enlist and the increased cost of
advertising, while maintaining innovation in our marketing campaign.
Marketing by its very nature requires constant change to remain
relevant. While our brand message of ``tough, smart, elite warrior''
has not changed, the Corps continues to explore the most efficient
manner to communicate and appeal to the most qualified young men and
women of the millennial generation. Currently, we are looking to expand
methods to influence the parents of potential applicants. Parents are
the primary influencers of the high school student population and it is
important that we educate them on the benefits of serving in the Marine
Corps.
Ensuring young men and women and their parents hear and understand
the recruiting message requires continual reinforcement through
marketing and advertising programs. To do this we continue to emphasize
paid media, generating leads for recruiters, and providing the
recruiters with effective sales support materials. Quality advertising
aimed at our target market provides the foundation for establishing
awareness about Marine Corps opportunities among young men and women.
Paid advertising continues to be the most effective means to
communicate our message and, as a result, remains the focus of our
marketing efforts. As advertising costs continue to increase it is
imperative that our advertising budgets remain competitive in order to
ensure that our recruiting message reaches the right audience. Marine
Corps recruiting successes over the past years are a direct reflection
of a quality recruiting force and an effective and efficient marketing
and advertising program.
Recruiter Access
The Marine Corps continues to benefit from the legislation enabling
recruiter access to high school student directory information, the same
as afforded other prospective employers. America's youth can learn
about career opportunities in both the public and private sectors now
that our recruiters are afforded equal access. We look forward to your
continued support as we strive to meet the increasing challenges of a
dynamic recruiting environment.
retention
A successful recruiting effort is but one part of placing a
properly trained marine in the right place at the right time. The
dynamics of our manpower system must match skills and grades to our
commanders' needs throughout the operating forces. The Marine Corps
endeavors to attain and maintain stable, predictable retention
patterns. However, as is the case with recruiting, civilian
opportunities abound for marines as employers actively solicit our
young Marine leaders for private sector employment. Leadership
opportunities, our core values, and other similar intangibles are a
large part of the reason we retain dedicated men and women to be
Active-Duty marines after their initial commitment. Of course retention
success is also a consequence of the investments made in tangible forms
of compensation and in supporting our operating forces--giving our
marines what they need to do their jobs in the field, as well as the
funds required to educate and train these phenomenal men and women.
Enlisted Retention
We are a young force. Achieving a continued flow of quality new
accessions is of foundational importance to well-balanced readiness.
Within our 154,600 marine Active-Duty enlisted force, over 27,000 are
still teenagers and 104,000 are on their first enlistment. In fiscal
year 2004, we reenlisted 6,019 first term marines with a 97.7 percent
MOS match. In fiscal year 2005, our career force requirement requires
that we reenlist approximately 25 percent of our first-term marine
population. To better manage the career force, we introduced the
Subsequent Term Alignment Plan in fiscal year 2002 to track
reenlistments in our Active career force. In fiscal year 2004, we again
met our career reenlistment goals and achieved a 96.6 percent skill
match. For our Reserve Force, we satisfied our requirements as we
retained 73.8 percent in fiscal year 2004 slightly above our historical
norm of 70.7 percent.
For fiscal year 2005, we are off to a strong start. The SRB program
greatly complements our reenlistment efforts and clearly improves
retention within our critical skill shortages. In fiscal year 2005, the
Corps is continuing to pay lump sum bonuses, thus increasing the net
present value of the incentive and positively influencing highly
qualified, yet previously undecided, personnel. It is a powerful
influence for the undecided to witness another marine's reenlistment
and receipt of his or her SRB in the total amount. With the added
benefit of the Thrift Savings Program, our marines can now confidently
invest these funds toward their future financial security. The Marine
Corps takes great pride in prudent stewardship of the resources
allocated to the critical SRB program.
A positive trend continues concerning our first term non-expiration
of Active service attrition--those marines who depart before their
enlistment is completed. As with fiscal years 2003 and 2004, we
continue to see these numbers decrease. The implementation of the
crucible and the unit cohesion programs continues to contribute to
improved retention among our young marines who assimilate the cultural
values of the Corps earlier in their career.
Officer Retention
Overall, we continue to achieve our goals for officer retention. We
are retaining experienced and high quality officers. Our aggregate
officer retention rate was 91.0 percent for fiscal year 2004, which is
our historical average. Current officer retention forecasts indicate
healthy continuation rates for the officer force as a whole. Reserve
officer retention in fiscal year 2004 was 75 percent, slightly below
the historical average of 77 percent. For the current year, Reserve
officer retention is back above the historical norms. It is important
to note that high retention in the Active component reduces the number
of officers transitioning (thus accessions) into the Selected Marine
Corps Reserve.
marine corps reserve
Our Reserve component continues to do an exceptional job augmenting
and reinforcing our Active component in support of the global war on
terrorism. Ready, rapidly responsive Marine Reserve Forces provide the
depth, flexibility, and sustainment vital to the success of our Marine
Air Ground Task Forces. To date, over 36,000 Reserve marines have
served on Active-Duty since September 11. The Marine Corps Reserve
continues to recruit and retain the men and women willing to
effectively manage their commitment to help in winning the global war
on terrorism while maintaining their commitments to their families,
their communities and their civilian careers.
Thanks to strong congressional support, the Marine Corps has
trained and equipped its Reserve to be capable of rapid activation and
deployment. This capability allows Reserve combat deployments to mirror
those of the Active component in duration.
More than 13,000 Reserve marines are currently on Active Duty with
over 11,500 in cohesive Reserve ground, aviation and combat support
units and nearly 1,600 serving as individual augments in both Marine
and Joint commands. Sixty-six percent of all mobilized reservists
deploy to the CENTCOM area of operations. To support ongoing mission
requirements for Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), the Marine Corps will
activate, reactivate or extend 67 Combat, Combat Support, and Combat
Service Support units or detachments. The progression of the current
mobilization has reinforced the point that our Reserve Force is a
limited resource that must be carefully managed to ensure optimum
employment over a protracted conflict.
As mentioned, recruiting and retention remain a significant
interest as the Marine Corps Reserve continues its support for the
global war on terrorism. Incentives are an integral tool that aides the
proper manning of our Reserve Force. The funding increases and
flexibility inherent in the Reserve incentives you provided in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 are an
invaluable asset to assist in our continued recruitment and retention
mission. The approved legislation allowing payment of an affiliation
bonus for officers to serve in the Selected Marine Corps Reserve will
greatly assist in increasing officer participation and meeting our
current junior officer requirements.
Healthcare remains an essential part of mobilization readiness for
our Reserve component. The assistance provided by Congress in this area
since September 11 has been invaluable to Reserve marines and their
families who are making significant adjustments in lifestyle to effect
successful mobilizations. Increased flexibility and portability of
healthcare for these families assists in alleviating one of the most
burdensome challenges facing families of deploying Reserve marines.
In an effort to ensure a well-balanced total force and address any
potential challenges that may arise, we are constantly monitoring
current processes and policies, as well as implementing adjustments to
the structure and support of our Reserve Forces. The Marine Corps made
a conscious investment through our Inspector-Instructor Program, which
provides a strong cadre of Active marines to support our Selected
Marine Corps Reserve units. This ensures Selected Marine Corps units
are trained and properly equipped prior to activation, allowing the
Marine Corps to effectively train, mobilize, and deploy its Reserve
Forces.
In order to meet the operational needs of the global war on
terrorism, the Marine Corps is in the process of making adjustments to
the force structure of both the Reserve and Active component. Two
efforts currently underway to rebalance the force for current and
future missions are the IMA study and the previously discussed force
structure review. Implementation of the IMA study results will increase
the number of high demand/low density specialties available for
deployment.
Present policy is to only activate Individual Ready Reserve (IRR)
members who have volunteered for duty. The population of activated IRR
volunteers to date is 323 officers and 634 enlisted. The two primary
means of recruiting IRR volunteers for Individual Augmentee billets is
through the use of Reserve Duty On-Line and the Mobilization Command
Call Center. Currently there are 1,629 Individual Augment billets being
filled by IMAs, IRRs, and retired recall or retired retained marines.
These marines have been critical to filling these requirements.
civilian marines
Civilian marines are integral to the Marine Corps Total Force
concept. We have approximately 24,000 civilian marines, of which
approximately 13,000 are appropriated fund employees, and about 11,000
are non-appropriated fund employees. Our appropriated fund civilian
marines, comprise just 2 percent of the total DOD civilian workforce,
the leanest ratio of civilians to military in the Department. Our non-
appropriated fund personnel are primarily resourced by revenue-
generating activities and services such as exchanges, clubs, golf
courses, bowling centers, and gas stations. Our civilian marines fill
key billets aboard Marine Corps bases and stations, thus freeing
Active-Duty marines to perform their warfighting requirements in the
operating forces.
Marine Corps Civilian Workforce Campaign Plan
Marines, more than ever before, recognize the importance of our
civilian teammates and the invaluable service they provide to our Corps
as an integral component of the Total Force. To that end we continue to
mature and execute our Civilian Workforce Campaign Plan, a strategic
roadmap to achieve a civilian workforce capable of meeting the
challenges of the future. We are committed to building leadership
skills at all levels, providing interesting and challenging training
and career opportunities, and improving the quality of work life for
all appropriated and non-appropriated civilian marines. As part of our
effort to meet our goal of accessing and retaining a select group of
civilians imbued with our core values, we have developed a program to
provide our civilian marines an opportunity to learn about the Marine
Corps ethos, history, and core values--to properly acculturate them to
this special institution. All this supports our value proposition, why
a civilian chooses to pursue a job with the Marine Corps: to ``Support
our marines. Be part of the team.''
National Security Personnel System
The Marine Corps is actively participating with the Department of
Defense in the development and implementation of this new personnel
system. Following an intensive training program for supervisors,
managers, human resources specialists, employees, commanders, and
senior management, we will join with the Department in the first phase
of implementation, tentatively scheduled for July 2005. In the Marine
Corps, we will lead from the top and have our Headquarters Marine Corps
civilian personnel included in the first phase of implementation, known
as `Spiral One.'
information technology
We remain committed to transforming our manpower processes by
leveraging the unique capabilities resident in the Marine Corps Total
Force System (MCTFS), our fully-integrated personnel, pay, and manpower
system that serves Active, Reserve, and retired members. The integrated
nature of MCTFS allowed us to develop our Total Force Administration
System (TFAS); a web based and virtually paperless administration
system that provides marines and commanders 24-hour access to
administrative processes via Marine On Line. Our TFAS allows
administrative personnel to refocus their efforts from routine tasks to
more complex analytical duties, and ultimately will enable greater
efficiencies. Additionally, MCTFS facilitates our single source of
manpower data, directly feeding our Operational Data Store Enterprise
and Total Force Data Warehouse. This distinctive capability provides a
reliable source of data to accurately forecast manpower trends, and
fuels our Manpower Performance Indicators, which provide near real time
graphical representation of the Corps manpower status such as our
deployment tempo. Properly managing our manpower requirements and
processes requires continued investment in modern technologies and we
are committed to these prudent investments.
taking care of marines and their families
Your marines have an inherent ability to perform well in the most
difficult environments, and the current state of combat is no
exception. Though we are an expeditionary force, the demands we are now
experiencing lends new significance to the term ``expeditionary.''
Still, our marines and their families' bravery, courage, and dedication
to mission are unyielding.
Quality-of-Life Investment
The Marine Corps is actively attuned to quality of life. It is
important to note the potential long-term mission of the global war on
terrorism and the challenge to support our community services
infrastructure--both human and material, such as facilities and
equipment. The spirit of service on our human side will never diminish,
but the current rotation cycle and heightened tempo impacts the
resources and time to reconstitute or recapitalize our infrastructure.
As previously stated, our longstanding expeditionary nature and manner
of operation have enabled our success to date. As this tempo continues,
however, our goal will be to ensure no required support is diminished.
To the degree possible, we will adapt and reorient existing support
capabilities, but we will also need to determine if our support
infrastructure requires additional resources for our long-term mission.
This assessment will be done in conjunction with our installation
commanders.
Funding
In terms of resourcing for quality of life community services
programs, I am pleased to note that the Marine Corps achieved the DOD
morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR) funding standard of 85 percent
for Category A Programs and 65 percent for Category B programs this
past year. Our actual fiscal year 2004 percentages were 88 percent and
65 percent, respectively. To achieve this goal, MWR program annual
direct Operations and Maintenance Marine Corps and Operations and
Maintenance Reserve (O&MMC/R) support budget-based funding has been
steadily increased by a total of $15 million from fiscal year 2002 to
fiscal year 2005. Our fiscal year 2005 Marine and Family Services
direct O&MMC/R support is at $47.5 million, including child
development, counseling, transition assistance, relocation assistance,
etc.; and voluntary education is at $46.7 million, including tuition
assistance.
Housing
It is important to mention that proper housing goes hand-in-hand
with our support programs to keep morale high and enhance quality-of-
life. We are providing for our young single marines by focusing on
housing our junior enlisted bachelor personnel in pay grades of E-1
through E-5 in our barracks, with a goal of providing a room standard
that allows two junior enlisted marines (E-1 to E-3) to share a room
with a private bath. By assigning two junior marines to a room, we
believe we are providing the correct balance between their need for
privacy and the Marine Corps' goals to provide companionship,
camaraderie, and unit cohesion. Noncommissioned officers (NCOs) in the
pay grades of E-4 and E-5 are provided a private room and bath. We have
over 170,000 marine family members and we are mindful that the military
lifestyle can be unsettling in some respects as it calls for frequent
relocations and deployments. To show our families that we appreciate
their fortitude in enduring these disruptions, we remain committed to
improving family housing. We have, and will continue to, increase our
quality-housing inventory through public private ventures and military
construction where necessary. Moreover, we are on track to have
contracts in place to eliminate inadequate family housing by the end of
fiscal year 2007.
Deployment Support
The global war on terrorism mission poses dangers, risks, and
periods of separation that test the fortitude and stamina of our
marines and their families. In keeping with our ethos that marines are
marines for life, our commitment to a continuum of care has never been
stronger or more effective. Our installation and operational commanders
are working diligently to ensure that both the deploying marine and the
marines and families who stay behind are provided support services to
enhance their quality-of-life. In this capacity, installation
commanders are continuously evaluating on base and deployed support.
They utilize all available resources, agencies, and methods of service
to broadly plan and deliver seemless support. Our installation
commanders reach out to local and national community service partners
to expand program access and availability, offer on-line and telephonic
assistance programs such as Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS)/
Military OneSource, and flex programs as necessary to decrease low
utilization services and increase additional demand programs. Finally,
as they are closest to the need, they monitor and pulse the community
as needed.
Five years ago we renovated and revitalized our community services
infrastructure and philosophical approach to support services. We
removed program stovepipes that precluded maximum capabilities and
focused the ``united team'' to pull together for the good of the
marines and their families. This renovated organization; MCCS is now 5
years old has matured and not only have they pulled together, they know
the cadence and direction required. I can personally attest to the
wisdom of MCCS, as I was both an installation commander responsible for
pushing support and an operational commander pulling support. Beginning
with Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and continuing through Operation
Iraqi Freedom (OIF), MCCS listened, learned, and continues to respond
to the needs of marines and their families. I would like to highlight
some specific examples of MCCS and other military personnel support.
Throughout all phases of the deployment cycle: during pre-
deployment, in-theater, and in post-deployment, the needs of marines
and their families are addressed. Additionally, home-station support,
which I will discuss below, is a central element of this multi-phased
dynamic that sustains all members of the Marine Corps family.
While in a pre-deployment phase, marines and their families are
briefed on a variety of issues ranging from deployment coping skills,
including the potential of traumatic combat experiences and associated
stress, to financial matters, where they take care of wills, powers of
attorney, and family care plans. At this stage, marine spouses receive
important assistance through Marine Corps Family Team Building Programs
such as the Key Volunteer Network (KVN) and the Lifestyle, Insights,
Networking, Knowledge, and Skills (L.I.N.K.S.) programs. The KVN is the
primary communication link between the commanding officer and unit
families. This spouse-to-spouse connection is used by commanders to
pass important, factual, and timely information on the status and
welfare of the operational unit. L.I.N.K.S. helps our Marine spouses
acclimate to our military lifestyle and learn how to survive the
challenges associated with frequent deployments and separations. When
spouses participate in L.I.N.K.S. prior to deployments, this training
is recognized as a readiness multiplier. This means those spouses who
took advantage of L.I.N.K.S. are more prepared for the experience of
separation and rigors of deployment. Both KVN and L.I.N.K.S training
programs are now available online and have CD-ROM versions for families
away from a base or station, or if they are too busy to attend classes.
To maintain our high level of morale and commitment and help ease
mission-related anxieties during deployment, MCCS and other agencies
provide support to deployed marines in many different forms, and we
adjust these support mechanisms as the intensity of the mission
changes. We have Tactical Field Exchanges, phone service, free Internet
service and expedited mail service. At the camps in Iraq there is a
variety of MWR equipment.
As I have discussed, the Marine Corps Exchange supports deployed
marines but it is also an important center of activity aboard our
installations. As part of the non-pay benefits system, we rely upon the
exchange to provide value through the sale of goods and services, but
to also contribute dividends to support MWR programs that help to make
installations home for our marines and their families.
It is well recognized that mail, voice or other communication, is
the most significant morale enhancer for anyone separated from loved
ones. Beyond quality phone and mail service to keep our deployed
marines in touch with their loved ones back at home, we have a new
communication alternative that we call ``MotoMail,'' for motivational
mail. MotoMail allows family and friends to rapidly communicate with
deployed marines who do not have Internet access readily available. To
connect, friends and family go to an established website and send an
email to the deployed marine, where it is downloaded and automatically
printed, folded and sealed by our Postal Marines for complete privacy.
The messages are usually delivered within 24 hours or less. As of
February 22, more than 59,000 MotoMail letters have been delivered.
Reducing Stress
To deal with individual and readiness concerns in theater, the
Marine Corps has a range of proactive counseling services. We are ever
watchful for symptoms and risks of untreated combat stress and its
signs, and advise marines of the resources available for treatment. We
also provide in-theater counseling through the Operational Stress
Control and Readiness (OSCAR) program, which embeds mental health
professionals within the Marine Division, where they offer counseling
in close a proximity to the combat operations as possible. OSCAR keeps
marines with low-level problems at their assigned duties and allows
those with more severe conditions to immediately receive appropriate
treatment. Reports indicate that units implementing the OSCAR program
have a marked decrease in MEDEVACs for mental health reasons. Before
marines depart theater, we have a decompression period when military
chaplains provide our warrior transition brief. The brief consists of
sessions designed to help marines realize that they have been in
combat, that they are preparing to rejoin their families at home, and
where they want to go with relationships in their personal lives.
In the post-deployment phase, when marines are back at their home
station, there is a decompression period before they are permitted to
go on leave. Supportive services are available on installations through
chaplains, medical treatment facilities, and MCCS for combat stress
related issues, relationship enrichment, drug or alcohol abuse,
domestic violence, and financial management. Additionally, Marine
families are supported by MCCS counseling and advocacy programs and a
spouse return and reunion briefing, which is provided on a voluntary
basis to interested spouses.
As I referenced earlier in this testimony, deployment support
includes important home-station support. We have a wide array of
services to strengthen family readiness. The Marine and Family Services
Program provides counseling as needed, child development programs and
respite child care services, support for marines with exceptional
family members, personal financial management guidance, and information
hotlines to provide accurate information, useful resources, and helpful
referrals pertaining to our deployments. We also provide recreational
and stress alleviating opportunities to help them through the
separation and provide a sense of normalcy as they carry on until their
marine returns.
Child Care
With regard to child development, we fully realize that when a
parent deploys, the remaining parent can experience stress and burnout.
Parenting issues can add to the stress placed on families during these
times. We thank you for the supplemental funds you provided last year.
We are using them to provide respite care, extended childcare hours,
childcare during deployment briefs, and deployment training materials
geared for children. We also sponsored the Enhanced Extended Child Care
Initiative, which reduces stress on Marine Corps families by providing
care during nontraditional hours (i.e., evenings, weekends, and
holidays). It is also designed to lower costs for military families
during periods of training, deployments, family emergencies or illness.
To help our families that reside in remote and isolated areas, we are
developing a partnership with the National Association of Child Care
Resources and Referral Agencies to provide comprehensive childcare
consumer education and referrals.
Beyond addressing parental burnout, we are also mindful that
wartime deployments take their toll on the very youngest members of our
Marine families. We work to help these youngsters cope with what can be
very confusing and frightening situations. For example, we have a new
deployment video, ``Nothing to Worry About,'' for Marine Corps
families, especially children ages 4 to 10. It will help families to
understand the impact of deployment on children and help children
better understand what their parents may be doing and experiencing
while deployed. It also discusses means for communication between the
children and the deployed parent. In addition, Marine and Family
Services at Camp Pendleton has partnered with the National Child
Traumatic Stress Network and the Naval Hospital Department of
Psychiatry at San Diego to develop appropriate protocols to assess the
impact of a parent's combat-related traumatic exposure on their
children and family functioning.
Military OneSource
I am now pleased to comment on the continued success of Military
OneSource, another powerful resource for our marines and their
families. The Marine Corps began OneSource as MCCS OneSource, now
expanded to all the Services. Everyday, we find ways to use this
service, which provides round-the-clock information and referral
assistance service and is available via toll-free telephone and
Internet access. As recently added support, separating servicemembers
and their family members are eligible for 180 days and our seriously
injured and the survivors of those who have died while on Active-Duty
are eligible indefinitely. Where necessary, referrals for face-to-face
counseling sessions are available to help marines or their families
cope with deployments. This program is especially important for our
Reserve marine families not located near military installations.
Suicide Prevention
For all our efforts to take care of marines and their families, we
are not immune to societal risk factors, such as suicide, domestic
violence, and drug and alcohol abuse. The Marine Corps is a youthful
and vigorous force. Our expeditionary nature and current operational
tempo brings stress, and for some, heightened anxiety. The mission is
intense. Knowing that negative behaviors may exist or manifest to
uncontrolled levels is of utmost concern to us. As such, we
aggressively work to prevent these behaviors or if necessary intervene.
As I'm sure this committee would agree, one suicide is too many. While
our suicide rates for 2004 were up compared with previous years, the
total remains below the national average for the demographic group.
Moreover, there are no clear trends among any specific groups.
Interestingly, the rate is higher among those who have not deployed.
Though the suicide rate remains within normal limits, we continue to
closely monitor this issue and have taken preemptive preventative
actions. Last December, the commandant provided guidance to commanders
on watch signs for stress that could escalate to self-harm.
Additionally, in the near future, we will issue ``A Leader's Guide for
Managing Marines in Distress.'' We have also taken steps to ensure that
the command climate is conducive to seeking help.
Domestic Violence
With regard to domestic violence, I am proud to report that our
prevention and intervention measures continue to be successful.
Domestic violence in the Marine Corps has been steadily declining since
fiscal year 2001. Over the past year, both child and spouse abuse have
declined 27 percent and 18 percent, respectively.
Substance Abuse
Drug and alcohol abuse remains a negative throughout society and we
at the Marine Corps know that we must be mindful of such influences on
our young population who continue to endure the challenges associated
with our current deployment climate. Our leadership monitors risk areas
and works to prevent substance abuse incidents, thereby decreasing the
need for intervention. Our aggressive testing, commander's commitment
against drug use, and targeted education allows us to sustain a low
drug positive rate. I am pleased to report that the positive drug-
testing rate for the Marine Corps is less than 1 percent.
Sexual Assault
It is the Marine Corps' unequivocal position that sexual assaults
are a criminal act and will not be tolerated in any capacity. We, along
with DOD and our sister Services, continue to be proactively engaged in
this matter, issuing new policy and guidance, focusing and coordinating
procedures to address alleged offenders and the specific needs of
sexual assault victims. We formally established the Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response Office to serve as the integrating entity (i.e.
health services, legal, law enforcement, training and education, etc.)
for all sexual assault efforts. This cross-discipline effort allows us
to fully address the issues relating to the victim, alleged offender,
prevention and response. As for caring for victims, the Marine Corps
currently has 31 federally employed or contracted victim advocates and
125 highly trained volunteers at 17 installations. These advocates
provide information, guidance, and support to victims of domestic
violence and sexual assault. With regard to deployed marines, a
Uniformed Victim Advocate (UVA) program has been established to assist
deployed unit commanders in supporting victims of sexual assault in the
theater of operations. To date, 172 commander-appointed UVAs have been
trained. Some of these UVAs have deployed to Iraq and some will remain
to perform training for other UVAs at home station. It is our intent to
have a minimum of two UVAs each per squadron and battalion throughout
the Marine Corps. Also, on this important topic, I am pleased to report
that the Marine Corps began developing and improving sexual assault
policies prior to the requirements of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. Of course, we will continue to
adjust policies, where and if necessary, to meet the standards set
forth by Congress and the DOD.
Casualty Assistance
As this testimony reflects, we do our very best to support marines
and their families. As of February 22, 2005, there have been 467 (365
hostile and 102 non-hostile) marines killed in Operations Enduring
Freedom (OEF) and Iraqi Freedom (OIF). There have been 4,010 very
serious and serious injuries or illnesses (3,711 hostile and 299 non-
hostile). Of these casualties, 48 of those killed, and 350 of those
wounded, were from the Reserve component. Support in the wake of a
casualty must be beyond reproach, and the Marine Corps relies upon our
expansive network of approximately 5,000 trained Casualty Assistance
Calls Officers (CACOs) who offer support to Marine families when they
need it most. CACOs are the prime point of contact for surviving
families and we see to it that their training matches the sensitivity
of their mission. The training provided by the Casualty Section at
Headquarters Marine Corps is a highly detailed ``train the trainer''
program. The actual training of CACOs is a command responsibility but
Casualty Section representatives conduct training on a regular basis at
all the bases and stations. Additionally, the Marine Corps CACO
Training Information Brief and CACO Guide to Benefits and Entitlements
are available on the web to all assigned CACOs and provide expansive
information on the duties of the CACO. We immediately update our
training documents as information changes to continue effective support
for assigned CACOs. We also continuously review our CACO program for
potential improvements. Most recently, we incorporated into the CACO
Guide a list of reputable benevolent and philanthropic agencies to help
our survivors in alleviating financial burdens and support gaps
associated with existing benefits and entitlements. In the event a
Marine is assigned to perform CACO duties and has not had the
opportunity to attend a training session, he or she is walked through
every phase of the process by our Casualty Section utilizing the CACO
Training Guide. Furthermore, our Casualty Section personnel are
available around-the-clock to ensure the CACO receives the necessary
assistance to provide the right support to our surviving family
members.
We diligently work to stay in touch with our Marine families after
the death of their loved one. Our Casualty Section engages next of kin,
via casualty assistance correspondence, on several occasions following
the death of a marine. General information on the circumstances of the
casualty, survivors guides, veterans benefits information, and
information regarding benevolent and philanthropic agencies are
provided immediately to assist Marine families as they make the
difficult transition to life without their marine. Follow-up reports on
the circumstances of the casualty are mailed when casualty information
changes. A 60-day follow-up letter to the next of kin is also sent to
survivors. All of this correspondence includes a reminder to notify the
Casualty Section if there are any questions or concerns related to the
marine's death or the assistance they are receiving.
We understand that life for Marine families following the death of
their marine can be tumultuous. Even the simplest tasks can become
arduous and confusing. To ease this confusion and help surviving
families take care of themselves and their affairs, our Personal and
Family Readiness Division at Heaquarters Marine Corps stands ready to
help navigate various benefits and programs, such as the TRICARE
system. An additional resource is Military OneSource, which I
previously mentioned. This service provides a wealth of helpful
information and referrals on many subjects, including parenting,
education, finances, legal issues, elder care, health and wellness,
deployment, combat stress, crisis support, and relocation. As I stated,
survivors are eligible for Military OneSource indefinitely; and we
believe it will continue to provide help and some measure of comfort to
our families.
We are very appreciative of the many benevolent organizations that
support our marines. Such organizations include: the Navy/Marine Corps
Relief Society, the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, the Marine
Corps Scholarship Foundation, the Fisher Foundation, the Injured Marine
Semper Fi Fund, and the Intrepid Foundation. We look forward to
productive and lasting coordination with the various groups who do so
much for our brave troops and their families.
As for our marines who sustain injuries in combat, we have a new
web-based Injured/Ill Patient Tracking system. The system is linked to
the Corps' casualty databases and contains information on all injured/
ill reported via a casualty report. The system allows Patient
Administration Teams (PAT) to enter the most up-to-date general
treatment information and travel plans and now commanders at all levels
have visibility of their marines during all stages in the medical
pipeline. The Marine Corps uses PATs throughout the entire medical
pipeline, from Iraq through Bethesda and points beyond. Our PATs
provide tremendous support to the families of our marines brought to
the beside of an injured marine by the Marine Corps on invitational
travel orders. For example, they meet arriving families at the
airports, arrange hotels, provide transportation to and from the
hospital on a daily basis, and provide any other assistance the family
may need. PATs also coordinate the ``warm handoff'' to other hospitals
that will provide additional care and support to our marines.
marine for life--injured support
Building on and leveraging the organizational network and strengths
of our previously established Marine for Life Program, we are currently
implementing an Injured Support Program to assist the disabled after
they are discharged. The goal is to ensure that these marines know that
the Corps will always be there for them, and to bridge the often
difficult and lengthy gap between the care we in the Marine Corps and
Navy provide, and that which the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
assumes. The key is to ensure continuity of support through transition
and assistance for however long it might take, to include providing
assistance during the gap in entitlements. Planned features of the
program include advocacy within the Marine Corps and the Department of
the Navy for the disabled and their families, and helping them in
dealing with external agencies from which they may receive support. An
extremely important part of this will be both pre and post service
separation case management, assistance in working with physical
evaluation boards, creation of an interactive web site for disability/
benefit information, assistance with Federal hiring preferences and
law, and improved VA handling of marine cases. The latter is being
effected by the attachment of a liaison officer embedded within the VA
headquarters. The Marine for Life Injured Support Program began
operations in early January, and it will continually evolve and improve
its services. If there is any area that needs continued effort and
interest, it is in the long-term help and assistance for our disabled
personnel and their families.
The Marine Corps looks forward to our continued partnership with
Congress to enhance support services for marines and Marine families
when they are dealing with the injury or loss of a loved one. In this
regard, I thank you for the new authorities provided in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 to include the parents
of deceased servicemembers for burial travel and up to three family
members to travel to the bedside of an injured servicemember. These new
authorities go a long way toward helping our Marine families through
difficult times.
We appreciate the heightened congressional interest in caring for
our war casualties and their families. There are no words, deeds or
compensatory measures that can take the place of our fallen marines.
That said, we must do our very best to support those families who are
forced to live without their loved one. We must take every feasible
step to make the survivors of our fallen heroes whole monetarily, so
that they are not unduly burdened with financial worry. Such support
includes appropriate death gratuities, life insurance, ending unfair
pension offsets, and ensuring that dependents are cared for with regard
to healthcare and education. There are various legislative remedies
currently under discussion. However, we should make certain that the
final remedy treats all servicemembers equitably. We simply cannot
distinguish between types of service to this great Nation.
conclusion
Through the remainder of fiscal year 2005, and into fiscal year
2006, our Nation will remain challenged on many fronts as we prosecute
the global war on terrorism. Services will be required to meet
commitments, both at home and abroad. Marines, sailors, airmen, and
soldiers are the heart of our Services--they are our most precious
assets--and we must continue to attract and retain the best and
brightest into our ranks. Transformation will require that we blend
together the ``right'' people and the ``right'' equipment as we design
our ``ideal'' force. Personnel costs are a major portion of the
Department of Defense and Service budgets, and our challenge is to
effectively and properly balance personnel, readiness, and
modernization costs to provide mission capable forces. We are involved
in numerous studies regarding human resources strategy to support our
military, which requires we must balance the uniqueness of the
individual Services. In some cases a one-size fits all approach may be
best, in others flexibility to support service unique requirements may
be paramount. Regardless, we look forward to working with Congress to
maintain readiness and take care of your marines.
The Marine Corps continues to be a significant force provider and
major participant in joint operations. Our successes have been achieved
by following the same core values today that gave us victory on
yesterday's battlefields. Our Active, Reserve, and civilian marines
remain our most important assets and, with your support, we can
continue to achieve our goals and provide what is required to
accomplish the requirements of the Nation. Marines are proud of what
they do! They are proud of the ``Eagle, Globe, and Anchor'' and what it
represents to our country. It is our job to provide for them the
leadership, resources, quality-of-life, and moral guidance to carry our
proud Corps forward. With your support, a vibrant Marine Corps will
continue to meet our Nation's call as we have for the past 230 years!
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony.
Senator Graham. Thank you, General.
General Brady.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. ROGER A. BRADY, USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
STAFF, PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
General Brady. Mr. Chairman and Senator Nelson, thank you
for the opportunity to be with you here today.
In the years since the fall of the Soviet Union, America's
airmen have responded to dramatic changes in our force
structure and the world security environment. We continue to
streamline our Active-Duty Force while, remaining engaged
around the world at levels higher than at any time during the
Cold War.
As we work toward the future, we must determine our
personnel needs, shape the force to meet those needs, provide
relief for our most heavily stressed career fields, and develop
the leaders who will take the reins deep into the 21st century.
These are complex and interrelated issues, challenging how we
manage the Total Force.
We are on target to meet end strength by the end of fiscal
year 2005. We will continue to bring balance to the force by
right-sizing and right-shaping specific career specialties and
overall officer/enlisted skill sets. We remain postured to use
various programs already in place such as Career Job
Reservation, noncommissioned officer (NCO) retraining, Palace
Chase, and Blue to Green initiatives. Due to the success of our
programs thus far, you can expect to see continuing adjustments
to our current force-shaping criteria that will ensure we
right-size and right-shape our force.
As we return to our authorized end strength, relief is
flowing to over-stressed career fields. This is a multi-step
process, but our guiding principle is simple: we must have the
right people with the right skills in the right place to meet
the needs of our Air Expeditionary Force (AEF). We are doing
this prudently, identifying specialties and specific year
groups within those specialties where we have more people than
we need. At the same time, we are correcting our skill
imbalances by realigning manpower and expanding training
pipelines.
We are also taking a hard look at where our people serve.
We have airmen serving outside the Air Force who do not deploy
as part of an AEF. They serve in joint and defense agency
positions. While some of these positions require uniformed
people, others do not. Through military-to-civilian conversions
and competitive sourcing initiatives, in consultation with
other agencies, we are returning some of these airmen to Air
Force positions.
The Guard and Reserve obviously play a critical role in the
Total Force. Today 25 percent of the air expeditionary packages
are composed of National Guard and Air Force Reserve
volunteers. As we take steps to ensure the long-term health of
our Active-Duty Forces, we must do the same for our citizen
airmen, and bolstering the ranks of the Air Reserve component
is a critical part of our force shaping.
While reducing Active-Duty accessions is one tool currently
being used to bring the force down to authorized levels, it is
imperative that we continue to renew and replenish the ranks
with targeted recruiting. For fiscal year 2005, we plan to
access 19,000 enlisted members, and just over 5,000 officers.
This 1-year reduction in our recruiting goal is part of a
deliberate effort to reduce force size without jeopardizing
long-term health. A 1-year reduction will create a temporary
decrease, offset by the number of people accessed, in preceding
and subsequent years. Continued congressional support of our
recruiting and marketing programs is critical to maintain the
Air Force's competitiveness in a dynamic job market. We must
all remember that ours is a recruited force, which means we
must be competitive in the national personnel marketplace to
both recruit and retain our people.
A vital element for success is the ability to offer bonuses
and incentives where we have traditionally experienced
shortfalls, and we need the continuing authority to use
incentive tools flexibly in a dynamic personnel market.
Congressional support for these programs, along with increases
in pay and benefits and quality-of-life initiatives, have been
critical to our success in recruiting and retaining airmen and
their families, and we are most appreciative of that.
To achieve the Secretary of Defense's objective of shifting
resources ``from bureaucracy to battlefield,'' we are
overhauling our personnel services--our Personnel Services
Delivery Transformation dramatically modernizes the processes,
organizations, and technology by which we support airmen and
their commanders. Routine personnel transactions, for instance,
may now be done ``on-line.'' As a result, we deliver higher
quality personnel services with greater access, speed,
accuracy, reliability, and efficiency.
Our civilian work force will go through a significant
transformation as well with implementation of the DOD National
Security Personnel System (NSPS), a more flexible civilian
personnel system that will improve the way we hire, assign,
compensate, and reward our valuable civilian employees. This is
the most comprehensive change to the Federal personnel system
in more than 30 years and a key enabler in the Department's
achievement of Total Force management.
While we continue to size and shape the force to meet our
evolving mission, we must remain attentive to the quality of
service for our members. In this regard, we completed an Air
Force-wide assessment of our sexual assault prevention and
response capabilities. A campaign plan was approved, and we are
implementing specific initiatives to better understand the
problem of sexual assault, to do everything within our ability
to prevent it, and prepare ourselves to provide consistent and
continuing care for victims when it occurs.
We re-emphasized and continue to stress the need for airmen
to look after one another. We are weaving this mindset into the
very fabric of our culture. Our airmen have a responsibility to
a part of the well-being of their wingmen--their fellow airmen.
This is not a program, it is a mind set, a reaffirmation of our
culture to take better care of our most valuable resource--our
people.
As we continue to develop and shape the force to meet the
demands of the AEF, we will seek more efficient and effective
service delivery methods. We will leverage opportunities to
educate future leaders and make the extra efforts required to
recruit and retain the incredible men and women who will take
on the challenge of defending our Nation well into the 21st
century. Undergirding this effort will be an aggressive
commitment to nurture and sustain our core values of Service,
Integrity, and Excellence, which makes ours the most respected
Air and Space Force in the world.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for
calling this hearing and for your continued support for the men
and women of your Air Force.
[The prepared statement of General Brady follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Roger A. Brady, USAF
introduction
In the nearly 15 years since the fall of the Soviet Union,
America's airmen have responded to dramatic changes in our force
structure and the world security environment. We continue to streamline
our Active-Duty Force, all the while remaining engaged around the world
at levels higher than at any time during the Cold War. To prevail in a
dangerous and ever-changing world, we transformed ourselves from a
heavy, forward-based presence designed to contain communism into an
agile, expeditionary force, capable of rapidly responding on a global
scale, with tailored forces ready to deal with any contingency. Since
the attacks of September 11, 2001, our transformation took on an even
more urgent and accelerated pace. With safety at home directly
challenged, domestic security rose to the forefront and we went on the
offensive to attack terrorism on a global scale. While we've enjoyed
great success, this transformation is in its infancy and there is still
much to do.
The first step in our transformation was to establish a set of
strategic goals to focus our personnel mission, and shed light on the
specific capabilities our system offers to our airmen and their
leaders. We set out to define the force, implementing a capabilities-
based requirements system that meets surge requirements and optimizes
force mix (Active-Duty, Air Reserve component, civilian, and
contractors) in order to produce a flexible and responsive force.
Additionally, we continually seek out ways to renew the force,
maintaining a diverse, agile workforce that leverages synergy between
Active-Duty, Air Reserve, and civilian components, and private industry
to meet requirements and sustain capabilities. Throughout the process,
we committed ourselves to develop future leaders by synchronizing
training, education, and experience to continuously create innovative,
flexible, and capable airmen to successfully employ air and space
power. Key to our success, we identified the need to continually
sustain the force through focused investment in airmen and their
families. We will also synchronize our efforts to implement a robust
strategic planning framework, understand the Air Force human resource
investment, and link programming and legislative development to the
plan. Finally, we will transform how we deliver customer service,
creating a leaner, more cost-effective, customer-focused Human Resource
Service to support the Air Expeditionary Force.
At the heart of our efforts was the creation of an environment, and
the associated tools necessary, to more deliberately develop airmen to
be the leaders at all levels in the years to come. Our force
development efforts extend across the Total Force, encompassing
officers, enlisted, civilian employees, and Air National Guard and Air
Reserve members.
As we work towards the future, we must determine our end strength
needs, shape the force to meet those needs, provide relief for our most
heavily stressed career fields, and develop the leaders who will take
the reins deep into the 21st century. These are complex and inter-
related issues, challenging how we manage the Total Force.
The success of our efforts is no small measure due to the
outstanding support we've received from Congress. You've approved
significant advances in pay, benefits, and retention incentives for the
men and women who serve in all of the military services. These
initiatives made a significant difference in Air Force readiness and in
quality of life for our members and their families. In the coming years
we look forward to your continued support in helping us develop a force
the American people will continue to be proud of; a highly skilled,
professional force dedicated to the defense of our great Nation.
Our work in shaping the force is key to honing our combat
capability. The core of this capability is the professional airman who
voluntarily serves each and every day. Airmen create air and space
power, turning ideas, tools, tactics, techniques, and procedures into
power projection, global mobility, and battle space effects. With this
understanding, the Air Force embraced a personnel vision and strategic
planning model to transform airmen management across the Total Force
(Active-Duty, Air National Guard and Reserve; officer, enlisted, and
civilian). Additionally, we refocused our personnel processes and
delivery systems on achieving capabilities and creating effects to
develop the right people, with the skills, knowledge, and experience
necessary to perform their missions in the right place at the right
time.
This vision succinctly defines the role of our manpower, personnel,
and training professionals: detailing mission requirements; continually
refreshing the pool to maintain an effective balance of youth and
vigor, age and experience; deliberately developing the skills,
knowledge, and experience required by our combatant and support
missions; sustaining the force by meeting the needs of our airmen and
their families; and providing integrated program management and service
delivery systems.
Important to note, our transformation doesn't end with military
members. With the increasing threat of an enemy untethered to national
borders with the flexibility and speed to attack without warning, it
became obvious to all, that the institutionalized bureaucracy, which
served us well throughout the Cold War had to transform as well. The
National Security Personnel System (NSPS) enables our civilian force
development initiatives in putting the right person in the right job at
the right time. It provides the flexibility to address emerging threats
quickly by freeing up essential military resources and allows for
increased integration of military and civilian roles, ultimately
translating into a more versatile, more responsive ability to provide
national defense.
All of these initiatives are designed to do one thing--take care of
people. Our force thrives due to the expertise and professionalism of
its airmen. Unfortunately, recent events revealed a longstanding
societal problem that threatens everything we hold dear. To address
this issue, as well as others such as suicide and accident prevention,
we are embracing a cultural shift to better take care of each other
personally and professionally. Our commanders have increased the
emphasis on the manner in which professional airmen relate to each
other, including a zero tolerance acceptance level for inappropriate
behavior of all kinds, and a focused effort to take better care of each
other.
This statement represents our vision of the way ahead for Air Force
people. To place these issues in context, we will begin by discussing
the Air Force core competency directly affecting every Air Force
member: Developing airmen. This core competency is at the heart of our
strategic vision for Air Force personnel.
developing airmen
To adapt to dramatic changes in force structure and the security
environment, we established a set of strategic goals to focus our
personnel mission.
Force Development: Right People, Right Place, Right Time
Over the past 18 months, the Air Force implemented a new Force
development structure to get the right people in the right job at the
right time with the right skills, knowledge, and experience. Force
development combines focused assignments and education and training
opportunities to prepare our people to meet the mission needs of our
Air Force. Rather than allowing chance or ad hoc decisions to guide an
airman's experience, we will take a deliberate approach to develop
officers, enlisted, and civilian employees throughout our Total Force.
Through targeted education, training, and mission-related experience,
we will develop professional airmen into joint force warriors with the
skills needed across the tactical, operational, and strategic levels of
conflict. Their mission will be to accomplish the joint mission,
motivate teams, mentor subordinates, and train their successors.
One of the first steps in implementing our development efforts was
the creation of individualized development plans. These plans are a
critical communication tool capturing the member's ``career''
development ideas, including desired career path choices, assignment,
and developmental education preferences. These plans flow through the
chain of command, to include their most senior commanders, for
endorsement. The newly created Development Team (DT), comprised of
senior leaders from the functional community, carefully reviews each
individualized career plan, along with commander's comments, and Senior
Rater input. Targeting Air Force requirements, the teams place a
developmental ``vector'' into the plan as input for our assignment
teams, and immediate feedback to the member and commander regarding
their expressed development plans. Assignment teams match members to
assignments using Developmental Team vectors; thus, ``developing'' our
people to meet Air Force requirements.
This year also saw a continued focus on developmental education
with continued expansion to include not only traditional Professional
Military Education (PME), but also efforts to reduce resident PME time
through Automated Distance Learning (ADL) as well as advanced academic
degree programs, specialty schools, fellowships, education with
industry, and internships. Our development teams are using the
individualized development plans, along with the member's record and
Air Force requirements, to make educational recommendations to the
Developmental Education Designation Board. This board designates the
right school for the right member at the right time. Intermediate
Developmental Education and Senior Developmental Education prepare
members for a developmental assignment following the respective
schools. This two-dimensional process facilitates the transition from
one level of responsibility to the next. All developmental education
assignments are made with the emphasis on the best utilization of the
member's background, functional skills, and valuable time, to meet Air
Force requirements.
One of our most recent development efforts has been broadening the
focus to include our enlisted corps. Beginning with the next promotion
cycle, we will stand up a new top-level course of enlisted PME designed
specifically for those selected to serve as Chief Master Sergeants. The
course will focus on leadership in the operational and strategic
environments, and will constitute a substantial leap forward in the
development of our Chiefs. Another segment of warriors requiring
special attention is our cadre of space professionals--those that
design, build, and operate our space systems. As military dependence on
space grows, the Air Force continues to develop this cadre to meet our
Nation's needs. Our Space Professional Strategy is the roadmap for
developing that cadre. Air Force space professionals will develop more
in-depth expertise in operational and technical space specialties
through tailored assignments, education, and training. This roadmap
will result in a team of scientists, engineers, program managers, and
operators skilled and knowledgeable in developing, acquiring, applying,
sustaining, and integrating space capabilities.
The bottom line of our Force development efforts is to provide an
effects and competency-based development process by connecting the
depth of expertise in the individual's primary career field (Air Force
Specialty Code) with the necessary education, training, and experiences
to produce more capable and diversified leaders.
Every aspect of the Total Force development environment is designed
to develop professional airmen who instinctively leverage their
respective strengths as a team. The success of this effort depends on
continued cultivation and institutional understanding of and interest
in Force development, promoting an understanding of the competency
requirements of leaders, and funding for the associated development
initiatives.
Force Shaping
We are on track to bring Active-Duty end strength to the
congressionally authorized level of 359,700 by the end of fiscal year
2005. This planned reduction shapes the future force without
jeopardizing career field health. The force shaping plan has two
phases: 1) increase voluntary separations and retirements, and 2)
further increase voluntary separations while simultaneously reducing
programmed accessions. Phase 1, implemented in February 2004, was used
to judge retention behavior and ensure a measured approach to reducing
end strength. Phase 2, begun in May 2004, opened the aperture to allow
more servicemembers an opportunity to leave Active Duty. Additionally,
we significantly reduced the Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) program
from 146 to 62 enlisted skills, resulting in a significant decrease in
first term reenlistment rates; and we continue to review further
reduction of SRB skills.
Specific force shaping initiatives include the Palace Chase
program--early separation from Active-Duty to serve with the Air
National Guard or Air Force Reserve--waiving of Active-Duty service
commitments, and resurrection of the Career Job Reservation Program to
correct skill imbalances and re-train first-term airmen into needed
skills. Additionally, we took advantage of the statutory authority that
allows 2 percent of colonels and lieutenant colonels with 2 years time-
in-grade to retire in grade instead of waiting the normal 3 years; and
some Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) graduates may now
go directly into the Air National Guard or Air Force Reserve.
In fiscal year 2004, we lowered accession goals by approximately
3,000. In fiscal year 2005, we continued to lower our accession goals,
and have temporarily limited enlisted accessions to only the 58 most
critical combat and combat support skills. We plan to open enlisted
accessions for the remaining skills in late spring 2005, if we are at
our authorized strength.
The results of our force shaping efforts are positive, facilitating
the migration of personnel into critical shortage specialties while
reducing manpower to ensure we meet authorized end strength
requirements by the end of fiscal year 2005.
Rebalancing the Force
As we return to our authorized end strength, relief is flowing to
``over stressed'' career fields. This is a multi-step process, but our
guiding principle is simple--we will properly size and shape the force
to meet the needs of the Air Expeditionary Force. We are doing this
prudently, identifying specialties and specific year groups within
those specialties where we have more people than we need. At the same
time, we are correcting our skill imbalances by realigning manpower and
expanding training pipelines.
We are also taking a hard look at where our people serve. We have
airmen serving outside the Air Force who don't deploy as part of an Air
Expeditionary Force. They serve in joint and defense agency positions,
some of which require uniformed people; however, others do not. Through
military-to-civilian conversions and competitive sourcing initiatives,
we are returning these airmen ``to the fold.''
The Guard and Reserve play a critical role in this endeavor. Today,
25 percent of the air expeditionary packages are composed of Air
National Guard and Air Force Reserve volunteers. As we take steps to
ensure the long-term health of our Active-Duty Forces, we must do the
same for our citizen airmen.
Recruiting/Retention
While reducing accessions is a tool currently being used to bring
the force down to authorized levels, it is imperative that we continue
to renew and replenish the ranks with targeted recruiting. For fiscal
year 2005, we plan to access nearly 19,000 enlisted members and just
over 5,000 officers--a 44-percent reduction from normal enlisted
recruiting levels and a slightly lower level of officers compared to
fiscal year 2004.
As outlined under force shaping, a significant 1-year reduction in
our recruiting goal is part of a deliberate effort to reduce force size
without jeopardizing long-term health. A 1-year reduction will create a
temporary decrease offset by the number of personnel accessed in
preceding and subsequent years. We are committed to returning to normal
recruiting targets as quickly as possible. Continued congressional
support of our recruiting and marketing programs is critical to
maintain the Air Force's competitiveness in a dynamic job market.
A vital element for success is the ability to offer bonuses and
incentives where we have traditionally experienced shortfalls. To
protect this valuable resource we ensure active senior leadership
management, including semi-annual reviews of which career specialties,
and which year groups within those specialties, are eligible for
bonuses. Congressional support for these programs, along with increases
in pay and benefits and quality of life initiatives, have greatly
helped us retain airmen and their families.
Personnel Service Delivery Transformation
To achieve the Secretary of Defense's objective of shifting
resources ``from bureaucracy to battlefield,'' personnel services are
being overhauled. Our personnel service delivery transformation
dramatically modernizes the processes, organizations, and technology by
which we support airmen and their commanders. Routine personnel
transactions, for instance, may now be done ``on-line.''
As a result, we deliver higher-quality personnel services with
greater access, speed, accuracy, reliability, and efficiency. We
programmed the resulting manpower savings to other compelling Air Force
needs over the next 6 years. This initiative enhances our ability to
acquire, train, educate, and deliver airmen with the needed skills,
knowledge, and experience to accomplish Air Force missions.
National Security Personnel System
Our civilian workforce will go through a significant transformation
as well with implementation of the Department of Defense (DOD) NSPS.
NSPS is a simplified and more flexible civilian personnel system that
will improve the way we hire, assign, compensate, and reward our
valuable civilian employees. This modern, agile human resource system
will be responsive to the national security environment, while
preserving employee protections and benefits, as well as the core
values of the civil service. Implementation will begin as early as July
2005.
NSPS design and development has been a broad-based, participative
process including employees, supervisors and managers, unions, employee
advocacy groups, and various public interest groups. Employees slated
for conversion to the new system will be included in groupings called
Spirals. Spiral One will include approximately 85,400 General Schedule
and Acquisition Demonstration Project, U.S.-based Air Force civilian
employees and will be rolled out in three phases over an 18-month
period. The labor relations provisions of NSPS will be implemented
across the Department this summer as well. NSPS is the most
comprehensive new Federal personnel system in more than 50 years and a
key component in the Department's achievement of a total force
structure.
Culture of Airmen
We completed an Air Force-wide assessment of our sexual assault
prevention and response capabilities, knowing we were not where we
needed to be in addressing this societal problem that has serious
readiness implications. A campaign plan was approved, and we are
implementing specific initiatives to better understand the problem of
sexual assault, do everything within our ability to prevent it, and
prepare ourselves to provide consistent and continuing care for victims
when it occurs.
In response to an increased suicide rate among airmen, we re-
emphasized, and continue to stress, the need for airmen to look after
one another. Commanders and co-workers are rethinking the way airmen
interact with one another, calling attention to behavioral indicators
and risk factors associated with suicide. Safety and risk management
are also being emphasized to reduce the number of accident-related
fatalities. We are weaving this mindset into the very fabric of our
culture.
All airmen have a responsibility to get involved, pay attention and
ensure the health and well being of their wingman. It's not a program,
it's a mindset; a cultural shift designed to take better care of our
most valuable resource--our people.
conclusion
As we continue to develop and shape the force to meet the demands
of the Air Expeditionary Force, we continue to seek more efficient
service delivery methods, opportunities to educate our future leaders,
and make the extra efforts required to recruit and retain the
incredible men and women who will take on the challenge of defending
our Nation well into the 21st century. While doing so, we will remain
vigilant in our adherence to our core values of Service, Integrity, and
Excellence which make ours the greatest Air and Space Force in the
world.
Senator Graham. Thank you all. That was well done. I
appreciate it.
I will start off, and we will just have a discussion among
ourselves. I am going to throw out a couple of concepts. We
have very talented staff that can take all of your requests and
sanitize them. We will meet as many of them as we can, but in
our short time together, I would like to try to talk about some
big themes from a business point of view, for lack of a better
word.
One big theme focuses on the difference between retaining
and recruiting that seems to be obvious. Is this an acute
problem or a chronic problem, Dr. Chu?
Dr. Chu. I think this is a problem of the moment brought
about by a confluence of factors. Yes, sir, it is different,
and you have noticed that in the testimony that I and my
colleagues offered. We are doing quite well, Active and
Reserve, on retention. We are having our challenges in some
areas of recruiting. Some of it is the larger circumstance of
our economy. That is something to which our recruiting picture
responds.
But there is another factor, and this is something on which
we would value your assistance and your colleagues' assistance
over time. That is the reluctance, which has been there for
some time, of older adults to commend a young person when he or
she selects a military option, whether that is a tour of
service or a career. We have seen this increasingly as an issue
over the last year or so.
Marine recruiters were among the first to bring it to my
attention. When you are 17, the parents must sign saying it is
okay to enlist. Marine recruiters reported about 6-9 months ago
that we are starting to see more resistance to that signature.
I think the Army is seeing a similar trend in its recruiting
efforts.
We think a period of military service enhances everyone in
terms of life's values, in terms of what you can contribute as
a citizen over time, whether you serve for a few years or for
20 or 30 years' time. We think it would be very helpful if more
adults would make that point to young Americans.
What the recruiters tell us is that their toughest sell is
not necessarily the 19- or 20- or 21-year-old. My colleagues
ought to speak to this. It is selling the parents or the school
counselor or the coach that this is a good idea, and your
reinforcement of the value of military service would be a great
help to the Department.
Senator Graham. Any comments?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, I would reinforce what Dr. Chu just
said. Active-Duty retention is 102 percent for this year. That
tells us that once they join our team, they and their families
are very satisfied with their well-being and exactly what their
missions are which we asked them to do. They are staying on at
a higher rate than we have ever asked them to stay on before.
Our retention goals for this year for the Active are just over
64,000 and we are on a glide path to meet or exceed that, and
the Reserve and Guard are just behind that at 97 percent right
now.
I concur with regard to the recruiting issues. Our surveys
tell us exactly what Dr. Chu has stated. I make it a point to
go out to recruiting stations, and I have been to several, to
include your part of the South. We are tending to get the same
number of youngsters approaching us--who we call contacts--to
consider joining the Army. However, we are getting that
influencer perspective which is telling them in some areas, let
us wait a few months and see how this business in Iraq sorts
itself out. So we are spending a lot more time with parents,
teachers, and coaches than we have in the past. It is a large
challenge, but we are confident we can get what we need.
Senator Graham. All right. Let us project forward. I am not
asking you to be accurate to a person, but generally speaking,
2 years from now, will we have 100,000 troops in Iraq? More or
less?
Dr. Chu. That is well outside my area of responsibility in
the Department, sir, and I think it is really outside anyone's
ability to predict.
I do think in this global war on terrorism, we need to be
prepared as a military to respond to the country's needs
wherever they may arise, and that will require of our people,
Active and Reserve, periods of overseas service. Whether it
will continue at the current pace and with the current risks in
the present locations, I do not think that is knowable at this
juncture, but we must be prepared.
Senator Graham. Right.
Dr. Chu. My colleagues and I have worked across the
Department, Active and Reserve Forces, to create a sustainable
deployment posture where we can sustain a large number of
soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines forward deployed. It
does mean we need to give them rest. The Actives deserve their
time at home. The Reserve deserve their time off. But
predicting the exact number I think is beyond what we can do.
Senator Graham. Would anyone else like to chime in there?
General Osman. Sir, I would add that young men and women
join the Marine Corps because they want to deploy. That is the
reason you are a marine. It is to, if need be, go in harm's
way. It is interesting. As you watch, particularly our
reservists that are called to Active-Duty, when we mobilize
them, we have been essentially deploying about 67 percent of
those marines that are mobilized. If you go poll them, the
reservists that are really gaining the greatest satisfaction
are those that are deployed. We watch that in the reenlistment
statistics. So it really does show that marines join to deploy.
I would add that even though we may be having some
challenges in recruiting, the numbers, the fact of the matter
is our quality of recruiting is very high. We are running about
98 percent high school graduates, over 70 percent the upper
mental groups. We really are getting the young marines that we
are going to need for the future. As we look to the future, I
think we are getting a quality individual who understands what
they are asking for and are willing to serve. With those
challenges that we face in the future, I am very optimistic.
Admiral Hoewing. Sir, we are blessed in the Navy right now
to be doing very well in the recruiting environment. Also our
quality is higher than we have ever seen. The high school
graduates, the percent with college education or some college
education, performance on the ASAB test, across all ethnic
backgrounds, is very strong.
We are solid green in fiscal year 2005 with a couple
exceptions. We are falling behind a little bit on medical
officers, and we are behind in Reserve recruiting. We think we
understand the reason why. One of the reasons is we primarily
in the past recruited Active-Duty sailors in the Reserve that
leave the Service. With our reenlistment rates as high as they
are right now, the actual numbers that are leaving the Service
is down. So we have to renew our energies in recruiting these
sailors that leave Active-Duty, and we have engaged in a non-
prior service recruiting campaign for our Reserve Forces not to
just bring anybody in, but to bring the types of folks in that
can be molded to the specific types of skills we need in order
to fight the global war on terrorism.
Reenlistment rates continue to be high. We are very proud
of that, and we thank this subcommittee very much for your
support in being able to help us in those areas.
Senator Graham. I will tell you what I will do. I will let
Senator Nelson speak. I have several more questions, but I do
not want to hold you too long. Now would be a good time for
Senator Nelson.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again, I
want to thank the witnesses.
For my first question, I would like to discuss an issue of
importance to military families, which is consistent with what
was just said, recruiting individuals but retaining families.
As we grow more concerned about retaining our people, I think
it is important to consider ideas that will make the Services
even more family friendly. The military is already doing a lot
of these things and doing them very well, but there is one that
I would like to point out.
Each of the Services at the present time is doing a great
job of providing maternity leave for our new mothers. General
Brady, I understand that the Air Force allows 2 months from the
time of birth to return to duty. General Hagenbeck, I
understand the Army provides 6 weeks, and Admiral Hoewing, I
understand the Navy provides 42 days. But all of this is in
relationship to maternity leave as opposed to adoption. I
understand you are all prepared for what I am going to say.
So I was surprised to learn that when a servicemember
adopts a child, there is no official adoption leave policy. I
think that is an oversight as opposed to a planned omission.
The Department provides up to $2,000 per child and up to $5,000
per year to compensate for adoption-related expenses, but the
current DOD policy does not provide servicemembers paid leave
for the purpose of bonding with an adopted child.
Speaking as an adoptive parent myself, I can tell you that
it is important to bond with your adopted child and do
everything possible to make sure that they come into a happy
home, just as in the case of maternity and a family.
Speaking as a member of the Armed Services Committee, I
obviously want to do everything I can to make the military as
family friendly as I can. I recently introduced S. 487 with
Senators Smith, Landrieu, Jeffords, Johnson, and Coburn. This
legislation will provide up to 21 days of paid leave to the
primary caregiver immediately after placement of an adopted
child in their home. It is tough enough to adopt a child in the
military because of the cost and sometimes the reluctance of
adoption agencies to begin the process, knowing a family could
be deployed during that period of time. This legislation would
remove at least one of those hurdles, and I hope that your
services will provide support on this important legislation.
If you would like, I would ask that you might give me your
thoughts on this proposal. We will start with Dr. Chu.
Dr. Chu. Senator, if I may. First let me emphasize we will
certainly take a careful look at the legislation that you have
cosponsored.
I should point out that the military is quite generous with
leave already. People receive 30 days paid leave a year as a
baseline. In fact, actually we have had, with the current pace
of deployment, a bit of the opposite problem, people running up
against leave ``use or lose'' limitations. So we will have to
look at this. Is this an issue? Is there a need here? Is this
the right way to satisfy the need? But my instinct is that we
have a pretty good foundation that gives people a flexible
stockpile of leave allowance that they can use in any way that
they find most effective. In fact, most people do have some
stockpiled leave. If an adoption bonding period is an issue, I
would think they would have that leave available to take with
our current allowance.
Senator Ben Nelson. Well, there is no question that the
current situation will provide for that, but the current
situation in the case of maternity provides for that plus. So
it would seem to me that equity for the situations would
require that at least the same leave be provided in the case of
maternity or in the case of adoption, the difference being
fairly obvious, but the similarities are quite clear as well.
Bringing a new child into the home requires that attention, and
if it requires special leave in the case of maternity, I do not
see requiring the adoptive caregiver to use up personal leave
for that purpose. I am not advocating taking away the maternity
leave to level it out either. I think that that is the point
that we are trying to make.
Dr. Chu. Well, we thank you for raising the issue.
Senator Ben Nelson. If the members of the Services would
like to say anything about it, you certainly may, but if you
would rather wait and respond to it later, that is okay as
well.
General Osman. Sir, I would like to add one point too,
because I think it is important.
Dr. Chu is correct. There is a good little bit of leave
that is being accrued these days, but when you have an order,
or an instruction, or a law that raises that as an issue, when
the individual adopts a child, and there is something that says
you are supposed to get 21 days, or whatever it might be, just
the fact that there is a recognition that that leave should be
taken, whether it is basket leave given to the individual or he
uses his own earned leave, the fact of the matter is somebody
has put a marker down that that is important. So I think it
does send a signal.
We can take a look at the legislation you are proposing and
see that it, in fact, meets the requirement of the Service as
well as the individual.
Senator Ben Nelson. It does not require that they take all
of it, take up to that, as I think you understand. Each
situation is different, but it would authorize a maximum. Then,
of course, if they felt they needed additional leave, they
could go, as you say, to their surplus of leave and utilize
that on top of the other leave that would be authorized.
General Brady. Having adopted two children, I was wondering
if I could get that retroactively. [Laughter.]
I would echo clearly it is something the Department needs
to look at. I appreciate General Osman's comment too, that it
is a recognition that, as you point out, they are very similar
circumstances. In terms of care, they are identical.
Senator Ben Nelson. Absolutely.
General Hagenbeck. Sir, the Army supports it in principle.
Admiral Hoewing. I agree with Dr. Chu. We certainly want to
support our families in every way we possibly can. Family
friendly, retaining families, that is all key to what we are
trying to accomplish. It is, however, a time of war. One of the
advantages with the adoption process is that there is some
alternative to choose the timing associated with it.
I would want to have an opportunity to pore through the
language, and I just want to make sure that all of our folks
out there have that same opportunity for those leave and
liberty days in order to make their families all whole.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you. I think General Brady will
tell you that there may be an option as to the time you start
it, but there is not necessarily an option at the time they
arrive. It may be different than maternity. It is not quite a
storefront situation. That is one of the reasons that there is
some concern about granting adoption in the case of military
families because of mobility and uncertainty.
But in any event, I certainly hope that you will support it
and look very carefully at it.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham. One more round, if you do not mind. This
will be the more challenging part here.
I think it would be fair to say that when you look at
personnel retention and recruiting models, you look at the best
case scenario and the worst case scenario. I do not know what
is going to happen 2 years from now in Iraq either. I think
that is a very fair answer to a very fair question.
But let us assume for a moment the worst. Let us assume
that we have a large military footprint in Afghanistan, and
Iraq, and God knows where else over the next couple years. Let
us try to figure out how to answer the questions of those
parents and influencers in a constructive way, and let us deal
with the reality of the fact that this war has taken a toll on
our recruiting process and, I think, will eventually take a
toll on our retention process.
General Cody, the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, said at
a hearing in March, that what keeps him awake at night is what
this All-Volunteer Force will look like in 2007.
Along those lines, General Hagenbeck, why did the Army go
to 39 years, extended the age limit from which you can recruit
Guard and reservists, and why did the Army waive the high
school requirement to enter?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, with regard to the 39 years, that
opens up a pool of about 22 million. As I am sure you know, it
allows the Reserves and the Guard to recruit individuals that
may have skills that younger members of our society might not
have. We do not anticipate that we will get large numbers in
that group, however, that gives them some flexibility to get
some key skills that are scarce at this particular time.
Senator Graham. What percentage of the Guard and Reserves
called to Active-Duty are unable to go to the fight because of
medical problems?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, I do not have that number right
now, but I can get that to you.
Senator Graham. Does anyone else know for their Service?
Dr. Chu. About 3 percent.
Senator Graham. Fair enough.
What percentage of the Guard and Reserves of any of the
Services do not have access to health care in the private
sector?
Dr. Chu. It varies, sir. We have just completed a survey on
that front. For the more senior, roughly E-5, E-6, 03 and
above, typically 90 percent or better have private medical
insurance. It is the younger people who do not. Part of that is
voluntary, and that is consistent with experience in the civil
sector in which young people, who often feel they are
invulnerable and are subsidizing their elders in this regard,
decline insurance. So it is not a big issue in our judgment.
Senator Graham. Well, I just want to put everyone on notice
that when it comes time to talk about retaining families and
recruiting soldiers and keeping families, I think from my point
of view--and I think Senator Nelson shares this view--we need
to do more for the Guard and Reserve. We need to do more for
employers.
You do not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out
where this is leading. The reason you are having a problem
recruiting is because people see this war as a dangerous event.
The military is a dangerous endeavor, but it never really was
understood to be as dangerous as it is until this war came
along for millions of Americans. For those who stay in, thank
God, because they are doing their country a great service.
General Brady, I have been to Iraq three times, and I have
taken countless C-130 flights from Kuwait into Iraq and all
over Afghanistan. I have flown only with one Active-Duty crew.
Two years from now, if that remains the same, what effect will
that have on the force?
General Brady. That is a real challenge. As you are well
aware, a large percentage of the C-130 fleet is in the Guard
and Reserve. However, we have been able to mitigate that to a
large extent by AEF rotation policies. That does not mean that
we do not have Guard units and Active units that have been
deployed a number of times. However, our basic rotation policy
of 120 days for the AEF mitigates that to a certain degree. A
considerable percentage of our people are able to do that on a
volunteer basis as opposed to being mobilized.
I would not minimize the fact that that is a challenge, and
we are continuing to look at it in the Air Force as to what the
appropriate mix is for Guard and Reserve for C-130 forces, as
well as for all of our forces.
Senator Graham. General, when it comes to the Marine Corps,
you have the greatest tradition of all Services I think in many
ways of loyalty to the Corps. The fact that you experience any
recruiting problems or any retention problems I think is
something that we need to very much take seriously.
But money matters, and I have never heard a marine say that
as directly as you did. I have never heard a marine come up and
say if I had more money, it would help keep a marine. I think
that is an honest answer, and I think you are going to get more
money. You are going to get more flexibility.
But when we look to retaining young people and their making
that first decision, would changing the thrift savings plan for
lower enlisted grades, beefing that program up where they would
get a matching component, help in retaining and recruiting?
General Osman. The thrift savings plan, I think, is a great
tool. I will tell you that the young people who come in the
Marine Corps are not drawn to the Marine Corps by that plan.
They are drawn because of other intangibles, the opportunity to
serve, the challenge, the deployment, as I mentioned before.
Once they come in the Marine Corps and we educate them
about the goodness of the program, it is amazing how many will
then come to it and use it. We would like to see more of them
do it. Maybe if we were able to look at something like that,
that probably would draw more of them to it. I think we have a
responsibility to them to help them build for their future, and
that is a good way to do it. So I would like to take a hard
look at such a provision.
Senator Graham. This will be my last question, and I will
it over to Senator Nelson.
Dr. Chu, you have a forward-thinking view of how to reform
personnel entitlement programs in the military. I can attest,
having been on Active-Duty in the Guard and Reserve for many
years, that our military personnel programs are not 21st
century friendly. I am willing, and I will try, to get other
subcommittee members to be equally willing to engage on changes
that will allow military commanders to have more control over
the Total Force, including the civilian force.
If you could, share with us what you would like to see this
subcommittee consider when it comes time to redesigning the
personnel system that currently covers civilians and military
members.
Dr. Chu. On the civilian front, of course, Mr. Chairman,
you have given us extraordinary authority with the NSPS
legislation. We are in the process of implementing that
authority. The meet and confer period with the unions, formally
required by the statute, begins on April 18. We have already
had, prior to that period, 10 meetings with the 41 unions
representing the workers of this Department. We look forward to
that continued dialogue with them on their comments. We
received a large number of comments on the draft regulations.
Your continued counsel and support for that process is most
welcome and most helpful, and I think essential to its success.
We are very eager, as my colleagues and I know, to try to
bring the first spiral, as we are phrasing it, of civilian
employees under this new system sometime later this summer. I
think it will have an energizing effect on the Department's
ability to carry out the Nation's missions.
To the Active and the Reserve Forces of the United States,
we continually are seeking, and we have a number of proposals
in this year's legislative package, as you are aware, to bring
the tools with which we manage that force into the 21st
century, to recognize that people can serve longer. People are
healthier, more active, and fit at later ages than was true
before, and a number of changes like that, including, as you
noted, the Army's decision to go to the statutory maximum in
terms of enlistment eligibility.
I think where we need assistance is particularly in the
Reserve community, to some extent also in the Active community,
in additional targeted incentives, so we can put the
inducements where they are most needed and to get the most
effect for the funds that you provide for us.
I would ask on the Active front your support for the pilot
authority language that is included in this year's package of
proposals from the administration. It was, after all, the pilot
demonstration on the civilian side over 25 years ago, starting
with China Lake back in 1978, that taught us what we need to
think about for the civilian work force. We need similar
authority in specific military communities, and we would like
to start with four officer communities, if we might, of limited
scope. What is the best way to recruit, manage, develop, and
promote the officer force for the future, recognizing that one
size does not fit all and that we ought to be developing some
alternative models here? I think that pilot authority would be
very powerful.
It will not change things next year, except for those small
communities that might be involved. It will, I would argue,
have a dramatic, profound effect in what we will all learn
together 5 or 10 years from now, and I think that will produce
the next revolution in military personnel management.
Senator Ben Nelson. In conjunction with the flexibility in
changing compensation arrangements, CNO Admiral Clark made
reference in one of our hearings to changing the compensation
of the Navy so it is not simply based on rank or on pay grade,
as it has been in the past. Rather it would look at a way to do
something in the way of compensation based more on skills that
are required for certain jobs which would be consistent, I
think, with retention flexibility. I am clearly inclined to
support that effort. I think it makes sense. I suspect that
every branch is looking at how to compensate based on the skill
levels that you want to acquire and retain for the future.
Dr. Chu, no one needs to talk about the importance of
quality education for children of families and for all
children, for that matter. It is very important to all of us. I
am concerned that the relocation of significant military units
from overseas bases to military installations in the United
States and perhaps even with Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAC) could result in a significant impact on local civilian
school systems. Many of these schools are already strapped for
funds, and they do not have the means to suddenly assimilate
large numbers of additional students. They do not get the
Impact Aid funds and other funds, at a time that is convenient
with their budgeting process necessarily. So they could incur
the obligations and the expenses before they get any kind of
compensation.
I wondered if the DOD is looking at this to see if there is
any way to assist these local schools and to prepare for those
increases and/or what we might do in the way of Impact Aid to
compensate for any of those changes.
Dr. Chu. Of course, Impact Aid, Senator, is governed by a
formula that is in statute and subject to the appropriations
process.
Let me join you, however, in underscoring the importance of
quality education for the children of military families. It is
one of the preeminent concerns of the contemporary military
household, and properly so.
We have partnered with Johns Hopkins to look at what we can
do as an institution to encourage successful educational
outcomes in local school systems, which I think is the ultimate
import of your question. It is highly variable today. It is not
simply a matter of the resource position that the local school
system has. I do not want to, however, deny the importance of
resources in achieving good outcomes.
We do not have the results of that yet, but we would be
delighted to share those results with you as soon as they are
available, because our objective is to ensure that every
military family can look forward to a high quality education
for their children regardless of the location to which they are
assigned.
Senator Ben Nelson. Parents, whether in the military or in
the private sector, are equally concerned about quality
education for their children. It's just that simple. The
complexity is because of relocations based on military
reassignments and relocation. I am looking at it from the
standpoint of making sure that the local schools have the
resources to be able to provide for those kinds of increases
because of the impact on the school budgets and their ability
to assimilate these students. I think it is a challenge that we
need to address and I hope that we can. I will be anxious to
see that study.
One further question, Dr. Chu. The Government
Accountability Office (GAO) has determined that mobilized
reservists suffer an alarmingly high rate of pay problems when
they are on Active-Duty. An August 2004 GAO report concluded
that 95 percent of the soldiers audited had at least one pay
problem and many had multiple problems associated with their
Active-Duty pay and allowances.
Another report was just released last month documenting
that mobilized Army Guard soldiers were also experiencing
significant problems getting accurate, timely, and consistent
reimbursements for out-of-pocket travel expenses. This has
caused significant financial problems for the soldiers and
their families as they have had to carry debts on their
personal credit cards, they have trouble paying monthly bills,
and in some cases were unable to make child support payments,
all of which is very unfortunate, as we all understand. They
are suffering in many cases because of a pay cut due to their
military service. So this is icing on a very bad cake.
I wonder if the Department has taken any actions to try to
address this to ease these pay problems and reimbursement
problems so that we can avoid this. If we are trying to make
the military attractive, we do not need to have anything that
makes it less attractive if there is something we can do to
overcome that.
Dr. Chu. Absolutely, sir. Maybe General Hagenbeck would
like to elaborate on the outline. I will offer it briefly.
First, on the travel reimbursement funds, I have encouraged
the comptroller, and she has promised, that we will undertake
an experiment to think about using debit cards as opposed to
credit cards because that will solve, I think, a good deal of
the problems involved in terms of late reimbursement. There may
be some legal issues associated with that. They have yet to be
worked out.
Second, the more important issue raised is the antiquated
nature of our Reserve component pay systems. The Army has
worked assiduously to get the current systems to work as well
as we can. Our future, really, lies in bringing consistent with
the phrase ``Total Force,'' everyone to the same unified pay
and personnel system. Take for instance, the model the Marine
Corps pioneered over 10 years ago. For the Department as a
whole, it goes under the name of Defense Integrated Military
Human Resources System (DIMHRS). We are very hopeful of
bringing the first parts of the Department under that system
toward the close of this year. I think that really is the way
ahead. We are grateful for everyone's patience in the meantime.
The Army and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service
have taken extraordinary steps to try to deal with these
issues, but that is an old system. The code is old, hard to
maintain, and difficult to get to work properly.
Is there anything you might want to add?
General Hagenbeck. Senator, he is exactly right. The
systems themselves are antiquated and difficult, and we have
put some interim solutions into effect. I just came back from
theater Saturday night, having spent about a week back over
there checking, and this was one of the major issues we had
worked.
We have done a couple of things. Prior to units deploying
during the mobilization process, we take the personnel and the
finance people through a course at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. We
also have mobile training teams that go out and train these
personnel prior to the deployment.
Then when they go into theater, we have also increased and
made more robust the higher level headquarters liaison in
Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq, adding Reserve and National
Guard liaison finance officers to work these pieces for them
specifically.
I got a very encouraging view out of Afghanistan with about
four or five different liaison officers (LNOs) that are there
and going out to all the teams. So quantitatively it looks like
they have gone down, but for the one soldier that has a
problem, it is a big problem. Until we get this compatible pay,
which will ultimately integrate with DIMHRS, we are going to
have to look at this very vigilantly every single day in
theater.
Senator Ben Nelson. Well, obviously, we all know it is
important, and I commend you for looking at it. On behalf of
those who have experienced the problems, I encourage speed in
resolving this. Certainly we want the best possible pay system
for the reservists who are suffering these challenges right
now.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
We will let you go here. One quick question. If it became
the will of Congress, after hearing the recruiting and
retention problems, to say that we needed to increase the Army
end strength by 30,000 in the next 2 years, could you do that?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, anything is possible. It will take
a concerted effort to do that.
Senator Graham. It would be highly unlikely, would it not?
General Hagenbeck. Yes, sir. It would take a national
effort. It is more than just an Army problem, as I said before.
This is a piece that the Nation has to step up to if we want to
increase the Army to those kinds of numbers.
Senator Graham. Do we need to increase the Army?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, I would just reiterate what our
chief has said before. In terms of numbers, with 640,000
mobilized right now, the temporary end strength that Congress
has granted us is adequate for the conditions that exist today.
Senator Graham. As for the Navy, the Navy is going to
reduce its force by 13,000?
Admiral Hoewing. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. You did 8,000 last year. Is that correct?
Admiral Hoewing. 7,800.
Senator Graham. You are going to do 10,000 reservists?
Admiral Hoewing. Over a 2-year period, yes, sir.
Senator Graham. You did 8,000 reservists last year.
Admiral Hoewing. A total from 87,000 down to about 70,000
over a 3-year period is what our plan is for Reserves.
Senator Graham. Do you have enough ships?
Admiral Hoewing. Yes, sir. Our ships today are much more
capable than the ships in the past. The metric should not
necessarily just be numbers, but we do have the littoral combat
ship coming online, and every single one of those ships that is
coming online in the future, as a part of a human systems
integration process, will have less manning on board. So even
as our ship numbers start to increase, as the shipbuilding
program picks up over the next several years, our manning
numbers will not go back up, simply because we have greater
capability with less human beings on the ships and the
platforms.
Senator Graham. Well, thank you all for coming. One last
comment. I think the problem that we are facing--and this is
just my personal observation--is a chronic problem, not an
acute problem. The retention numbers are understandable to me
because people who join, join for a reason, and they get a lot
of job satisfaction. But you see, even in the retention
numbers, certain specialties are being affected because of high
mobilization. That is why you are wanting a lot more money,
because you have to entice people to stay because of the
operational tempo of the Active Forces, because this war is
stressing the force in my opinion. I would encourage each of
you to go back and think about a scenario along these lines.
Senator Ben Nelson. I had one further question that your
question triggered. With the reduction in the Air Force and the
Navy end strength, I have heard of ``Blue going Green.'' I
wonder what kind of success you are having in redirecting many
of these already highly-trained, highly-skilled military
personnel, in the direction of the Army and whether the Army is
able to assimilate and/or utilize these individuals who are
furloughed out of the military, of the Navy and Air Force.
Admiral Hoewing. Senator, the Navy strongly supports the
Blue to Green program. We understand it totally. As a part of
our transition process for those sailors that are leaving
Active-Duty, we inform them of the Blue to Green program. We
have cooperative agreements with the Army. We will give them
the e-mail addresses, addresses, and phone numbers, in order to
be able to carry on that conversation back and forth.
Senator Graham. What is your success rate of people leaving
the Navy and voluntarily going to the Army?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, we have just gotten traction on the
program. The numbers are small right now, 50 officers recently.
That is a mix from the Navy and the Air Force, and we only have
under 200 at this point for----
Senator Graham. Too early to tell. Right?
Air Force, the same answer?
General Brady. Yes. We have 109 enlisted and, I think, 26
officers at this point. Much as Admiral Hoewing said. All of
this information is given to people as a part of their
transition. We are working with Army recruiters, making sure
that they have access to people on Air Force bases, and that
people are aware, as we are drawing down our manpower
currently, that this is one of the options that they have,
including in the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC). We
have a handful of cadets in Air Force ROTC that are taking
their commission with the Army this year. It is not a large
program. I think it will grow a little bit.
Senator Ben Nelson. Would a bonus arrangement, in
particular, to make it even more attractive, be advisable given
the fact that we have already invested hundreds of thousands of
dollars in these military personnel?
General Hagenbeck. From the Army perspective, yes, sir.
However, I know, as alluded to by General Brady, coming to the
Army is just one of the options. Obviously, they are looking at
the Reserve and Guard as well. So we have to balance that among
the Services.
Senator Graham. I do not know what it would cost to make a
Navy guy go in the Army. That might be pretty expensive.
[Laughter.]
Or vice versa.
Senator Ben Nelson. I noticed General Osman was quiet. Are
any coming your way in that process?
General Osman. We will make our numbers. We do not need the
Blue to Green help at this time, sir.
Senator Graham. We may get some bills going here.
Admiral Hoewing. Senator, I would add on behalf of my
friend in the Marine Corps, we actually have increased the
number of officers going to the Marine Corps from the Naval
Academy over the last 2 years because the need is there. The
Navy officer requirement was going down, and it was a perfect
match. So we believe in both colors of green.
Senator Ben Nelson. Well, I love this brotherly approach. I
think it speaks well of our military and of our Department of
Defense.
Senator Graham. This has been a great panel.
I have a fundamentally different read on where we are going
and why. I think the problem we face is more of a chronic
problem tied to the war on terrorism. September 11 caused
everybody to become very patriotic as it should have. People
joined in record numbers, but this war has drawn out, and it is
harder than most people thought. I think we are going to have
well over 100,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan 2 years from
now, not because we have done anything wrong, but because it is
hard work to go from a dictatorship to a democracy.
The stress on the Guard and Reserves is a difference
between the Cold War and the war on terrorism, and we need to
adapt. We cannot have every C-130 flown into theater 2 years
from now being flown by Reserve crews. Even the Guard and
Reserve have a stretching point. If you like being deployed, as
the marines do, your ship has come in as a marine, because you
are going to be deployed as far as the eye can see. You do
retain families, General. You really do.
We are going to stand with you, Dr. Chu. We are going to
bring about reform. I honestly believe that we need to beef up
in every way, not just convincing adults to be better
influencers here. We need to make it as attractive as possible,
and when somebody leaves the Navy because the Navy is
overstaffed, we should do everything we can to keep them
around, because they are patriotic, well-trained, Americans. We
should look at this as an opportunity to plus up the Army from
the Navy and the Air Force.
From the Navy's point of view, please do not lose sight of
the fact that there is a certain amount of ships you are going
to need. I really worry about China taking on Taiwan. I think
this is a more dangerous world than all of us really completely
understand, and a lot of people evaluating American Armed
Forces may misunderstand that this stress is weakness. We are
not weak. We are stressed.
God bless.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Dr. Chu. Thank you.
General Hagenbeck. Thank you.
Admiral Hoewing. Thank you.
General Osman. Thank you.
General Brady. Thank you.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much. Now on to our second
panel here. The heck with the script. We know who you are; you
know who we are. We thank you all for coming. Each of you in
your own way is helping America maintain its force, and I
personally appreciate the energy you bring on servicemembers'
issues to Capitol Hill, because without people like you, the
ability of Congress to understand what is going on in the real
world would be diminished.
So having said that, Mr. Strobridge will start.
STATEMENT OF STEVEN P. STROBRIDGE, CO-CHAIRMAN, THE MILITARY
COALITION
Mr. Strobridge. If you would indulge us, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Senator Nelson, for
this opportunity to discuss The Military Coalition's
recommendations on military personnel and compensation issues.
I have to say, when I heard your questions, I was jumping
up and down in the background. I do not think we could agree
with you more in terms of the threat and the risk and our
concern about looking at things in the most optimistic scenario
possible. It is of great concern to us as it obviously is to
you.
Before I begin, I would like to ask your permission to
include a statement in the record from the Fleet Reserve
Association, a member of The Military Coalition, if that would
be all right, sir.
Senator Graham. Absolutely.
[The prepared statement of the Master Chief Barnes
follows:]
Prepared Statement by Master Chief Joseph L. Barnes, USN (Ret.)
introduction
Mr. Chairman and other distinguished members of the subcommittee:
The Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) is most grateful for your support
of our military men and women and, particularly, those serving or
having served in Afghanistan, Iraq and other troubled spots around the
globe. At the top of the Association's gratitude list is the quality of
life improvements adopted in the 108th Congress. Thanks so much for the
effort FRA knows you contributed in the previous year for making a
tough life much easier for those that might make the ultimate sacrifice
in the service of this Nation. BRAVO ZULU.
This statement lists the concerns of our members, keeping in mind
that the Association's primary goal will be to endorse any positive
safety programs, rewards, and quality of life improvements that support
members of the uniformed services, particularly those serving in
hostile areas, and their families.
FRA is concerned that in spite of signs of bravado, many of our
sailors, marines, and coast guardsmen serving in Operation Iraqi
Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) may not be fully
armed with the protective devises available for their personal safety.
Advocating the receipt of these protective devices: i.e.--interceptor
body armor, outer protective vests, and small arms protective inserts;
to every uniformed member sent into harm's way is FRA's No. 1 priority.
The Association's next priority is to see that our wounded troops,
their families, and the surviving families of the men and women killed
in action are cared for by a grateful Nation. The Departments of
Defense (DOD), Veterans Affairs (VA), Labor (DOL), etc., should all be
working together to provide this support. FRA, as a veterans' service
organization, will do its share in representing those who seek its
assistance in gaining medical and health care, special programs, and
other benefits available now and in the immediate future. In this
respect, FRA fully endorses the proposed increases to death gratuity
and life insurance proposed by the administration. Further, the
Association advocates the adoption of any proposal that authorizes our
wounded veterans continuance of their combat pay and other special pays
received while in combat until the completion of their hospital care or
discharge from their respective military service.
other goals
Health Care. FRA and its-membership are most grateful for the
improvements in accessing proper health care for the military community
and the expansion of the program to provide greater care for military
retirees and their families. Not everyone in the military community is
pleased, but Congress has done much with the resources available to
offer the best program for as many beneficiaries as possible. There are
other proposals on the table that would increase benefits for those not
satisfied with the current program. FRA endorses these proposals for
many of its members would be affected by their adoption. However, the
Association's primary concern is that existing programs be adequately
funded for fiscal year 2006 and beyond.
Active Duty/Reserve Programs. The topping the list among the
Active-Duty and Reserve members of the Sea Services (Navy and Marines)
are adequate pay and allowances, child care and housing.
Pay and Allowances. This distinguished subcommittee has for the
past years improved compensation that, in turn, enhanced the
recruitment and retention of uniformed personnel in an All-Volunteer
environment. Adequate and targeted pay increases for middle grade and
senior petty and noncommissioned officers have contributed to improved
morale and readiness. With a uniformed community that is more than 50
percent married, satisfactory compensation relieves much of the tension
brought on by operational and personal tempos.
For the fiscal year 2006, the administration has recommended a 3.1
percent across the board basic pay increase for members of the Armed
Forces. This is commensurate with the 1999 formula to provide increases
of 0.5 percentage points greater than that of the previous year for the
private sector. With the addition of targeted raises, the formula has
reduced the pay gap with the private sector from 13.5 percent to 5.2
percent following the January 1, 2005, pay increase.
FRA, however, is disappointed that there are no targeted pay
increase recommended, particularly for mid-grade and more senior
enlisted personnel. FRA, The Military Coalition, the 9th Quadrennial
Review of Military Compensation (9th QRMC), and the DOD have advocated
the necessity for targeted pays. In spite of the number of targeted pay
increases in the last few years, the pay of our noncommissioned and
petty officers remains compressed, a situation that has existed since
the advent of the All-Volunteer Force. Examples of compression are
noted below:
PAY COMPRESSION
Basic Pay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-5--12 YOS E-7--16 YOS E-9--20 YOS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre Pre Pre
Average Average Average Average Average Average
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...................................... $471 $471 $627 $627 $844 $844
Recruit (E-1)........................... $144 $269 $144 $269 $144 $269
Ratio of Pay (Nearest $1)............... 3.1 2.1 4.1 2.1 6.1 3.1
Ratio of Pay 2005....................... 2.1 3.1 4.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRA urges the subcommittee to adopt a targeted pay table for fiscal
year 2006, at least proportionate to that of January 1, 2004, and
ensure that uniformed members of the Public Health Service (US PHS) are
included in the pay increase authorized for fiscal year 2005.
Submarine Incentive Pay. On October 1, 2004, the United States Navy
authorized increases in Submarine Incentive Pays for commissioned
officers in grades 03 to 06. The Navy noted this was the second phase
of increases that began with enlisted and junior officers on October 1,
2002; however, the Navy has yet to verify it would increase the pay of
commissioned officers at a later date.
Submarine Incentive Pay originally was offered only to enlisted
submariners. Subsequently, commissioned officers were authorized the
payment at the same percentage as for enlisted (50 percent of basic
pay). In 1928, the Hook Commission reported the need to provide greater
incentives to commissioned officers. ``The rates proposed for hazard
pay serve as an inducement to undertake and continue special duties,
and such inducement need not be as great in monetary terms for lower
paid and less advanced personnel as for higher paid and more highly
trained personnel.'' . . . fortunately this is now not the case. It is
evident the current Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Vern Clark,
agrees: I'm fond of saying that chiefs make the Navy run. Chiefs are
the most influential leaders that we have in our institution.''
The Chiefs' importance to the Navy also applies to the Navy's
submarine service and FRA questions why the Navy increases the rates of
submarine incentive pay for certain submarine officers while allowing
the rates for senior enlisted chiefs to decrease with time in service.
Are experienced and chiefs with longevity of lesser valuable to the
submarine service than the officers with like experience and time in
service? See chart below.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
FRA seeks this subcommittee's assistance in directing the Navy to
review its submarine incentive pay rates and offer more equitable rates
to senior enlisted submariners commensurate with those authorized for
commissioned officers on October 1, 2004.
Other Pays and Allowances. FRA supports for the continuation, and
enhancement of bonuses and other compensatory items necessary for the
military services to function accordingly and to provide the necessary
incentives for the Nation's young men and women to serve in the Armed
Forces. Recruiting and retention are vital to the success of the All-
Volunteer Force and fulfilling the Nation's commitments.
Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH). FRA supports The Military
Coalition in seeking revised housing standards. Many enlisted
personnel, for example, are unaware of the standards for their
respective pay grade and assume that the applicable BAH level is
determined by a higher standard than they may be authorized. This
causes confusion over the mismatch between the amount of BAH they
receive and the actual cost of their type of housing. As an example,
enlisted members are not authorized to receive BAH for a 3-bedroom
single-family detached house until achieving the rank of E-9--which
represents only 1 percent of the enlisted force--yet many personnel in
more junior pay grades do in fact reside in detached homes. The
Coalition believes that as a minimum, this BAH standard (single family
detached house) should be extended gradually to qualifying
servicemembers beginning in grade E-8 and subsequently to grade E-7 and
below over several years as resources allow.
FRA is most grateful to the subcommittee for acting in 1999 to
reduce out-of-pocket housing expenses for servicemembers over several
years. Responding to your leadership on this issue, the DOD proposed a
similar phased plan to reduce median out-of-pocket expenses to zero by
fiscal year 2005. Through the leadership and support of this
subcommittee, this plan has been implemented. This aggressive action to
better realign BAH rates with actual housing costs has had a real
impact and provides immediate relief to many servicemembers and
families struggling to meet rising housing and utility costs.
The Association applauds the subcommittee's action to deliver on
this commitment. Unfortunately, housing and utility costs continue to
rise, and the pay comparability gap, while diminished over recent years
continues to exist. Members residing off base face higher housing
expenses along with significant transportation costs, and relief is
especially important to junior enlisted personnel living off base who
do not qualify for other supplemental assistance.
FRA urges the subcommittee to direct gradual adjustments in grade-
based housing standards as commended above and to more adequately cover
members' current out-of-pocket housing expenses.
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) Reimbursements. As The Military
Coalition noted in its statement FRA, too, is most appreciative of the
significant increases in the Temporary Lodging Expense (TLE) allowance
authorized for fiscal year 2002 and the authority to raise PCS per diem
expenses to match those for Federal civilian employees in fiscal year
2003. FRA greatly appreciates the provision in the fiscal year 2004
defense bill to provide full replacement value for household goods lost
or damaged by private carriers dent directed moves, and looks forward
to the timely implementation of the DOD comprehensive ``Families
First'' plan to improve claims procedures for servicemembers and their
families.
These were significant steps to upgrade allowances that had been
unchanged in over many years. Even with these changes, however,
servicemembers continue to incur significant out-of-pocket costs in
complying with government-directed relocation orders.
For example, PCS mileage rates have not been adjusted since 1985.
The current rates range from 15 to 20 cents per mile--less than half
the 2005 temporary duty mileage rate of 40.5 cents per mile for
military members and Federal civilians. PCS household goods weight
allowances were increased for grades E-1 through E-4, effective January
2003, but weight allowance increases are also needed for servicemembers
in grade E-5 and above to more accurately reflect the normal
accumulation of household goods over the course of a career. The
Association recommends modifying weight allowance tables for personnel
in pay grades E-7, E8, and E-9 to coincide with allowances for officers
in grades O-4, O-5, and O-6, respectively. FRA also supports
authorization of a 500-pound professional goods weight allowance for
military spouses.
In addition, the overwhelming majority of service families own two
privately owned vehicles, driven by the financial need for the spouse
to work, or the distance some families must live from an installation
and its support services. Authority is needed to ship a second POV at
government expense to overseas' accompanied assignments. In many
overseas locations, families have difficulty managing without a second
family vehicle because family housing is often not co-located with
installation support services.
With regard to families making a PCS move, members are authorized
time off for housing-hunting trips in advance of PCS relocations, but
must make any such trips at personal expense without any government
reimbursement such as Federal civilians receive. Further, Federal and
State cooperation is required to provide unemployment compensation
equity for a military spouse who is forced to leave a job due to the
servicemember's PCS orders. FRA also supports authorization of a
dislocation allowance to servicemembers making their final ``change of
station'' upon retirement from the uniformed services.
FRA is sensitive to the subcommittee's efforts to reduce the
frequency of PCS moves. But we cannot avoid requiring members to make
regular relocations, with all the attendant disruptions in their
children's education and their spouse's career progression. The
Association believes strongly that the Nation that requires them to
incur these disruptions should not be requiring them to bear the
resulting high expenses out of their own pockets.
FRA urges continued upgrades of permanent change-of-station
reimbursement allowances to recognize that the government, not the
servicemember, should be responsible for paying the cost of government-
directed relocations.
Combat and Incentive Pays during Hospitalization. FRA joins The
Military Coalition in strongly urging the subcommittee to take action
to ensure combat-wounded servicemembers do not have their pay reduced
or their taxes increased during periods of hospitalization. The
Coalition believes that such compensation treatment is essential for
servicemembers who continue to suffer from the hazardous conditions
that combat-related incentive pays and tax relief were created to
recognize.
Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS). FRA is grateful for the
increases in BAS over the years. There is more to be done; however, to
permit single career enlisted members greater individual responsibility
in their personal living arrangements believes it is inconsistent to
demand significant supervisory, leadership, and management
responsibilities of noncommissioned and petty officers, but still
dictate to them where and when they must eat their meals while at their
home duty station.
FRA urges the subcommittee to repeal the statutory provision
limiting BAS eligibility to 12 percent of single members residing in
government quarters. As a long-term goal, extend full BAS eligibility
to all single career enlisted members, beginning with the grade of E-6
and, eventually, to the lower grades as budgetary constraints are
eased.
MGIB. The Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) often is characterized as a
form of compensation or as a ``recruiting tool.'' However, FRA would
argue that it would be more appropriate to consider the benefit an
investment in our Nation's future. Military personnel can use the MGIB
on Active-Duty to aid in their professional development, giving them
the tools to become better leaders, mentors and representatives of
their respective Service. Many veterans who leave the military and use
the MGIB to further their education have become more productive members
of our society. From the offensive backfield of the Denver Broncos to
the halls of Congress to several Fortune 500 Companies to small
businesses in Main Street, America, there are college graduates who
used the MGIB stipend to help pay for their education. These veterans
pay taxes, returning more in revenue to the Treasury than what they
might have contributed without a degree. (Persons with Bachelor Degrees
earn 70 percent more on average than those with a high school diploma.)
Our Nation has a responsibility to ensure the MGIB investment
remains a relevant supplement to completing one's education. We must
give our veterans the tools to excel in an academic environment.
FRA recommends the enhancement of benefits currently available in
the MGIB. The Association is grateful for the October 1, 2004 increases
in basic rates but they cover only about 60 percent of current tuition
expenses. A creation of a benchmark for the MGIB will keep pace with
the cost of an average 4 year college education. The cost of a 4-year
college education for the school year 2004-2005 ($20,082 for 4-years at
private institutions; $5,132 at public institutions) is much greater
than what is available through the MGIB. Enhancing the value of the
MGIB would be an improved incentive to enlist or reenlist in the Armed
Forces.
There are 61,000 senior enlisted members in the Armed Forces who
entered military service during the Veterans Education Assistance
program (VEAP) era and did not have the opportunity to enroll in the
MGIB. FRA urges the adoption of an open enrollment period offering
these enlisted leaders a chance to sign up for the education benefits
available through the MGIB. In fact, the Association believes the MGIB
should be expanded so that any uniformed member reenlisting in his or
her military service will have the opportunity to enroll in the
program.
family readiness and support
It's most important that DOD and the military services concentrate
on providing programs for the families of our servicemembers. There are
a number of existing spousal and family programs that have been fine
tuned and are successfully contributing to the well-being of this
community. The Navy's Fleet and Family Centers and the Marines' Marine
Corps Community Services (MCCS) and Family Services programs are
providing comprehensive, 24/7 information and referral services to the
servicemember and family through its OneSource links. OneSource is
particularly beneficial to mobilized reservists and families who are
unfamiliar with varied benefits and services available for their use.
It's true that `the servicemember enlists in the military service
but it's the family that reenlists.' To ensure the family opts for a
uniformed career, the family must be satisfied with life in the
military. To assist in bringing that satisfaction, FRA recommends the
following to the subcommittee.
Child and Youth Programs. Both programs rank high in priority for
the families of sailors and marines. As an integral support system for
mission readiness and deployments, its imperative these programs
continue to be improved and expanded to cover the needs of both married
and single parents. Currently, the Navy's program cares for over 31,000
children 6 months to 12 years in 227 facilities and 3,180 on- and off-
base licensed child development homes. With the high priority tagged to
child care, FRA urges Congress to continue enhancing and increase
funding for this important benefit.
Pre-tax Treatment Child Care Expenses. FRA seeks the support of the
subcommittee to direct the DOD to implement flexible spending accounts
for pre-tax payment of child-care expenses. The Association urges the
subcommittee to coordinate with the Ways and Means Committee to enact
such authority as may be needed as soon as possible.
Spousal Employment. Today's All-Volunteer environment requires the
Services to consider the whole family. It is no longer adequate to
focus only on the morale and financial well-being of the member. Now,
his or her family must be considered. One of the major considerations
for spousal employment is it could be a stepping-stone to retention of
the servicemember--a key participant in the defense of this Nation. The
Association urges Congress to continue its support of the military's
effort to affect a viable spousal employment program and to authorize
sufficient funds to assure the program's success.
Impact Aid. FRA is most appreciative for the Impact Aid authorized
in previous Defense measures but must urge this subcommittee and its
full committee to support a substantial increase in the funding for
schools bearing the responsibility of educating the children of
military personnel and Federal employees. Current funds are not
adequate to ably support the education of federally sponsored children
attending civilian community elementary schools. Beginning with the
Nixon administration, funding for Impact Aid has decreased
dramatically. For example, in the current fiscal year the Military
Impacted Schools Association (MISA) estimates Impact Aid is funded at
only 60 percent of need according to law. Our children should not be
denied the best in educational opportunities. Impact Aid provides the
children of our sailors, marines, coast guardsmen, soldiers, and
airmen, a quality education. FRA implores Congress to accept the
responsibility of fully funding the military Impact Aid program. It is
important to ensure our servicemembers, many serving in harm's way,
have little to concern with their children's future but more to do with
the job at hand.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs (MWR). FRA can't help but
believe Congress and even the military services are less concerned with
MWR programs that are really vital to supporting the servicemember and
his or her family. The Navy's top enlisted chief, Master Chief Petty
Office of the Navy (MCPON) Terry Scott U.S. Navy (USN) again this year
advised a House panel on February 16, 2005, he is particularly troubled
that current budget decisions will place a greater burden on the
Service in providing the necessary programs so important in maintaining
the well-being of its sailors and families. The MWR programs of the
Navy; Child Care, Fleet/Family Support Program (FFSP), for example,
include recreation, fitness, social and community support activities,
spouse employment, personal financial management, counseling, family
advocacy, safety, transition and relocation--all having a positive
affect on Fleet Readiness.
MCPON Scott noted he was concerned that as ``we continue to face
increased demands on operational costs these MWR programs and the
sailors they serve will be tempting targets for reduction.'' So it has
been on many naval installations world-wide. The MCPON knows MWR
programs are ``crucial to readiness and retention of (the) force.''
There is no one closer to the enlisted men and women of the Navy than
their top senior enlisted chief petty officers. They work along side
enlisted sailors who make up about two-thirds of the naval forces and
are aware of what affects their subordinates. These senior enlisted
chiefs, in turn, pass the information along to the MCPON who reads the
signs that readiness and retention will suffer if Congress fails to
fund the Navy's MWR programs and services.
Currently, the shortage of funds is curtailing or closing some of
the activities while the costs of participating in others have
increased over the past year or 2. One major problem is in Europe. The
weakening dollar has caused an increase in child-care rates, movie
tickets, etc., and placed a hiring freeze on MWR employees.
The lack of fiscal support for MWR programs is damaging the need to
provide mental and physical relief to both sailors and families from
the stress of deployments that have increased dramatically since the
military downsized in the 1990s. MWR programs build a community spirit
among those living on or near a military installation, something not
experienced by those who may seek comfort and well-being from a
civilian environment. FRA disagrees with the DOD's apparent effort to
move housing, schools, hobby shops, etc., off-base in order to save
money for other purposes. MWR facilities should be fully funded and
include, where and when available, the Guard, Reserve, and retired
military population residing in the area. One group aids the other. Who
better to assist, comfort, counsel, and encourage military family
members concerned with the conflict in Iraq, continuing deployments,
and other military related activities?
FRA again recommends a review of the MWR program be undertaken by
Congress to evaluate its importance to the uniformed services as a
factor in maintaining the highest in morale, and readiness, relieving
both operational tempo (OPTEMPO) and personnel tempo (PERSTEMPO), and
generating a valid incentive for retention. The goal, hopefully, will
be to restructure fiscal responsibilities for funding and, perhaps,
restrict (fence) expenditures to MWR exclusively.
Dislocation Allowance (DLA). Moving households on government orders
can be costly. Throughout a military career, servicemembers endure a
number of permanent changes of station. Too often each move requires
additional expenses for relocating to a new area far removed from the
servicemembers' current location.
Dislocation allowances are authorized for military-ordered moves.
To aid servicemembers in defraying these additional costs, Congress in
1955 adopted the payment of a special allowance--termed ``dislocation
allowance''--to recognize that duty station changes and resultant
household relocations reflect personnel management decisions of the
Armed Forces and are not subject to the control of individual members.
Odd as it may appear, servicemembers preparing to retire from the
Armed Forces are not eligible for dislocation allowances, yet many are
subject to the same additional expenses they experienced when effecting
a permanent change of station during the 20 or more years Active Duty
spent earning the honor to retire. Moving on orders to another duty
station or to retire are both reflective of a management decision.
Retiring military personnel after completing 20 years of service is
advantageous to the Armed Forces. It opens the ranks to much younger
and healthier accessions. FRA recommends amending 37 USC Sec. 407, to
authorize the payment of dislocation allowances to members of the Armed
Forces retiring or transferring to an inactive duty status such as the
Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Reserve who perform a ``final change of
station'' move of 50 or more miles.
the navy's transformation
Of major concern to FRA is the Navy's transformation program. Under
the guise of `transformation' the Navy will be saying goodbye to 60,000
or more officers and sailors by 2011, mothballing one or more aircraft
carriers, reducing the number of ships and submarines, scrapping a
number of aircraft squadrons, and cutting back on quality of life
programs for its personnel. FRA submits that the Navy's
`transformation' program could become a means to reduce the Sea Service
to a secondary power in the world's naval services. The United States
can ill afford to allow the Navy to shrink from unquestionably the
world's most powerful to perhaps one of the world's best.
Some of the Navy's recently developed personnel programs appear to
be harmful to the morale and readiness of a number of its enlisted men
and women, as well as some of its commissioned officers. FRA conducted
a survey during September 2004 and noted that 60 percent of the
respondents said the Navy's proposed reduction in manpower ``will
significantly have a negative impact on (their) morale.'' Of the 41 who
participated in the Sea Swap program, 30 agreed it had a negative
affect on morale and the ability to perform their assigned duties.
FRA is reminded of the Army's transformation program. It cut the
size of its forces and is now facing difficulty in providing adequate
manpower, mobility, armament, and personal safety to fulfill its
mission in Iraq. Let's not idly sit back in the name of budgetary
restraint to emasculate the Navy. It plays a major role, along with the
other Armed Services, in protecting our citizens and preventing the
enemy from using the contiguous oceans to attack the United States.
Additionally, FRA is concerned with the effect the Navy's reduction
program will have on the Marines. The Association believes the Navy
should not be afforded the opportunity to reduce further its sealift
capability. As noted by a retired Marine General, a former director of
naval expeditionary war, ``If we can't get our (Marine) forces to the
objective area expeditiously and in sufficient quantity to in, then we
are relegated to a long, protracted attrition type of conflict.'' He
concluded by saying that, beyond the sealift capability, the Marines
need the infrastructure offered by amphibious ships to sustain
prolonged operations.
FRA urges the subcommittee to closely monitor the Navy's
``transformation'' program and urge the DOD and Navy to reassess the
Navy's future role in the defense of the United States.
force size/readiness/optempo/perstempo
FRA will again simultaneously address force size, readiness,
OPTEMPO, and PERSTEMPO as one issue. Readiness is achieved at its
highest if force size is adequate in numbers, OPTEMPO is not too
excessive, and PERSTEMPO is not adversely affecting the performance of
individual servicemembers. FRA noted in its fiscal year 2005 statement
that all four were suffering from a shortage of uniformed members.
Since then, this subcommittee, in fiscal year 2005, added numbers to
the uniformed manpower in both the Army and Marine Corps. FRA is
grateful for the increase and is hopeful the added manpower will be the
answer to the difficulty experienced by the military in Iraq over the
past few years. FRA, with The Military Coalition, will continue to
monitor the situation to ensure the numbers remain sufficient to
relieve both OPTEMPO and PERSTEMPO brought on by operations in
Afghanistan and Iraq.
reserve component
Operational Tempo. The increase in the use of Reserve units to
serve along side Active-Duty components in Iraq, as an example, has
caused considerable challenges for individual reservists. Not only has
their mobilization placed a strain on employment and income, but the
family as well. Employer support, once strong, decreases as more
essential employees are whisked-off to spend longer periods in uniform
leaving the employer frustrated with having to find a replacement and,
at the same time, hold the position open for the reservist's return.
FRA has always supported the Total Force Policy but is concerned
that the sustained use of Reserve Forces will eventually harm the
recruiting and retention of young men and women willing to serve as
future citizen sailors, marines, and coast guardsmen. The United States
must maintain a strong Reserve Force at all times in the event a
greater need than at the present.
The fiscal year 2005 defense authorization bill established a
Commission on the National Guard and Reserves. FRA is in hope that it
will provide recommendations to this subcommittee on what enhancements
are necessary to recruit and retain the number of reservists required
for the defense of the United States. There is a possibility the study
may include recommendations addressing such issues as tax relief,
healthcare, retirement upgrades, improvements in the Montgomery G.I.
Bill Select Reserve (MGIB-SR) and family support programs.
Until the study is released, FRA urges this subcommittee to move
rapidly in the area of enhancing and improving the following agenda.
Increase both enlisted and reenlistment bonuses.
Enhance the MGIB-SR rates for those who choose to
participate in the program.
Adopt legislation that would provide academic and
financial protection to members who are attending an
institution of higher learning when called to Active-Duty.
Support and fund programs for families, particularly
those geographically dispersed and not readily accessible to
military installations and inexperienced with the military.
Authorize cost-share access to TRICARE for members of
the Selected Reserve and their families.
retired component
Survivor Benefit Plan. FRA has experienced a greater concern for
improving the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) than any issue on its Web
site (www.fra.org). With an average age of 68 on the Association's
membership roll, the concern is justified. Most convincing is the need
to continue refining the program. There are many FRA members, and other
military retirees, age 70 and older, who have been paying into the Plan
for more than 30 years with the only relief more than 3-plus years into
the future.
There are three compelling reasons to amend the Plan. One, the cost
of participating in SBP has increased from 60 percent for the military
retiree to more than 80 percent allowing the DOD to renege on its
original charge to provide 40 percent of the cost. Two, the SBP was
fashioned from the survivor program for retired Federal employees, yet
the military retiree on the average will pay more for participating in
his or her Plan. Three, the military retiree on the average will pay
into the SBP over a longer period than the Federal retiree. Although
Congress has adopted a time for SBP participants to halt payments of
premiums (when payments of premiums equal 30 years and the military
retiree is 70 years of age) the date is more than 3 years away.
Military retirees enrolling on the initial enrollment date (1972) will
this September be paying premiums for 33 years, by 2008, 36 years.
FRA recommends and urges the subcommittee to adopt an amendment to
the SBP to restore the value of participating in the program by
changing the date 2008 to October 31, 2005 when certain participants
attaining the age of 70 and having made payment to the Plan for at
least 30 years are no longer required to make such payments.
Authorize Surviving Spouses a Full Month's Retired Pay for Month in
which Retirees Die. This is a proposal initiated by FRA based an pleas
tram surviving spouses caught in the bureaucracy of mammoth rules and
regulations, absolutely foreign to them. Current regulations require
survivors of deceased military retirees to return any retirement
payments received for the month in which the retiree dies. On the
demise of a retired servicemember entitled to retired pay, the
surviving spouse or beneficiary is to notify the DOD of the death. The
Department's financial arm then stops payment on the retirement check
or electronic deposit and subsequently recalculates the payment to
cover the actual days in the month the retiree was alive. In other
cases where the death is not reported in a timely manner, any payments
made for the days the retiree was not alive will be recouped.
Retirement and its related activities are most agonizing if not an
arduous experience for many military retirees and families
transitioning to an unfamiliar civilian-lifestyle. For the average
retiree, most likely an enlisted member, he or she will suddenly
discover finances now will be more than a principal concern. On leaving
Active-Duty, the retiree's income will drop 60- to 70-percent of what
he/she earned while in uniform. The enlisted retiree, unlike his or her
Active-Duty counterpart, will receive no death gratuity and, in the
case of many of the older enlisted retirees, would not have had the
financial resources to purchase adequate insurance to provide a
financial cushion for the surviving spouse.
Death is a most traumatic experience for survivors. It is a most
painful time when the surviving spouse must accept the task of
arranging for the deceased members' funeral services. The additional
cast involved constitutes a major output of scarce family dollars only
amplified by the loss of retirement income when needed the most. A
final month's retirement payment will go far in helping to sooth the
strain on the survivor's financial obligations.
To aid in reducing the cost of the proposal, survivor benefit
payments may be forfeited for the month in which the retiree dies and,
in lieu thereof, the survivor receives the retiree's final month's
check. In the event the retiree's final month's retirement check is
less than the SBP annuity, the survivor would receive the one most
favorable.
FRA recommends that, in consideration of service to the Nation and
the trauma surrounding the death of a retired servicemember, the
surviving spouse would be entitled to receive and retain the final
retired paycheck/deposit covering any month in which the member was
alive for any 24-hour period.
Concurrent Receipt. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
for Fiscal Year 2003 authorizes a special compensation that establishes
a beachhead to authorizing full concurrent receipt, a term for the
payment of both military non-disability retired pay and any VA
compensation for service-connected disabilities without a reduction in
one or the other payment. The fiscal year 2004 and 2005 NDAA expanded
the benefit list. Although FRA is appreciative of the effort of
Congress to address the issue, it fails to meet the resolution adopted
by the Association's membership to seek full compensation for both
length-in-service military retirement and VA compensation. Currently,
the receipt of VA compensation causes a like reduction to a retired
servicemember's military retired pay. This leads to the belief, and
well deserved, that retired servicemembers, earning retired pay as a
result of 20 years or more of service, are forced to pay for their own
disablement.
Most disabilities are recognized after the servicemember retires.
Some are discovered while the member is still performing Active-Duty or
as the result of a retirement physical. However, it is to the benefit
of the DOD to retire the member without compensation for any
disability. Instead, the member is directed to the DOD for compensatory
relief for the damages incurred by the member while serving the Nation
in uniform.
Prior to 1975, all military disability pay was tax exempt. A
perception of abuse to the system, mostly in the Armed Forces senior
officer grades, caused Congress to amend the Internal Revenue Code. The
Tax Reform Act of 1976 forced the DOD to change the rules so that only
a percentage of the member's disability retired pay attributable to
combat-related injuries would be tax-exempt. Subsequently, many
retiring servicemembers petitioned the VA for relief for service-
connected injuries.
Servicemembers, whether in uniform or retired, are considered
Federal employees subject not only to Title 10, U.S. Code, but Title 5,
U.S. Code, regulating the conduct and performance of government
employees, on the job or retired. When retired, servicemembers are not
entitled to VA compensation payments for their disabilities without
forfeiting an equal amount of their retired pay with one exception;
military retirees may go on the Federal employee rolls and subsequently
retire using military service time to calculate their Federal
retirement annuity. They, then, may receive veterans' compensation as
well as Federal civil service retirement payments with no offsets,
reductions, or limits. Why should current law discriminate against the
military retiree?
FRA encourages Congress to take the helm and fully authorize and
fund concurrent receipt of military non-disabled retirement pay and
veterans' compensation. Congress should remember that U.S.
servicemembers, more so than any collective group, not only had a major
hand in the creation of this Nation, but have contributed for more than
200 years to the military and economic power of the United States.
Those who have served in the Armed Forces for 20 years or more years
certainly deserve the opportunity to have equity with their
counterparts in the Federal service who can earn both without a penalty
to one or the other.
Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA). Recent threats to curtail or
halt cost of living adjustments have been lobbed in the direction of
military retired pay and related payments such as survivor benefit
annuities. Once again, Congress is urged to keep its promise that
military retired pay will maintain its purchasing power based on
increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
One must recall that the wisdom of Congress initiated the COLA
program in lieu of the ``recomputation'' system. Recomputation was a
term used to describe adjustments to military retired pay prior to the
1970s. Military retirees received retirement pay adjustments each time
Active-Duty pay was increased. This system guaranteed the servicemember
if he/she retired at a certain percentage of Active-Duty pay, that pay
would maintain the same percentage factor to Active-Duty pay throughout
retirement. In 1963, Congress--concerned with a heightened number of
retired WWII members on the retired roll--decided to switch to the CPI
method.
In 1985 the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act gave the administration an
open door policy to ``stop payment'' on COLAs to military retired pay.
The result was a frontal attack on Congress by military retirees under
the banner of the newly formed (The) Military Coalition. Congress did
not include veterans in its sequestration proposing a 3.7-percent COLA
for veterans and their survivors, so the Coalition used the slogan,
``Military retirees are veterans too.'' The Coalition was irate.
Conversely, COLA protection is the paramount reason military
retirees make an irrevocable decision to elect significant reductions
in retired pay to provide surviving spouses and children with an
annuity following the retiree's death. The most compelling reason for
the decision is that the guaranteed inflation protection made the SBP a
superior alternative to life insurance policies. The sequestration of
COLA funds violate that guarantee and greatly diminishes the value of
the SBP.
FRA recommends that Congress--if it reduces the fiscal year 2006
budget--not target military and Federal retirees' retirement pay. Such
action is discriminating and contrary to the promise made by Congress
to maintain the purchasing power of military retirement pay.
Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA). The
USFSPA is a statute adopted without hearings on the House side and no
up-or-down vote in the Senate. As one member of the House said at the
time, the law will cause more problems than it will solve. How true the
prediction.
Since its inception in 1982, more than two-thirds of States have
adopted community property laws. More have turned to no-fault decisions
in determining the outcome of divorces. Some of the actions were the
result of State Courts embracing the USFSPA as a means to automatically
strip military retirees of their hard-earned retirement pay for the
payment of alimony to a former spouse who in far too many cases, failed
to dedicate the same number of years to the marriage and the military.
Whether serving in war or peace, the military member is credited only
2\1/2\ percentage points for each year of Active-Duty. It takes at
least 20 years to receive sufficient credits to qualify for retirement.
On reaching that plateau the member becomes entitled to 50 percent of
his or her Active-Duty pay. Fifty percent of the member's Active-Duty
pay, by the way, is nearer to 30 percent of all pay and allowances
earned while serving in uniform.
One of the major problems with USFSPA is it allows state courts to
consider military retired pay as property that may be divided between
the retiree and the spouse/former spouse. The court, with little or no
knowledge of how the retiree earns retired pay, grants the spouse/
former spouse a portion of that retired pay for the life of the
retiree, regardless of the number of years of marriage. A lifetime of
payments to a spouse/former spouse for a period of marriage less than
20 years during which the retiree was slowly accruing only 2\1/2\
percent for each of those years is unfair, inequitable, and
discriminating.
The spouse/former spouse should not be entitled to more than an
equal percentage of the retiree's retirement pay for each year of
marriage and should not be in receipt of that amount for any longer
than the number of years of marriage. Although the servicemember is not
entitled to retired pay until the minimum credible time is completed,
the former spouse can become eligible at any time based on the decision
of a Civil Court.
It's a terrible law. Moreover, since State courts have little if
anything to say about how the military directs its people to serve the
Nation, and servicemembers agree only to defend the Constitution, why
does the Federal Government dump its fiscal responsibilities to its
uniformed members onto the State courts?
FRA recommends that this subcommittee, Congress, accept the
responsibility of conducting a review and the possible adoption of
amendments to the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act [10
USC, 1408] to establish a more equitable division of the
servicemember's retirement pay with a spouse/former spouse upon
dissolution of a marriage.
Medical Care Recovery Act. In the summer of 2003 while the new
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps was in the process of assuming his
duty, his wife was nearly killed by a ``wayward driver.'' She spent
weeks in a Navy hospital the recipient of emergency brain surgery,
intensive care, military air transportation to Washington, D.C, from
California, and both occupational and physical therapy. Now the Navy is
proceeding to recover the returns from the insurance companies of both
parties, an estimated $100,000.
The Navy, as with the other Services, cites a 41-year old law,
Medical Care Recovery Act, as the basis to collect payment for medical
care administered to uniformed personnel. According to a January 4,
2004, news article by James W. Crawley in the San Diego Union Tribune,
the Navy collected $11 million in reimbursements from insurance
companies in the past year ``that would have gone to sailors, marines,
and their dependents.''
Apparently, the law is reasonable. The Navy operates its medical
facilities with taxpayer funds and it is only right that these
expenditures be recovered whenever possible. However, the question of
fairness rises to the front when the process of recovery goes against
the victim. FRA believes any recovery should come from the insurance of
the party at fault. In many cases the proceeds from the victim's
insurance policy will be earmarked for expenses involved in the
continued care of the victim, babysitting, replacement vehicle, and
other everyday living requirements not now accomplished on a personal
basis but by payment or hire.
The ironic part of this statute is that recovery is only
collectible through a third party. If a servicemember is injured as a
result of ``willful and negligent'' acts and in receipt of medical care
in a military treatment facility (MTF), no claim of recovery can be
made against the member.
The law does allow the Secretary concerned to waive a claim of the
United States. However, it is doubtful that affected servicemembers are
aware such a waiver may be granted if requested. Such information
should be disseminated to all servicemembers through the military's
information program and upon receipt of treatment and care at a MTF.
FRA recommends a review of the law, 10 USC 1095, and the
possibility of an amendment authorizing the no-fault victim to retain a
certain percentage of the proceeds from insurance claims so the no-
fault victim will not bear a fiscal burden during a time of financial
need.
other issues
Predatory Lending and Pension Selling. FRA continues to be vitally
concerned that there are lending institutions and other predatory
businesses whose mission appears to be scamming our men and women in
uniform, particularly those who are young and married. The rates of
interest charged for loans to servicemembers is ludicrous and should be
stopped or, at least, required to charge an average percentage
interest. Current rates are so that servicemembers must keep on paying
and paying with little hope of getting ahead of the lending
institutions. Other predators are pursuing retirees, veterans, and
social security recipients in an effort to ``purchase'' their Federal
payments. This is against the law but apparently is not being enforced.
FRA recommends that this subcommittee support the adoption of an
anti-predatory lending act and an amendment to current law preventing
the ``purchasing'' or ``selling'' of Federal payments made to military
retirees, veterans, and social security recipients.
conclusion
FRA is grateful for the opportunity to present its goals for fiscal
year 2006. If there are questions or a need for further information,
please call Matt Schafer, FRA Acting Director of Legislative Programs,
at 703-683-1400.
Mr. Strobridge. Ms. Raezer, Ms. Holleman, and I are here
representing different organizations, but we all work very
closely together, and we share common goals on the vast
majority of issues. So to save repetitive testimony, what we
would like to do is focus our remarks on different subject
areas, with the understanding that each of us supports the
other's remarks.
For my part, I will highlight coalition priorities on
Active-Duty, Guard, Reserve, and health care issues.
First, we are grateful to the subcommittee for your
continued emphasis on restoring military pay comparability with
the private sector. We certainly support the proposed 3.1
percent pay raise and the bonus flexibilities that DOD and the
Services were requesting, but we also believe that additional
targeted raises are needed for senior enlisted members and
warrant officers to reflect the salaries for similarly educated
and experienced people in the private sector.
Second, we continue to believe that the force is too small
for its long-term operational missions. We certainly hope the
subcommittee will provide substantial and permanent end
strength increases, particularly for the Army and the Marine
Corps, to ease operational stresses and protect against
retention and readiness shortfalls. We recognize that that
poses a recruiting challenge, but to us, we need to devote
whatever resources it takes to do that to be able to defend the
country.
One no-cost benefit that we ask the subcommittee to pursue
is to provide military members the same health premium
conversion and flexible spending account benefits that all
other Federal civilians already enjoy. These programs would
save many servicemembers thousands of dollars a year by letting
them pay child care and health care expenses with pre-tax
dollars, and it would save DOD money as well by reducing its
payroll tax liability. It does not make sense to us that
military members are denied savings options that all other
Federal workers have.
Next, the coalition believes we must protect wounded
servicemembers' income by continuing hostile fire and hazard
pays during periods of hospitalization and rehabilitation.
Troops who get paid for just incurring the risk should not lose
their pay for actually incurring the combat wounds.
Mr. Chairman, we are particularly grateful for your
personal efforts to secure health coverage for the selected
Reserve. The first fruits of that labor will be recognized
later this month, but we believe more remains to be done. Many
remain without health coverage, and coverage is only temporary
for those people who do sign up. We expect many will be
reluctant to enroll their families in a program for which their
eligibility will expire in only a couple of years. We had that
very experience with a Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan
(FEHBP) test program several years ago that the subcommittee
authorized.
The requirement to enroll before leaving Active-Duty also
will inhibit informed consultation with the family members most
affected by this decision. We share your belief that all
Selected Reserve members deserve permanent coverage. We believe
they also deserve the option to have the Government pay the
premiums or, at least, a share of the premiums for their
civilian coverage when they are mobilized, just as the DOD
already does for its own civilian employees.
On the issue of Reserve retirement, the coalition believes
some adjustment is necessary to recognize the dramatically
increased military service demands on this group. They are now
being told to expect extended mobilizations every 6 years, and
that could take 25 percent of their working life as long as
they are in the Reserves. That is going to dramatically reduce
their expected civilian retirement benefits, 401(k)
contributions, and so forth, and we believe it is appropriate
to help offset that with an adjustment to the Reserve
retirement age.
The coalition also recommends as a matter of equity that
members who are activated for more than 30 days should be
entitled to full military pay, including locality-based housing
allowances.
On the defense health program, the coalition remains
concerned about seemingly annual funding shortfalls that cause
cutbacks in beneficiary sensitive areas like pharmacy
formularies. We remain troubled by the lack of seamless
transition between DOD and VA health care programs for the
returning wounded. Despite years of effort, we still do not
have a transferrable electronic medical record or an electronic
DD Form 214. Despite the subcommittee's guidance, there is
uneven implementation of the single discharge physical, a
particular problem at major facilities like Walter Reed and
Bethesda. We believe an extraordinary Manhattan Project kind of
effort is required to ensure the kind of leadership focus,
priority, continuity, and effective delivery that our veterans
need.
Finally, we urge the subcommittee's continuing focus on
ensuring timely access to quality health care for TRICARE
standard beneficiaries, as well as prime enrollees. The DOD has
gathered initial survey data on provider availability as the
subcommittee directed, but it has yet to establish what
constitutes inadequate availability or what corrective actions
are required for localities that fall below that standard. We
ask your support in requiring development of such standards and
ensuring the survey data is used to improve beneficiary access.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my portion of the testimony,
and Ms. Raezer will now address quality of life concerns.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Strobridge follows:]
Prepared Statement by Steven P. Strobridge
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee. On
behalf of The Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent
uniformed services and veterans' organizations, we are grateful to the
subcommittee for this opportunity to express our views concerning
issues affecting the uniformed services community. This testimony
provides the collective views of the following military and veterans'
organizations, which represent approximately 5.5 million current and
former members of the seven uniformed services, plus their families and
survivors.
Air Force Association
Air Force Sergeants Association
Air Force Women Officers Associated
American Logistics Association
AMVETS (American Veterans)
Army Aviation Association of America
Association of Military Surgeons of the United States
Association of the United States Army
Chief Warrant Officer and Warrant Officer Association,
U.S. Coast Guard
Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S. Public
Health Service, Inc.
Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the
United States
Fleet Reserve Association
Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.
Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America
Marine Corps League
Marine Corps Reserve Association
Military Chaplains Association of the United States of
America
Military Officers Association of America
Military Order of the Purple Heart
National Association for Uniformed Services
National Guard Association of the United States
National Military Family Association
National Order of Battlefield Commissions
Naval Enlisted Reserve Association
Naval Reserve Association
Navy League of the United States
Noncommissioned Officers Association
Reserve Officers Association
Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces
The Retired Enlisted Association
United Armed Forces Association
United States Army Warrant Officers Association
United States Coast Guard Chief Petty Officers
Association
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States
Veterans' Widows International Network
The Military Coalition, Inc., does not receive any grants or
contracts from the Federal Government.
executive summary--recommendations of the military coalition
Active Force Issues
Personnel Strengths and Operations Tempo
The Military Coalition continues to strongly recommend increased
Service end strengths to sustain the long-term global war on terrorism
and fulfillment of national military strategy. The Coalition supports
increases in recruiting resources as necessary to meet this
requirement. The Coalition urges the subcommittee to consider all
possible manpower options to ease operational stresses on Active,
Guard, and Reserve personnel.
Pay Raise Comparability and Pay Table Reform
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to restore full pay
comparability as soon as possible and to reject any request from the
administration to cap pay raises or provide smaller increases to
servicemembers in any of the uniformed services, including the U.S.
Public Health Service or National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. The Coalition believes all members of the uniformed
services need and deserve annual raises at least equal to private
sector wage growth. The Coalition supports ``targeted'' raises to align
the pay of career servicemembers with earnings in the private sector
for civilians with comparable experience and education. However, to the
extent that ``targeted'' raises are needed, the Department of Defense
(DOD) should define the ultimate objective pay table toward which these
targeted raises are aimed.
Combat and Incentive Pays during Hospitalization
The Military Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to take
action to ensure combat-wounded servicemembers do not have their
compensation reduced during periods of hospitalization and
rehabilitation. The Coalition believes that such compensation treatment
is essential for servicemembers who continue to suffer from the
injuries sustained through combat and other hazardous duty, which these
compensation incentives were created to recognize.
Pre-tax Treatment for Health and Child Care Expenses
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct the
Department of Defense to implement for military members the same health
premium conversion and flexible spending account plans that all other
government employees already can use to reduce their out-of-pocket
expenses for health care and dependent care. The Coalition's research
indicates this can be done within the subcommittee's purview without
any necessity to change tax laws.
Commissaries
The Military Coalition opposes initiatives that would reduce
benefits or savings for members and strongly supports full funding of
the commissary benefit to sustain the current level of service for all
beneficiaries including retirees, Guard and Reserve personnel, and
their families.
Family Readiness and Support
The Military Coalition recommends a family support structure, with
improved education and outreach programs and increased childcare
availability, to ensure a high level of family readiness to meet the
requirements of increased force deployments for active, National Guard
and Reserve members.
GI Bill Incentives for the 21st Century Force. Montgomery GI Bill
(MGIB) education benefits need to be upgraded to support Active and
Reserve Forces recruitment programs, allow equitable benefit usage on
Active-Duty, restore proportional benefits for Guard and Reserve
initial entrants, allow career servicemembers who declined `VEAP' a
MGIB enrollment opportunity, and other initiatives.
Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH)
The Military Coalition urges an adjustment to grade-based housing
standards to more accurately reflect enlisted members' realistic
housing options and members' out-of-pocket housing expenses.
Permanent Change of Station (PCS)
The Military Coalition urges continued upgrades of permanent
change-of-station reimbursement allowances including expedited
implementation of the Families First Program, modifying personal
property weight allowances for senior enlisted grades (E-7, E-8, and E-
9), and authorizing shipment of a second POV at government expense to
Alaska, Hawaii and other overseas accompanied assignments.
National Guard and Reserve Issues
Stress on Guard and Reserve Forces
The Military Coalition urges additional resources for Reserve
recruitment, retention, and family support to relieve enormous pressure
on overstressed Guard and Reserve Forces.
Healthcare for Members of the National Guard and Reserve
The Military Coalition urges permanent authority for cost-share
access to TRICARE for all members of the Selected Reserve--those who
train regularly--and their families in order to ensure medical
readiness and provide continuity of health insurance coverage. As an
option for these servicemembers, the Coalition urges authorizing the
government to pay part or all of private health insurance premiums when
activation occurs, a program already in effect for reservists who work
for the Department of Defense.
Review and upgrade the Reserve Compensation System to Match the New
``Contract''
Develop and implement improvements to Reserve compensation. Restore
the Selected Reserve Montgomery GI Bill (SR-MGIB) to 50 percent parity
with the Active-Duty MGIB; authorize retirement credit for all earned
drill points; increase Reserve bonuses, special and incentive pays;
simplify the Reserve duty system without compromising the current or
future value of Reserve compensation; eliminate BAH II; and award full
veteran status to Guard and Reserve servicemembers who successfully
complete 20 qualifying years of Reserve service, but do not otherwise
qualify as veterans under Title 38.
Guard/Reserve Retirement Upgrade
The Military Coalition urges lowering the Reserve retirement age
from 60 to 55 as an option to partially offset loss of civilian
retirement benefits resulting from greatly increased military service
requirements.
Guard/Reserve Family Support Programs
The Military Coalition urges support and funding for a core set of
family support programs and benefits that meet the unique needs of
geographically dispersed Guard and Reserve families who do not have
ready access to military installations or current experience with
military life. Programs should promote better communication and enhance
education for Reserve component family members about their rights and
benefits and available services.
Financial Relief for Activated Reservists and Their Employers
The Military Coalition urges enactment of legislation to relieve
financial strains on Guard and Reserve members and to recognize their
employers in a tangible way: tax credits for employers who pay wage
differentials to activated employees, similar tax credits for hiring
temporary workers, and authority for penalty free withdrawals and
reinvestment into civilian retirement plans due to economic pressures
associated with mobilization.
Survivor Program Issues
SBP-DIC Offset
The Military Coalition strongly recommends that the current dollar-
for-dollar offset of Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) benefits by the amount
of Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) be eliminated. Indemnity
payments when the service causes death should be added to--not
substituted for--retiree-purchased SBP. Active-Duty spouses, many of
whom have their entire SBP offset by DIC, deserve more than a $993
monthly annuity, considering police and firefighter survivors often
receive 100 percent of pay as an annuity in addition to substantial
lump-sum payments.
30-Year Paid-Up SBP
The Military Coalition strongly recommends acceleration of the
October 1, 2008, implementation date for 30-year paid-up SBP coverage
to October 1, 2005. A 1972 retiree has already paid almost 20 percent
more premiums than a 1978 retiree will ever pay. By 2008, they will
have paid a 34 percent ``Greatest Generation'' tax.
Death Benefits Enhancement
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to raise SGLI to
$500,000, with the first $100,000 provided at no cost to the
servicemember, and to increase the military death gratuity to $100,000.
The Coalition believes this coverage should be extended to all deaths
since Oct. 7, 2001 that were in the line of duty, and not just deaths
caused by combat or other narrowly defined determinations.
Final Retired Paycheck
The Military Coalition strongly recommends that surviving spouses
of deceased retired members should be allowed to retain the member's
full retired pay for the month in which the member died.
Retirement Issues
Concurrent Receipt of Military Retired Pay and Veterans Disability
Compensation
The Military Coalition greatly appreciates Congress' action to
date, but urges subcommittee leaders and members to be sensitive to the
thousands of disabled retirees who are not yet included in concurrent
receipt legislation enacted over the past several years. Specifically,
as a priority, the Coalition urges the subcommittee to expand combat-
related special compensation to disabled retirees who were not allowed
to serve 20 years solely because of combat-related disabilities and
ensure full, immediate compensation for otherwise qualifying members
rated as ``unemployable.'' The Coalition strongly urges the
subcommittee to ensure the upcoming Veterans' Disability Benefits
Commission protects the principles guiding the DOD disability
retirement program and Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) disability
compensation system.
Former Spouse Issues
The Military Coalition recommends corrective legislation, including
the recommendations made by the DOD in their 2001 Uniformed Services
Former Spouse Protection Action (USFSPA) report, be enacted to
eliminate inequities in the administration of the USFSPA.
Pre-Tax Premium Conversion Option
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support S. 484 and to seek
Finance Committee support to provide all Federal and uniformed services
beneficiaries a tax exemption for premiums or enrollment fees paid for
TRICARE Prime, TRICARE Standard supplements, the Active-Duty dental
plan, TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan, FEHBP and Long Term Care.
Health Care Issues
Defense Health Program Funding
The Military Coalition strongly recommends the subcommittee
continue its watchfulness to ensure full funding of the Defense Health
Program, including military medical readiness, needed TRICARE Standard
improvements, and the DOD peacetime health care mission. It is critical
that the Defense Health Budget be sufficient to secure increased
numbers of providers needed to ensure access for TRICARE beneficiaries
in all parts of the country.
Medical Manpower Transformation
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to provide oversight
of the implementation of medical manpower transformation plans on
health care delivery to ensure the plan to shift non-operational care
to civilian providers does not inadvertently compromise health care
delivery/beneficiary access, Graduate Medical Education, medical
professional growth and promotion opportunities, or the assignment
rotation base.
Assistance for Wounded Combat Veterans and Others Separating from
Military Service
The Military Coalition asks the subcommittee to demand a concerted
``Manhattan Project'' kind of effort to ensure full and timely
implementation of seamless transition activities, a bi-directional
electronic medical record (EMR), enhanced post-deployment health
assessments, implementation of an electronic DD214, additional family
and mental health counseling services, and the single physical at time
of discharge.
Implementation of TRICARE Reserve Select
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to provide oversight
of implementation of the TRICARE Reserve Select benefit, to extend
eligibility for TRICARE Reserve Select for all Selected Reserve
members, to take steps to permit members of the Individual Ready
Reserve (IRR) called to Active-Duty for a contingency operation to
participate in TRICARE Reserve Select, if they remain in the IRR
subject to future recall, to address loss of TRICARE Reserve Select
benefits when members are mobilized during their benefit period and to
permit beneficiaries to elect TRICARE Reserve Select coverage during
the 180 days of Transitional Assistance Management Program.
TRICARE Standard Improvements
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee's continued oversight
to ensure DOD is held accountable to promptly meet requirements for
beneficiary education and support, establish criteria for evaluation of
access/provider availability, and follow through with education and
recruitment of sufficient providers to solve access problems for
standard beneficiaries.
Provider Reimbursement
The Military Coalition requests the subcommittee's support of any
means to establish and maintain Medicare and TRICARE provider payment
rates sufficient to ensure beneficiary access, and to support measures
to address Medicare's flawed provider reimbursement formula.
TRICARE Transition And Implementation Of New Contracts. The
Military Coalition recommends that the subcommittee continue to
strictly monitor implementation of TRICARE contracts, especially the
ability to meet Prime access standards, and ensure that Beneficiary
Advisory Groups' inputs are sought in the evaluation process.
Prior Authorization under TNEX
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee's continued efforts
to reduce and ultimately eliminate requirements for pre-authorization
for Standard beneficiaries and asks the subcommittee to assess the
impact of new prior authorization requirements upon beneficiaries'
access to care.
Uniform Formulary Implementation
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure the uniform
formulary remains robust, with reasonable medical-necessity rules and
increased communication to beneficiaries about program benefits, pre-
authorization requirements, appeals, and other key information.
Access to TSRx for Nursing Home Beneficiaries
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct DOD to
reimburse pharmacy expenses at TRICARE network rates to uniformed
services beneficiaries residing in residential facilities that do not
participate in the TRICARE network pharmacy program, and who cannot
access network pharmacies due to physical or medical constraints.
TRICARE Benefits for Remarried Widows
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to restore equity for
surviving spouses by reinstating TRICARE benefits for otherwise
qualifying remarried spouses whose second or subsequent marriage ends
because of death, divorce or annulment, consistent with the treatment
accorded CHAMPVA-eligible survivors.
TRICARE Prime Continuity in BRAC Areas
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to amend title 10 to
require continuation of TRICARE Prime network coverage for uniformed
services beneficiaries residing in Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
areas.
overview
Mr. Chairman, The Military Coalition (TMC) thanks you and the
entire subcommittee for your continued, unwavering support for the fair
treatment of Active-Duty, Guard, Reserve and retired members of the
uniformed services, and their families and survivors. The
subcommittee's work to greatly improve military pay, eliminate out-of-
pocket housing expenses, improve health care, and enhance other
personnel programs has made a significant difference in the lives of
Active, Guard, and Reserve personnel and their families. This is
especially true for our deployed servicemembers and their families and
survivors who are engaged throughout this world in the global war on
terror.
The subcommittee's work to enact provisions eliminating the
military survivor benefit plan ``widows tax'' over the next 3 years
will provide significantly improved survivor benefits for current and
future beneficiaries, including survivors of servicemembers fighting
today in Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom (OIF/OEF). These and the
many other important provisions of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2005 will enhance the quality of life of our
servicemembers, retirees, and their families and survivors in the years
ahead.
Congress has made military compensation equity a top priority, and
much has been accomplished over the past several years to improve the
lives of men and women in uniform and their families. But we hear
recommendations periodically from some in the administration to return
to the failed policies of the past by capping future military pay
raises below private sector wage growth. Shortchanging compensation for
military personnel has exacted severe personnel readiness problems more
than once in the last 25 years, and the Coalition thanks the
subcommittee for staying the course to further close the pay
comparability gap and for enacting provisions to reestablish the pay
comparability principle in permanent law.
Despite these improvements in military compensation, we are deeply
troubled by how much harder troops have to work--and their families
have to sacrifice--for that compensation.
Today's reality is simple--servicemembers and their families are
being asked to endure ever-greater workloads and ever-greater
sacrifices. Repeated deployments, often near back-to-back, have
stressed the force to the point where recruiting and retention are real
concerns for some Services; and, if it weren't for the Services' stop-
loss policies and massive recalls of Guard and Reserve members,
readiness would suffer. The subcommittee's work to increase Army and
Marine Corps end strength sends a clear signal that our forces are
stretched too thin, but even with these increases, the hard fact is
that we don't have large enough forces to carry out today's missions
and still be prepared for any new contingencies that may arise
elsewhere in the world. In addition, the Coalition is concerned that
the Navy and Air Force are in the midst of ``transformation''
initiatives that include reducing their respective end strengths
despite continuing demanding operational commitments.
In testimony today, The Military Coalition offers its collective
recommendations on what needs to be done to address these important
issues and sustain long-term personnel readiness.
budget overview
The Military Coalition is concerned that some in the executive
branch are now bemoaning Congress' efforts in recent years to reverse
military pay shortfalls and correct compensation and benefit inequities
affecting retired military members, military survivors and Guard and
Reserve members, contending that the cost those initiatives impinges on
current defense budget needs, including the ability to support
compensation initiatives for the current force.
The Coalition objects strongly to any such efforts to pit one
segment of the military community against another. Our experience has
been that this subcommittee has rarely, if ever, turned down Defense
Department requests for current force funding needs. Congress also has
had greater sensitivity than the executive branch--regardless of the
political party of the administration--to the importance of career
military benefits to long-term retention and readiness.
Those who complain today about the cost of restoring military pay
comparability, repealing REDUX retirement penalties, and enacting
TRICARE For Life apparently do not recall that the Joint Chiefs of
Staff at the time all told Congress that fixes were needed in these
areas in order to address the significant retention problems
experienced in the late 1990s.
The Coalition is amazed to see some in the Defense Department now
contending that repairing retiree and survivor benefits doesn't help
retention, and that if we just give today's soldier a lump sum of cash
for a pickup truck, that soldier won't care about future retirement
benefits. To this way of thinking, anyone who is not currently on
Active-Duty provides no return on investment--which prompts opposition
to such congressional initiatives as concurrent receipt, health
coverage for the Selected Reserve, and elimination of the Survivor
Benefit Plan ``military widows tax.'' It's precisely this kind of
short-term budget thinking that led to the retention crises of the late
1970s and late 1990s.
Congress has been wise enough to see what executive branch
officials of both parties have not over the past 10 years--that it is
not enough to just meet the short term desires of the 19 year old new
enlistee with more cash in hand. Those members get older and have
families, and their families grow much more concerned at the second and
third reenlistment points, often after multiple family separations,
whether the long-term benefits of a military career offset the
extraordinary and persistent demands and sacrifices inherent in serving
20 to 30 years in uniform.
The Military Coalition believes this subcommittee will see past
penny-wise and pound-foolish efforts to rob one element of the military
community to pay another, and will continue to recognize the hard-
learned lessons of the past--that successfully sustaining readiness and
retention over the long term requires fair treatment for military
members and families at every stage: Active-Duty, Guard and Reserve,
retired, and survivors.
If the administration is concerned about budget shortfalls or
trade-offs in any area, the Coalition strongly believes that any such
trade-offs reflect the administration's own choices. They are not the
fault of the retirees, survivors, or Guard and Reserve members who
needed and deserved compensation corrections, and they are not the
fault of Congress that rightly enacted those corrections. If the
Department will only lay out the current defense requirements that need
to be met, the Coalition believes firmly that the subcommittee and
Congress will find an appropriate way to meet those needs.
active force issues
Since the end of the Cold War, the size of the force and real
defense spending have been cut by more than a third. In fact, the
defense budget today is 3.8 percent of this Nation's Gross Domestic
Product--less than half of the share it comprised in 1986. But today
America's Armed Forces are engaged in a global war on terrorism--a
campaign that has made constant and repeated deployments a way of life
for today's servicemembers. There is no question that the stress of
today's sustained operations is taking a significant toll on our men
and women in uniform, and their families and survivors, and this is
being reflected in failure of the Army Guard and Reserve to meet its
recent recruiting goals. In addition, there are indicators of growing
challenges in recruiting members of the other Services.
The subcommittee has taken action to help relieve the stress of
repeated deployments by increasing Army and Marine Corps end strength
and by making permanent family separation and danger area pays. These
are notable and commendable improvements; however, sustaining a quality
force for the long-term, remains a significant challenge, especially in
technical specialties. While some Services are meeting retention goals,
these goals may be skewed by post-September 11 patriotism and by
Services' intermittent stop-loss policies. This artificial retention
bubble is not sustainable for the long-term under the current pace of
operations, despite the reluctance of some to see anything other than
rosy scenarios.
From the servicemembers' standpoint, the increased personnel tempo
necessary to meet continued and sustained training and operational
requirements has meant having to work progressively longer and harder
every year. ``Time away from home'' is now a real focal point in the
retention equation. Servicemembers are enduring longer duty days;
increased family separations; difficulties in accessing affordable,
quality health care; deteriorating military housing; less opportunity
to use education benefits; and significant out-of-pocket expenses with
each permanent change of station move.
Intensified and sustained operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are
being met by servicemembers' patriotic dedication, but there is little
question that once Service stop-loss policies are lifted, the retention
of combat-experienced servicemembers is going to be problematic.
Experienced (and predominantly married) officers, noncommissioned
officers (NCOs) and petty officers are under pressure to make long-term
career decisions against a backdrop of a demand for their skills and
services in the private sector. Many servicemembers and their families
debate among themselves whether the rewards of a service career are
sufficient to offset the attendant demands and sacrifices inherent in
uniformed service. They see their peers going home to their families
every night, and when faced with repeated deployments to a combat zone,
the appeal of a more stable career and family life, often including an
enhanced compensation package with absolutely less demanding working
conditions, is attractive. When allowed the option, many of our
excellent soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines will opt for civilian
career choices, not because they don't love what they do, but because
their families just can no longer take the stress.
On the recruiting front, one only needs to watch prime-time
television to see powerful marketing efforts on the part of the
Services. But this strong marketing must be backed up by an ability to
retain these experienced and talented men and women. This is especially
true as the Services become more and more reliant on technically
trained personnel. The subcommittee reacted to retention problems by
improving military compensation elements, and the Coalition understands
that you have a continuing agenda in place to address these very
important problems. But we also understand the pressures to reduce
spending and the challenges associated with proposed defense budget
increases. The truth remains that the finest weapon systems in the
world are of little use if the Services don't have enough high quality,
well-trained people to operate, maintain and support them.
The subcommittee's key challenge will be to ease servicemembers'
debilitating workload stress and continue to build on the foundation of
trust that you have established over the past 4 years--a trust that is
being strained by years of disproportional sacrifice. Meeting this
challenge will require a reasonable commitment of resources on several
fronts.
Personnel Strengths and Operations Tempo
The Coalition has noted with disappointment the Department of
Defense's resistance to accept Congress' repeated offers to permanently
increase Service end strength to relieve the stress on today's Armed
Forces, which are clearly sustaining a wearing operations tempo
fighting today's global war on terrorism. While we are encouraged by
the subcommittee's work to increase Army and Marine Corps end strength,
we are deeply concerned that administration-proposed plans for
temporary manpower increases rely too heavily on continuation of stop-
loss policies, unrealistic retention assumptions, overuse of the Guard
and Reserves, optimistic scenarios in Southwest Asia, and the absence
of new contingency needs.
The Department has responded to your offers to increase end
strength with a continuing intention to transform forces, placing non-
mission essential resources in core warfighting skills, and
transferring certain functions to civilians. While the Department's
transformation vision is an understandable and necessary plan, its
implementation will take a long time--time that is taking its toll
after years of extraordinary operational tempo that is exhausting our
downsized forces.
The Joint Chiefs testified that their forces were stressed before
September 11, and end strength should have been increased then. Now,
almost 4 years later, heavily engaged in two major operations with no
end in sight, massive Guard and Reserve mobilizations, and broad
implementation of ``stop-loss'' policies, action to provide substantial
relief is late and short of the need. Especially noteworthy is a recent
memorandum detailing serious Army Reserve readiness concerns
referencing the Reserves as ``rapidly degenerating into a broken
force.''
Administration and military leaders warn of a long-term mission
against terrorism that requires sustained, large deployments to Central
Asia and elsewhere. The Services simply do not have sufficient numbers
to sustain the global war on terrorism, deployments, training exercises
and other commitments, even with the recall of large numbers of Guard
and Reserve personnel. Service leaders have tried to alleviate the
situation by reorganizing deployable units, authorizing ``family down
time'' following redeployment, or other laudable initiatives, but such
things do little to eliminate long-term workload or training backlogs,
and pale in the face of ever-increasing mission requirements. For too
many years, there has always been another major contingency coming, on
top of all the existing ones. If the administration does not recognize
when extra missions exceed the capacity to perform them, Congress must
assume that obligation.
Earlier force reductions went too far, and end strengths should
have been increased several years ago to sustain today's pace of
operations. Deferral of additional meaningful action to address this
problem cannot continue without risking serious consequences. The
Military Coalition's concerns in this regard are not limited to the
Army and Marine Corps. For example, a recent DOD report from the Office
of the Inspector General (D-2005-024) on ``Management of Navy Senior
Enlisted Personnel Assignments in Support of Operation Iraqi Freedom''
states that despite meeting Navy-required readiness levels, senior
enlisted manning levels are not measured when assessing a unit's
readiness level, and that visits to 14 units found that four units
deployed with less than 80 percent of their senior enlisted warfighting
positions filled. The Services' senior enlisted community is the
backbone of the Navy and according to the report, ``personnel in those
units were exposed to a higher level of risk for mishap or injury
during their deployment.'' The Coalition is concerned that planned
strength reductions can only exacerbate this problem.
This is the most difficult piece of the readiness equation, and
perhaps the most important under current conditions. Pay and allowance
raises are essential to reduce other significant career irritants, but
they can't fix fatigue and lengthy, frequent family separations.
Some argue that increasing end strengths wouldn't help the
situation, questioning whether the Services will be able to meet higher
recruiting goals. The Coalition believes strongly that this difficult
problem can and must be addressed as an urgent national priority, with
increases in recruiting budgets as necessary.
Others point to high reenlistment rates in deployed units in
certain Services as evidence that high operations tempo actually
improves morale. But much of the reenlistment rate anomaly is
attributable to tax incentives that encourage members to accelerate or
defer reenlistment to ensure this occurs in a combat zone, so that any
reenlistment bonus will be tax-free. Retention statistics are also
skewed by stop-loss policies. Over the long run, experience has shown
that time and again that family separation is the single greatest
retention disincentive. The Military Coalition believes that those who
ignore this and argue there is no retention problem are ``whistling
past the graveyard.''
The Military Coalition strongly recommends additional permanent
end strength increases to sustain the long-term global war on
terrorism and fulfill national military strategy. The Coalition
supports increases in recruiting resources as necessary to meet
this requirement. The Coalition urges the subcommittee to
consider all possible manpower options to ease operational
stresses on Active, Guard, and Reserve personnel.
Pay Raise Comparability
The Military Coalition appreciates the subcommittee's leadership
during the last 7 years in reversing previous practice of capping
servicemembers' annual pay raises below the average American's. In
servicemembers' eyes, those previous pay raise caps provided regular
negative feedback about the relative value the Nation placed on
retaining their services.
Unfortunately, this failed practice of capping military raises to
pay for budget shortfalls may yet rear its head again when those within
the administration look for ways to trim the budget. In the past, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) advocated capping future military
pay raises at the level of inflation, rather than keeping military pay
on par with private sector wage growth. The measure of merit with pay
raises is not inflation--it's the draw from the private sector, and pay
comparability with private sector wage growth is a fundamental
underpinning of the All-Volunteer Force, and it cannot be dismissed
without dire consequences for national defense.
When the pay raise comparability gap reached 13.5 percent in 1999--
resulting in predictable readiness crises--this subcommittee took
responsible action to change the law. Thanks in large part to your
efforts and the belated recognition of the problem by the executive
branch, the gap has been reduced to 4.9 percent in 2005.
While it would take another 10 years to restore full comparability
at the current pace, we sincerely appreciate this subcommittee's
decision to change the prior law that would have resumed capping pay
raises at below private sector growth and enacting a new law requiring
all raises, beginning in fiscal year 2007, to at least equal private
sector wage growth as measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
Employment Cost Index (ECI).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to restore full
pay comparability on the quickest possible schedule, and to
reject any request from the administration to cap future pay
raises for any segment of the uniformed services population.
Pay Table Reform
The subcommittee also has supported previous DOD plans to fix
problems within the basic pay table by authorizing special ``targeted''
adjustments for specific grade and longevity combinations in order to
align career servicemembers' pay with private sector earnings of
civilians with similar education and experience.
DOD had planned to continue targeted raises, but last year, the OMB
denied a $300 million request from DOD to continue targeted raises for
career servicemembers--a decision that deeply disappointed the
Coalition. The administration has requested another across the board
pay increase for 2006 rather than additional targeted raises for senior
enlisted and certain officer grades. We strongly urge this subcommittee
to authorize continued targeting of additional increases for career
servicemembers to correct shortcomings in their pay tables.
However, the Coalition urges the committee to direct DOD to
identify the ultimate ``objective pay table'' that would actually
achieve in 2006 the Department's purported goal of establishing
military pay at the 70th percentile of privates sector pay for
similarly experienced and educated private sector workers.
The Military Coalition believes all members need and deserve at
least a 3.1-percent raise in 2006 to continue progress toward
eliminating the existing pay raise comparability shortfall. The
Coalition also believes additional targeted raises are needed
to address the largest comparability shortfalls for career
enlisted members and warrant officers vs. private sector
workers with similar education, experience and expertise.
Combat and Incentive Pays During Hospitalization
The Coalition is concerned that current eligibility rules for
combat zone compensation programs are insensitive to the circumstances
of wounded members during hospitalization and rehabilitation.
Members assigned to combat zones, as well as those performing
hazardous duty elsewhere, are eligible for additional compensation
because the country recognizes the increased risk to life and limb
entailed in such duty. Yet the members who are injured or wounded lose
eligibility for hazardous duty/combat incentive programs during their
hospitalization and recovery from their injuries. In many cases, this
recovery can take months, and their families may be subject to
additional expenses because of their incapacity.
If we acknowledge that members deserve these extra pays for
incurring the risk inherent in a combat zone, we should also
acknowledge an obligation to continue such pays for those who actually
incur combat injuries until they can be returned to duty, retired, or
separated.
The Military Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to take
action to ensure servicemembers injured or wounded from
hazardous duty/combat do not have their compensation reduced
during periods of hospitalization. The Coalition believes that
such compensation treatment is essential for servicemembers who
continue to suffer from the wounds and injuries these incentive
programs were created to recognize.
Pre-tax Treatment for Child/Health Care Expenses
The Military Coalition is perplexed that military members are not
provided one key benefit that is common in the private sector and
virtually universal among all large civilian employers--premium
conversion and flexible spending account plans that allow payment of
health and child care expenses on a pre-tax basis.
Military members--and especially in cases where both spouses are
military members--have child-care needs that are driven by national
defense requirements. If Federal civilian employees and most private
sector employees are eligible for tax exemption for their child-care
expenses, it's extremely inequitable that military members are denied
comparable treatment.
These programs save many other government and corporate employees
thousands of dollars a year, and uniformed servicemembers certainly
have no less need for them.
The Coalition's research indicates this could be implemented by
policy if the administration chose, or otherwise by statutory direction
that would not require changing the tax code.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct the
Department of Defense to implement premium conversion and
flexible spending accounts for pre-tax payment of child and
health care expenses.
Commissaries
The Coalition is committed to preserving the value of the
commissary benefit--which is widely recognized as the cornerstone of
quality of life benefits and a valued part of servicemembers' total
compensation package.
Recent DOD initiatives included proposals to close a number of
commissaries, replace the traditional three-star officer serving as
chairman of the Commissary Operating Board (COB) with a political
appointee, and require a study on instituting variable pricing for
commissary products. Two of these proposals were apparently intended to
save money by ultimately reducing the annual appropriation supporting
the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA), which operates 272 commissaries
worldwide. The COB recommendation was also viewed as another indicator
of DOD's ongoing interest in eventually privatizing the benefit.
Subsequently, only a few previously approved closings were completed,
the COB chairmanship was retained by a senior uniformed officer, and
the variable pricing concept was dropped following a costly study. In
addition, Congress enacted new legislation strengthening statutory
protections for, and defining the purpose of the commissary and
exchange systems. The Coalition is grateful for the continued strong
support of this subcommittee in preserving this top rated benefit.
The Coalition supports cost savings through effective oversight and
management. However, we are concerned about the unrelenting pressure on
DeCA to cut spending and squeeze additional efficiencies from its
operations--despite years of effective reform initiatives and
recognition of the agency for instituting improved business practices.
The commissary is a highly valued quality of life benefit not
quantifiable solely on a dollars appropriated basis.
The Military Coalition opposes initiatives that would reduce
benefits or savings for members, and strongly supports full
funding of the benefit in fiscal year 2006 and beyond to
sustain the current level of service for all patrons, including
retirees, Guard and Reserve personnel, and their families.
Family Readiness and Support
Today, two-thirds of Active-Duty families and virtually all Guard
and Reserve families live off military installations, and approximately
60 percent of these servicemembers are married. A fully funded family
readiness program to include financial education and benefit
information has never been a more crucial component to the military
mission and overall readiness than it is today.
More needs to be done to ``connect'' servicemembers and their
families with important resources. A more aggressive outreach effort is
needed to educate servicemembers and their families on the benefits and
programs to which they are entitled. A systematic and integrated family
support system will help families cope with the stresses of deployment
and the demands of military life. Addressing such issues as childcare,
spousal employment/education, flexible spending accounts, increases in
SGLI, and other quality of life concerns will go a long way in
enhancing family well-being and improving retention and morale of the
force.
The Military Coalition urges improved family readiness through
further education and outreach programs and increased childcare
availability for servicemembers and their families and
associated support structure to assist families left behind
during deployments of Active-Duty, Guard, and Reserve members.
GI Bill Incentives for the 21st Century Force
Military transformation and rising pressures on the ``total force''
point to the need to restructure the Montgomery GI Bill educational
benefits program for the 21st century. Congress intended the modern
MGIB program to support military recruitment as well as transition. To
meet rising pressures on Active and Reserve Force recruitment,
especially among our ground forces, the Coalition recommends the Armed
Services Committees actively work with the Veterans Affairs Committees
to improve the MGIB as a recruiting tool. The Coalition notes with
appreciation that in recent years Congress enacted increases to MGIB
benefits for Active-Duty recruits and authorized full access to these
benefits during Active-Duty. However, the ``laptop generation'' of
Active-Duty troops gets reduced MGIB benefits compared to veterans, if
they use them on Active-Duty. Fixing this could stimulate retention.
Moreover, MGIB benefits--presently $1004 per month for full-time
study--don't pay for the actual cost of education at a 4-year public
college or university. In addition, approximately 63,000 career
servicemembers who entered service during the ``VEAP'' era but declined
to enroll in that program have been denied a MGIB enrollment
opportunity. The Coalition continues to support transferability of MGIB
benefits to family members for long-serving members who agree to
complete a military career.
The Military Coalition also believes it's time to reopen debate on
the need to dock volunteer force recruits $1,200 of their first year's
pay for the privilege of serving their country on Active-Duty.
Government college loan programs have no upfront payments; thus, it is
difficult to accept any rationale for our Nation's defenders to give up
a substantial portion of their first year's pay for MGIB eligibility.
The Coalition is also grateful to Congress for a ``down payment''
on MGIB upgrades for mobilized troops, who now can earn additional MGIB
entitlement for 90 days or more Active-Duty served in a contingency
operation. This significant step forward needs to be followed up with
other Reserve MGIB improvements. Given the erratic and often
dysfunctional call up practices of 2002-2003, many Guard and Reserve
troops who have now acquired up to 2 years Active-Duty are not eligible
for Active-Duty MGIB benefits due to breaks in service. Aggregate
Active-Duty served since September 11 should be authorized for a
proportional MGIB entitlement. For Guard and Reserve initial volunteers
who enlisted for the Reserve MGIB (chapter 1606, title 10), those
benefits have slipped to about 28 percent parity with the Active-Duty
program. The benchmark for the Reserve MGIB at its inception and for
the first 14 years of its existence was nearly 50 percent parity with
the Active-Duty MGIB (chapter 30, title 38). With worsening Guard and
Reserve recruitment, the Coalition believes that Congress needs to
restore Reserve MGIB program parity.
The Military Coalition recognizes that primary jurisdiction for
Active-Duty MGIB program is under the Veterans Affairs
Committee, whereas as the Reserve MGIB remains a Title 10
program. The Military Coalition urges that the MGIB be
restructured and improved along the lines described above so
that it can be restored as a powerful recruitment and retention
tool for the Active and Reserve Forces.
Basic Allowance for Housing
The Military Coalition supports revised housing standards that are
more realistic and appropriate for each pay grade. Many enlisted
personnel, for example, are unaware of the standards for their
respective pay grade and assume that their BAH level is determined by a
higher standard than they may in reality be entitled to. This causes
confusion about the mismatch between the amount of BAH they receive and
the actual cost of their type of housing. As an example, enlisted
members are not authorized to receive BAH for a 3-bedroom single-family
detached house until achieving the rank of E-9--which represents only 1
percent of the enlisted force--yet many personnel in more junior pay
grades do in fact reside in detached homes. The Coalition believes that
as a minimum, this BAH standard (single family detached house) should
be extended gradually to qualifying servicemembers beginning in grade
E-8 and subsequently to grade E-7 and below over several years as
resources allow.
The Coalition is most grateful to the subcommittee for acting in
1999 to reduce out-of-pocket housing expenses for servicemembers over
several years. Responding to the subcommittee's leadership on this
issue, the DOD proposed a similar phased plan to reduce median out-of-
pocket expenses to zero by fiscal year 2005. Through the leadership and
support of this subcommittee, this plan has been completed. This
aggressive action to better realign BAH rates with actual housing costs
has had a real impact and provided immediate relief to many
servicemembers and families who were strapped in meeting rising housing
and utility costs.
We applaud the subcommittee's action to deliver on this commitment.
Unfortunately, housing and utility costs continue to rise, and the pay
comparability gap, while diminished over recent years thanks to the
subcommittee's leadership, continues. Members residing off base face
higher housing expenses along with significant transportation costs,
and relief is especially important for junior enlisted personnel living
off base who do not qualify for other supplemental assistance.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct gradual
adjustments in grade-based housing standards to more accurately
reflect members' actual out-of-pocket housing expenses.
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) Reimbursements
The Military Coalition is most appreciative of the significant
increases in the Temporary Lodging Expense (TLE) allowance authorized
for fiscal year 2002 and the authority to raise PCS per diem expenses
to match those for Federal civilian employees in fiscal year 2003. The
Coalition also greatly appreciates the provision in the fiscal year
2004 defense bill to provide full replacement value for household goods
lost or damaged by private carriers during government directed moves,
and looks forward to the timely implementation of the DOD comprehensive
``Families First'' plan to improve claims procedures for servicemembers
and their families.
These were significant steps to upgrade allowances that had been
unchanged over many years. Even with these changes, however,
servicemembers continue to incur significant out-of-pocket costs in
complying with government-directed relocation orders.
For example, PCS mileage rates have not been adjusted since 1985.
The current rates range from 15 to 20 cents per mile--less than half
the 2005 temporary duty mileage rate of 40.5 cents per mile for
military members and Federal civilians. PCS household goods weight
allowances were increased for grades E-1 through E-4, effective January
2003, but weight allowance increases are also needed for servicemembers
in grade E-5 and above, and officers as well, to more accurately
reflect the normal accumulation of household goods over the course of a
career. The Coalition recommends modifying weight allowance tables for
personnel in pay grades E-7, E-8 and E-9 to coincide with allowances
for officers in grades O-4, O-5, and O-6, respectively. The Military
Coalition also supports authorization of a 500-pound professional goods
weight allowance for military spouses.
In addition, the overwhelming majority of service families own two
privately owned vehicles, driven by the financial need for the spouse
to work, or the distance some families must live from an installation
and its support services. Authority is needed to ship a second POV at
government expense to overseas' accompanied assignments. In many
overseas locations, families have difficulty managing without a second
family vehicle because family housing is often not co-located with
installation support services.
With regard to families making a PCS move, members are authorized
time off for housing-hunting trips in advance of PCS relocations, but
must make any such trips at personal expense, without any government
reimbursement such as Federal civilians receive. Further, Federal and
state cooperation is required to provide unemployment compensation
equity for military spouses who are forced to leave jobs due to the
servicemember's PCS orders. The Coalition also supports authorization
of a dislocation allowance to servicemembers making their final
``change of station'' upon retirement from the uniformed services.
We are sensitive to the subcommittee's efforts to reduce the
frequency of PCS moves. But we cannot avoid requiring members to make
regular relocations, with all the attendant disruptions in their
children's education and their spouse's career progression. The
Coalition believes strongly that the Nation that requires them to incur
these disruptions should not be requiring them to bear the resulting
high expenses out of their own pockets.
The Military Coalition urges continued upgrades of permanent
change-of-station reimbursement allowances to recognize that
the government, not the servicemember, should be responsible
for paying the cost of government-directed relocations.
national guard and reserve issues
More than 473,000 members of the National Guard and Reserve have
been mobilized since September 11, 2001, and many thousands more are in
the activation pipeline. Today, they face the same challenges as their
Active counterparts, with a deployment pace greater than any time since
World War II.
Guard/Reserve operational tempo has placed enormous strains on
reservists, their family members and their civilian employers alike.
Homeland defense and war on terrorism operations continue to place
demands on citizen soldiers that were never anticipated under the Total
Force policy. The Coalition understands and fully supports that policy
and the prominent role of the Guard and Reserve Forces in the national
security equation.
However, many Guard and Reserve members are facing increased
financial burdens under the current policy of multiple extended
activations over the course of a Reserve career. Some senior Reserve
leaders are rightly alarmed over likely manpower losses if action is
not taken to relieve pressures on Guard and Reserve troops. The
Coalition believes that addressing critical Guard and Reserve pay,
bonuses, benefits and entitlements issues--along with Active-Duty
manpower increases--are needed to alleviate those pressures and help
retain these qualified, trained professionals.
The Coalition greatly appreciates this subcommittee's effort to
address the increasing needs of our Nation's National Guard and Reserve
Forces. We believe that more work is required to ensure that Guard and
Reserve members' and their families' readiness remains a viable part of
our National Security Strategy. It is clear that our country needs
these valuable members of our national military team.
Healthcare for Members of the National Guard and Reserve. The
Military Coalition is very grateful that Congress established the
TRICARE Reserve Select health benefit in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. This new authority--along with
permanent pre- and post-activation TRICARE coverage--will help address
the needs of Guard and Reserve families in the call-up pipeline.
However, these authorities do not provide the coverage necessary to
address the long-term readiness issues that will continue with the
current and future utilization of our Guard and Reserve components.
With the increasing rate of utilization of all areas our Reserve
components increasing, we feel that Congress must act to provide
increased health care benefits for all our country's guardsmen,
reservists, and their families, to guarantee the Nation can continue to
call on them. TRICARE officials and DOD never implemented temporary
TRICARE provisions, and the fiscal year 2005 provisions leave more
questions unanswered.
For example, many members are reluctant to drop their permanent
health coverage for a military program that may only offer them
coverage for 1 to 4 years. Others will be reluctant to enroll because
the new guidelines force them to make a decision before departing
Active-Duty--which means many will be unable to conduct face-to-face
discussions on this important issue with their spouses, who are the
ones most affected by family health care issues.
It is our strong recommendation that we must provide a permanent
TRICARE program on a cost-share basis for our members of the Guard and
Reserve components who are being mobilized and deployed at increasing
rates. Further, coverage should include the Extended Care Health Option
(ECHO) for members with disabled children, who are currently excluded
by DOD policy.
The Military Coalition recommends permanent authorization of
cost-share access to TRICARE for all members of the Selected
Reserve and IRR members subject to activation under
Presidential call-up authority, to support readiness, family
morale, and deployment health preparedness.
Civilian Premium Offset
During mobilization, Reserve families who have employer-based
health insurance must, in some cases, pick up the full cost of premiums
during an extended activation. Guard and Reserve family members are
eligible for TRICARE if the member's orders to Active-Duty are for more
than 30 days; but many families prefer to preserve the continuity of
their own health insurance, rather than switching to a TRICARE
provider. Being dropped from private sector coverage as a consequence
of extended activation adversely affects family morale and military
readiness and discourages some from reenlisting. Many Guard and Reserve
families live in locations where it is difficult or impossible to find
providers who will accept new TRICARE patients.
Recognizing these challenges for its own reservist-employees, the
Department of Defense routinely pays the premiums for the Federal
Employee Health Benefit Program (FEHBP) when activation occurs. Non-
Federal employee and their families deserve equal consideration.
The Military Coalition urges enactment of authority for Federal
payment of civilian health care premiums (up to the cost of
TRICARE coverage) as an option for mobilized servicemembers.
Dental Coverage
Dental readiness is another key aspect of readiness for Guard and
Reserve personnel. Currently, DOD offers a dental program to Selected
Reserve members and their families. The program provides diagnostic and
preventive care for a monthly premium, and other services including
restorative, endodontic, periodontic and oral surgery services on a
cost-share basis, with an annual maximum payment of $1,500 per enrollee
per year. However, only 5 percent of eligible members are enrolled.
After September 11, soldiers with repairable dental problems had
teeth pulled at mobilization stations in the interests of time instead
of having the proper dental care treatment. Congress responded by
passing legislation that allows DOD to provide medical and dental
screening for Selected Reserve members who are assigned to a unit that
has been alerted for mobilization. Unfortunately, waiting for an alert
to begin screening is too late. During the initial mobilization for
OIF, the average time from alert to mobilization was less than 14 days,
insufficient to address deployment dental standards. In some cases,
units were mobilized before receiving their alert orders. This lack of
notice for mobilization continues despite best service efforts, with
many reservists receiving only short notice before mobilizing.
The Military Coalition recommends expansion of the TRICARE
Dental Program to Guard and Reserve servicemembers. This would
allow all Guard and Reserve members to maintain dental
readiness and alleviate the need for dental care during
training or mobilization. Authorization of a premium conversion
plan would further incentivize enrollment and readiness by
reducing after-tax costs to members.
Reserve Retirement Upgrade
The fundamental assumption for the Reserve retirement system
established in 1947 is that a reservist has a primary career in the
civilian sector. But it's past time to recognize that greatly increased
military service demands over the last dozen years have cost tens of
thousands of reservists significantly in terms of their civilian
retirement accrual, civilian 401(k) contributions, and civilian job
promotions.
DOD routinely relies on the capabilities of the Reserve Forces
across the entire spectrum of conflict from homeland security to
overseas deployments and ground combat. This reliance is not just a
trend--it's a central fixture in the National Security Strategy. DOD,
however, has shown little interest adjusting the Reserve compensation
package to acknowledge this long-term civilian compensation cost to
Guard and Reserve members. Inevitably, civilian career potential and
retirement plans will be hurt by frequent and lengthy activations.
The National Guard missed its recruiting goals by more than 10
percent in the last 2 years and is now about 13,000-15,000 short of end
strength. All Reserve components except the U.S. Marine Corps missed
their recruiting targets in the first quarter of fiscal year 2005
(September to December 2004).
The time has come to recognize the Reserve retirement system must
be adjusted to sustain its value as a complement to civilian retirement
programs. The future financial penalties of increased military service
requirements are clear, and should not be ignored by the government
that imposes them. Failing to acknowledge and respond to the changed
environment could have far-reaching, catastrophic effects on Reserve
participation and career retention.
The Military Coalition urges a reduction in the age when a
Guard/Reserve component member is eligible for retired pay to
age 55 as an option for those who qualify for a non-regular
retirement.
Review and Upgrade the Reserve Compensation System to Match the New
``Contract''
The Military Coalition thanks Congress for establishing the
Commission on the National Guard and Reserve to develop and recommend
improvements to Reserve compensation. The pay and retirement system was
developed more than a half century ago at a time when members of the
Guard and Reserve components were truly ``in Reserve.'' This is no
longer true. Increasing demands on the Guard and Reserve personnel to
perform national security missions at home and abroad indicates that
the compensation system may need to be modernized to attract and retain
those willing to shoulder the additional responsibility this new
mobilization reality. The Reserve compensation system (Active-Duty
(AD), Active-Duty training (ADT), Inactive Duty training (IDT) pay and
allowances, etc.) must adequately reflect the demands of increased
Reserve service, without creating disproportional incentives that could
undermine Active Force retention.
Needed improvements include:
Selected Reserve Montgomery GI Bill Upgrades.
Individuals who first become members of the National Guard or
Reserve are eligible for the SR-MGIB. Chapter 1606 of Title 10
governs the program. The problem is that the SR-MGIB program
competes with National Guard and Reserve pay accounts for
funding. During the first 14 years of the SR-MGIB, benefits
maintained 47 percent comparability with the basic MGIB. But,
in the last 5 years, the SR-MGIB has slipped to 28 percent of
the basic program.
To support Guard and Reserve recruitment, The Military
Coalition recommends raising SR-MGIB benefits to 50 percent of
the MGIB Active-Duty rate. The Coalition also recommends
transfer of the Reserve SR-MGIB authority from Title 10 to
Title 38 to permit coordinated benefit management with the
Active-Duty MGIB.
Retirement Credit for All Earned Drill Points. The
role of the Guard and Reserve has changed significantly under
the Total Force Policy. During most of the Cold War era, the
maximum number of IDT points that could be credited was 50 per
year. The cap has since been raised on three occasions to 60,
75, and most recently, to 90 points. However, the fundamental
question is why Guard and Reserve members are not permitted to
credit all the IDT they've earned in a given year toward their
retirement. Placing a ceiling on the amount of training that
may be credited for retirement serves as a disincentive to
professional development and takes unfair advantage of Guard
and Reserve servicemembers' commitment to mission readiness.
The Military Coalition recommends lifting the 90-point cap on
the number of IDT points earned in a year that may be credited
for National Guard and Reserve retirement purposes.
Raise Reserve Enlistment Bonuses, Special and
Incentive Pays. Sharp downturns in Reserve recruiting call for
increases in Reserve enlistment incentives. In addition, many
Guard and Reserve members who receive 1/30th of a month's pay
for many special and incentive pays for each day the duty is
performed feel cheated. These pays are based upon proficiency,
not time. The disparity, even if it is only a perceived
disparity, needs to be addressed.
Simplify the Reserve Duty System. Initiatives have
been put forward in recent years to simplify the duty status
for the Reserve components. One such change would have
seriously cut the pay of drilling Guard and Reserve members.
Reducing the paychecks of Guard and Reserve members, especially
at this time of looming retention and recruiting crises, should
be unthinkable.
Eliminate Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) II. BAH II
is paid to Guard and Reserve members in lieu of regular BAH who
are on orders of less than 140 days. BAH II is an antiquated
standard that no longer bears any relation to real housing
expenses and is, on average, far less than the BAH rate for any
given locality. There is an exception to this rule that
applies, by public law, for those called up for the contingency
operation. The Coalition believes strongly that any member
activated for 30 days or more should be eligible for locality-
based BAH.
Award full Veteran Status to Guard/Reserve Members.
Some servicemembers who successfully complete 20 qualifying
years of Reserve service, do not otherwise qualify as veterans
under title 38. Such members deserve full veteran status.
Guard/Reserve Family Support Programs
The increase in Guard and Reserve operational tempo is taking a
toll on the families of these servicemembers. These families are
routinely called upon to make more and more sacrifices as OIF and OEF
continue. Reserve component families represent communities throughout
the Nation; and, most of these communities are not close to military
installations. As a result, these families face unique challenges since
they do not have access to traditional family support services that are
available to Active-Duty members on military installations.
Providing a core set of family programs and benefits that meet the
unique needs of these families would go a long way in improving morale
and meeting family readiness challenges.
These programs would promote better communication with
servicemembers, specialized support for geographically separated Guard
and Reserve families, and training (and back-up) for family readiness
volunteers. Such access would include:
Expansion of Web-based programs and employee and
family assistance programs like Military OneSource and Guard
Family.org;
Enforcement of command responsibility for ensuring
that programs are in place to meet the special information and
support needs of Guard/Reserve families;
Expanded programs between military and community
religious leaders to support servicemembers and families during
all phases of deployments;
The availability of robust preventative counseling
services for servicemembers and families and training so they
know when to seek professional help related to their
circumstances;
Enhanced education for Reserve component family
members about their rights and benefits;
Innovative and effective ways to meet Reserve
component community needs for occasional child care,
particularly for preventative respite care, volunteering,
family readiness group meetings, and drill time; and,
A joint family readiness program to facilitate
understanding and sharing of information between all family
members, no matter what the service.
We applaud the support shown to families by DOD and military and
civilian community organizations. But with the continued and sustained
activation of the Reserve component, a stronger support structure needs
to be implemented and sustained
The Military Coalition urges Congress to focus on military
family support programs that meet the unique needs of the
families of mobilized Guard and Reserve component members.
Financial Relief for Activated Reservists and Their Employers
The Military Coalition has testified that overuse of the Guard and
Reserve components will have adverse consequences on the readiness and
morale of these forces. The Army Guard and Army Reserve have been
experiencing a sharp downturn in recruitment, and the Chief of the Army
Reserve has warned that mobilization policies and practices could
``break'' that force. In this context, the Coalition urges support for
financial and tax relief legislation that is under the jurisdiction of
non-defense committees.
Dysfunctional call-up policies are taking an enormous toll on
Reserve pocketbooks, morale, and employers. The General Accountability
Office reported recently that 41 percent of our Guard and Reserve
personnel take pay cuts from their civilian jobs when activated. Many
employers voluntarily help to ease this burden by making up the pay gap
between military and civilian pay. Employers also need additional
incentives to fill vacancies left by mobilized reservists with
temporary rather than permanent workers.
The Military Coalition supports legislation (e.g., H.R. 1779 in
the 108th Congress) to permit penalty-free withdrawals from
reservists' civilian retirement plans; allow activated members
of the Guard and Reserve to contribute wage gap payments back
into their employer-sponsored retirement plans, and grant
employers tax credits for wage differential payments, as well
as tax credits for hiring temporary workers during the absence
of a mobilized worker.
survivor program issues
The Coalition thanks the subcommittee for past support of
improvements to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP), especially last year's
provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005 that will phase out the SBP age-62 benefit reduction in the next 3
years. This victory for military survivors is a major step forward in
addressing longstanding survivor benefits inequities.
But two serious SBP inequities remain to be addressed. The
Coalition hopes that this year the subcommittee will be able to support
ending the SBP-DIC offset and moving up the effective date for paid-up
SBP to October 1, 2005.
SBP-DIC Offset
Congress should repeal the law that reduces military SBP annuities
by the amount of any survivor benefits payable from the Veterans'
Administration Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) program.
Under current law, the surviving spouse of a retired member who
dies of a service-connected cause is entitled to DIC from the VA. If
the military retiree was also enrolled in SBP, the surviving spouse's
SBP benefits are reduced by the amount of DIC (currently $993 per
month). A pro-rated share of SBP premiums is refunded to the widow upon
the member's death in a lump sum, but with no interest. The offset also
affects all survivors of members who are killed on Active-Duty. There
are approximately 53,000 military widows/widowers affected by the DIC
offset.
The Coalition believes SBP and DIC payments are paid for different
reasons. SBP is purchased by the retiree and is intended to provide a
portion of retired pay to the survivor. DIC is a special indemnity
compensation paid to the survivor when a member's service causes his or
her premature death. In such cases, the VA indemnity compensation
should be added to the SBP the retiree paid for, not substituted for
it. It's also noteworthy as a matter of equity that surviving spouses
of Federal civilian retirees who are disabled veterans and die of
military-service-connected causes can receive DIC without losing any of
their purchased Federal civilian SBP benefits.
In the case of members killed on Active-Duty, a surviving spouse
with children can avoid the dollar-for-dollar offset only by assigning
SBP to the children. But that forces the spouse to give up any SBP
claim after the children attain their majority--leaving the spouse with
less than a $1,000 monthly annuity from the VA.
The Coalition notes that most large city fire departments continue
100 percent of pay for survivors of firefighters killed in the line of
duty, in addition to far larger lump sum payments than military
members' survivors receive (see below). Military members whose service
costs them their lives deserve fairer compensation for their surviving
spouses.
The Military Coalition strongly supported legislation to repeal the
SBP-DIC offset introduced by Senator Nelson (D-FL) (S. 185) and
Representative Brown, (R-SC), respectively. Enactment is a top
Coalition goal for 2005.
The Military Coalition recommends eliminating the DIC offset to
Survivor Benefit Plan annuities, recognizing that the two
compensations serve different purposes, and one is not a
substitute for the other. Many military survivors now receive
annuities of less than $12,000 per year, which falls far short
of fair compensation for a service-caused death.
30-Year Paid-Up SBP
Congress approved a provision in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1999 authorizing retired members who had attained
age-70 and paid SBP premiums for at least 30 years to enter ``paid-up
SBP'' status, whereby they would stop paying any further premiums while
retaining full SBP coverage for their survivors in the event of their
death. Because of cost considerations, the effective date of the
provision was delayed until October 1, 2008.
As a practical matter, this means that any SBP enrollee who retired
on or after October 1, 1978 will enjoy the full benefit of the 30-year
paid-up SBP provision. However, members who enrolled in SBP when it
first became available in 1972 (and who have already been charged
higher premiums than subsequent retirees) will have to continue paying
premiums for up to 36 years to secure paid-up coverage.
The Military Coalition is very concerned about the delayed
effective date, because the paid-up SBP proposal was initially
conceived as a way to grant relief to those who have paid SBP premiums
from the beginning. Many of these members entered the program when it
was far less advantageous and when premiums represented a significantly
higher percentage of retired pay. In partial recognition of this
problem, SBP premiums were reduced substantially in 1990, but these
older members still paid the higher premiums for up to 18 years. The
Coalition believes strongly that their many years of higher payments
warrant at least equal treatment under the paid-up SBP option, rather
than forcing them to wait 4 more years for relief, or as many retirees
believe, waiting for them to die off.
By October 2005, a 1972 retiree will have paid almost 20 percent
more SBP premiums than a 1978 retiree will ever have to pay. Without
legislative relief, those 1972 enrollees who survive until 2008 will
have paid 34 percent more.
The Military Coalition recommends accelerating the
implementation date for the 30-year paid-up SBP initiative to
October 1, 2005.
Death Benefits Enhancement
Military insurance and death gratuity fall short of what is needed
when measured by private sector standards for employees in hazardous
occupations.
Most large employers provide lump-sum death benefits, cost-free to
the employee, of two times salary, capped at some limit between
$100,000 and $250,000. Police and firefighters killed in the line of
duty receive a Federal, cost-free Public Safety Officers Death Benefit
of $267,000 in addition to a typical five-figure death gratuity.
In today's commercial life insurance markets, insurance coverage
for many mid-career workers typically exceeds $500,000.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to raise SGLI to
$400,000, with $100,000 provided at no cost to servicemembers
who elect $300,000 coverage, and to increase the military death
gratuity to $100,000 for all deaths, with the coverage
increases retroactive to cover all deaths since Oct. 7, 2001
that were deemed ``in the line of duty.''
Final Retired Paycheck
The Military Coalition believes the policy requiring the recovery
of a deceased member's final retired paycheck from his or her survivor
should be changed to allow the survivor to keep the final month's
retired pay payment.
Current regulations led to a practice that requires the survivor to
surrender the final month of retired pay, either by returning the
outstanding paycheck or having a direct withdrawal recoupment from his
or her bank account. The Coalition believes this is an insensitive
policy coming at the most difficult time for a deceased member's next
of kin. Unlike his or her Active-Duty counterpart, the retiree will
receive no death gratuity. Many of the older retirees will not have
adequate insurance to provide even a moderate financial cushion for
surviving spouses. Very often, the surviving spouse has had to spend
the final retirement check/deposit before being notified by the
military finance center that it must be returned. Then, to receive the
partial month's pay of the deceased retiree up to the date of death,
the spouse must file a claim for settlement--an arduous and frustrating
task, at best--and wait for the military's finance center to disburse
the payment. Far too often, this strains the surviving spouse's ability
to meet the immediate financial obligations commensurate with the death
of the average family's ``bread winner.''
The Military Coalition strongly recommends that surviving
spouses of deceased retired members should be allowed to retain
the member's full retired pay for the month in which the member
died.
retirement issues
The Military Coalition is grateful to the subcommittee for its
historical support of maintaining a strong military retirement system
to help offset the extraordinary demands and sacrifices inherent in a
career of uniformed service.
Concurrent Receipt of Military Retired Pay and VA Disability
Compensation
The Military Coalition applauds the subcommittee for all of the
work that resulted in the landmark provisions in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 that expand combat related
special compensation to all retirees with combat-related disabilities
and authorizes--for the first time ever--concurrent receipt of retired
pay and veterans' disability compensation for retirees with
disabilities of at least 50 percent. The National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2005 provided additional relief to those with 100
percent disabilities by immediately authorizing these retirees full
concurrent receipt, effective January 2005. Disabled retirees
everywhere are extremely grateful for this subcommittee's action to
reverse an unfair practice that has disadvantaged disabled retirees for
over a century.
While the concurrent receipt provisions enacted by Congress benefit
tens of thousands of disabled retirees, an equal number are still
excluded from the same principle that eliminates the disability offset
for those with 50 percent or higher disabilities. The fiscal challenge
notwithstanding, the principle behind eliminating the disability offset
for those with disabilities of 50 percent is just as valid for those
with 40 percent and below, and the Coalition urges the subcommittee to
be sensitive to the thousands of disabled retirees who are excluded
from current provisions. As a priority, the Coalition asks the
subcommittee to consider those who had their careers cut short because
they became disabled by combat, or combat-related events, and were
medically retired before they could complete their careers. For these
retirees, the disability offset still exists and it is difficult to
explain to a lengthy career servicemember, disabled in combat, why his
or her service (perhaps as much as 19 years, 11 months) seems to have
had no value when a member with 20 years of service and a 10 percent
disability receives full payment for service and disability.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to expand Combat Related
Special Compensation to members who were medically compelled to retire
before short of 20 years of service solely because of their combat-
incurred disabilities, as envisioned in H.R. 1366. This legislation
would protect service-based retired pay (2.5 percent of high-3 years'
average basic pay times years of service) from being affected by the
disability offset. It would avoid the ``all or nothing'' inequity of
the current 20-year threshold, while recognizing that retired pay for
those with few years of service is almost all for disability rather
than for service and therefore still subject to the VA offset.
The Coalition also urges the subcommittee to resolve inequities
associated with the implementation of concurrent receipt legislation
enacted in the fiscal year 2005 National Defense Authorization Act.
This legislation authorized the immediate restoration of retired pay
for 100 percent rated disabled retirees; however, the administration
has yet to extend full payment to those disabled retirees who--because
their serious disabilities prevent them from working--are paid at the
100-percent rate because the VA has certified them as ``unemployable.''
The exclusion of these ``unemployable'' disabled retirees has created
two classes of 100 percent disabled retirees--a differentiation that is
not made in any other circumstance, either by the Department of
Veterans Affairs or in the administration of the Combat-Related Special
Compensation program by DOD. Accordingly, the Coalition urges the
subcommittee to ensure unemployable retirees are provided their full
compensation--by statute if the DOD does not do so administratively.
We understand that a significant concern among some critics that
still prevents broader concurrent receipt action is the need for a
review of the VA disability system. The Coalition believes much of the
concern is misplaced, and that the VA system should be able to
withstand reasonable scrutiny. The Coalition stands ready to assist the
Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission and participate in the debate
with relevant information and data affecting a full spectrum of
disabled veterans and their families and survivors. Most importantly,
the Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure that the Commission
remains focused on the fundamental principles that have served as the
foundation for both the DOD disability retirement and VA disability
compensation processes--principles of fairness, due process, and the
unique aspect that military duty is 24/7. We look forward to completion
of the review and revalidation of the process as important steps toward
resolving concurrent receipt inequity.
The Military Coalition greatly appreciates Congress' action to
date, but urges subcommittee leaders and members to be
sensitive to the thousands of disabled retirees who are not yet
included in concurrent receipt legislation enacted over the
past several years. Specifically, as a priority, the Coalition
urges the subcommittee to expand combat-related special
compensation to disabled retirees who were not allowed to serve
20 years solely because of combat-related disabilities.
The Coalition also urges the subcommittee to resolve NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2005 concurrent receipt legislation inequities that
prevents those disabled retirees rated 100 percent because of
``unemployability'' ratings from receiving their full
restoration of retired pay. Finally, the Coalition strongly
urges the subcommittee to ensure the Veterans' Disability
Benefits Commission protects the principles guiding the DOD
disability retirement program and VA disability compensation
system.
Former Spouse Issues
The Military Coalition recommends corrective legislation to
eliminate inequities in the USFSPA that were created through years of
well-intended, piecemeal legislative action initiated outside the
subcommittee.
The Coalition supports the recommendations in the DOD's September
2001 report, which responded to a request from this committee for an
assessment of USFSPA inequities and recommendations for improvement.
The DOD recommendations to allow the member to designate multiple SBP
beneficiaries would eliminate the current unfair restriction that
denies any SBP coverage to a current spouse if a former spouse is
covered, and would allow dual coverage in the same way authorized by
Federal civilian SBP programs.
The Coalition also supports DOD recommendations to require the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to make direct payments
to the former spouses, regardless of length of marriage; eliminate the
1-year deemed election period for SBP eligibility; if directed by a
valid court order, require DFAS to deduct SBP premiums from the
uniformed services retired pay awarded to a former spouse if directed
by a court order; and authorize DFAS to garnish ordered, unpaid child
support payments from the former spouse's share of retired pay.
Also, DOD recommends that prospective award amounts to former
spouses should be based on the member's grade and years of service at
the time of divorce--rather than at the time of retirement. The
Coalition supports this proposal since it recognizes that a former
spouse should not receive increased retired pay that is realized from
the member's service and promotions earned after the divorce.
The Coalition believes that, at a minimum, the subcommittee should
approve those initiatives that have the consensus of the military and
veterans' associations, including the National Military Family
Association. The Coalition would be pleased to work with the
subcommittee to identify and seek consensus on other measures to ensure
equity for both servicemembers and former spouses.
The Military Coalition recommends corrective legislation be
enacted to eliminate the inequities in the administration of
the USFSPA, to include consideration of the recommendations
made by the Department of Defense in their 2001 USFSPA report.
Tax Relief for Uniformed Services Beneficiaries
To meet their health care requirements, many uniformed services
beneficiaries pay premiums for a variety of health insurance programs,
such as TRICARE supplements, the Active-Duty dental plan or TRICARE
Retiree Dental Plan (TRDP), long-term care insurance, or TRICARE Prime
enrollment fees. For most beneficiaries, these premiums and enrollment
fees are not tax-deductible because their health care expenses do not
exceed 7.5 percent of their adjusted gross taxable income, as required
by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
This creates a significant inequity with private sector and some
government workers, many of whom already enjoy tax exemptions for
health and dental premiums through employer-sponsored health benefits
plans. A precedent for this benefit was set for other Federal employees
by a 2000 Presidential directive allowing Federal civilian employees to
pay premiums for their Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
(FEHBP) coverage with pre-tax dollars.
The Coalition supports legislation that would amend the tax law to
let Federal civilian retirees and Active-Duty and retired military
members pay health insurance premiums on a pre-tax basis. Although we
recognize that this is not within the purview of the Armed Services
Committee, the Coalition hopes that the subcommittee will lend its
support to this legislation and help ensure equal treatment for all
military and Federal beneficiaries.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support S. 484 to
provide all uniformed services beneficiaries a tax exemption
for premiums or enrollment fees paid for TRICARE Prime, TRICARE
Standard supplements, the Active-Duty dental plan, TRICARE
Retiree Dental Plan, FEHBP, and Long Term Care.
health care testimony 2005
The Military Coalition is most appreciative of the subcommittee's
exceptional efforts over several years to honor the government's health
care commitments to all uniformed services beneficiaries. These
subcommittee-sponsored enhancements represent great advancements that
should significantly improve health care access while saving all
uniformed services beneficiaries thousands of dollars a year. The
Coalition particularly thanks the subcommittee for last year's
outstanding measures to provide increased health care access for
members of the Guard and Reserve components and their families.
While much has been accomplished, we are equally concerned about
making sure that subcommittee-directed changes are implemented and the
desired positive effects actually achieved. Additional initiatives will
be essential to providing an equitable and consistent health benefit
for all categories of TRICARE beneficiaries, regardless of age or
geography. The Coalition looks forward to continuing our cooperative
efforts with the subcommittee's members and staff in pursuit of these
common objectives.
full funding for the defense health budget and manpower transformation
plans
Once again, a top Coalition priority is to work with Congress and
DOD to ensure full funding of the Defense Health Budget to meet
readiness needs--including graduate medical education and continuing
education, full funding of both direct care and purchased care sectors,
providing access to the military health care system for all uniformed
services beneficiaries, regardless of age, status or location. An
underfunded Defense Health Program inevitably compromises the
capability to deliver desired levels of quality care and undermines the
health care benefits military beneficiaries have earned. A fully funded
health care benefit is critical to readiness and the retention of
qualified uniformed service personnel.
The subcommittee's continued oversight of the defense health budget
is essential to avoid a return to the chronic underfunding of recent
years that led to execution shortfalls, shortchanging of the direct
care system, inadequate equipment capitalization, failure to invest in
infrastructure, curtailed drug formularies, and reliance on annual
emergency supplemental funding requests as a substitute for candid and
conscientious budget planning. We are grateful that once again late
last year, Congress provided $683 million supplemental appropriations
to meet the last quarter's obligations--but not all of the growing
requirements in support of the deployment of forces to Southwest Asia
and Afghanistan in the global war against terrorism.
The Coalition is hopeful that fiscal year 2006 funding levels will
not fall short of current obligations. We fear that additional
supplemental funding will once again be required. Last year, citing
budgetary restraints, the Air Force made a unilateral decision
directing removal of certain drugs from military treatment facility
(MTF) formularies. We appreciate that these are extremely challenging
budget times for MTF commanders; however, we are greatly concerned that
this budget-driven action undermined the deliberative process by which
the Uniform Formulary must be developed.
In addition, this policy forced increased use of the TMOP and TRRx,
more costly points of service, and thus increased costs to both DOD and
beneficiaries; inappropriately made budget considerations the primary
driver of formulary limits; bypassed any opportunity for Beneficiary
Advisory Panel inputs; and imposed regrettable interservice disparities
in pharmacy benefits
Health care requirements for members returning from the global war
on terrorism are also expected to continue to strain the military
delivery system in ways that may not have been anticipated in the
budgeting process. Similarly, implementation of the TRICARE Standard
requirements in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2004--particularly those requiring actions to attract more TRICARE
providers--will almost certainly require additional resources that we
do not believe are being budgeted for. Financial support for these
increased readiness requirements; TRICARE provider shortfalls and other
needs will most likely require additional funding.
At the January 2005 TRICARE Conference, Assistant Secretary
Winkenwerder said that funding for fiscal years 2006 and 2007 was
adequate. However, he went on to state, ``looking to the longer term,
I'm candidly concerned.'' At the same conference Air Force Chief of
Staff General John Jumper asserted that the health system is facing an
$11 billion shortfall over the next few years.
The Military Coalition strongly recommends the subcommittee
continue its watchfulness to ensure full funding of the Defense
Health Program, including military medical readiness, needed
TRICARE Standard improvements, and the DOD peacetime health
care mission. It is critical that the Defense Health Budget be
sufficient to secure increased numbers of providers needed to
ensure access for TRICARE beneficiaries in all parts of the
country.
Medical Manpower Transformation
The Coalition is concerned that over the next few years, the
military services are reshaping their forces by civilianizing thousands
of billets now held by uniformed health care personnel. This switch
from military-to-civilian providers is in conjunction with DOD's
overall manpower plans to ``transform'' the military by converting
support billets into civilian positions, thus freeing` personal in
uniform for jobs tied directly to warfighting.
The Coalition is well aware of the Nation-wide health care provider
shortage. This entire plan is predicated on the assumption that there
are adequate numbers of civilian providers out there readily available
to work in the military's direct care system. We are also greatly
concerned about the willingness of civilian providers to accommodate an
even greater patient load when the remaining uniformed medical
professionals deploy for contingencies.
We hear from our members across the country that they already
encounter difficulty in finding providers who will accept TRICARE
patients. The Coalition is concerned that this problem will only
increase if some of those civilian providers now must assume the
additional caseload previously seen by uniformed medical professionals.
The Coalition also is concerned that a shift in provider mix may
compromise DOD's outstanding graduate medical education (GME) programs.
The Coalition readily acknowledges that we lack the expertise to
second-guess the number of uniformed positions needed to adequately
staff the direct care system. We will only know if the plan is
successful or not from reports of our members who may or may not be
turned away from the direct care system or who may experience greater
difficulty finding civilian providers. Access to care for beneficiaries
will be the ultimate measure of success.
The Coalition does not think that service leaders are oblivious to
the Nationwide shortage of health care providers, even if their plans
sometimes may prove over-optimistic. But we believe that budget
considerations have been the driving force behind these manpower
changes rather than beneficiary care requirements.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to provide
oversight to the implementation of manpower transformation
plans on health care delivery for the entire DHP to ensure the
plan to shift non-operational care to civilian providers does
not inadvertently compromise health care delivery; beneficiary
access; or the Graduate Medical Education, career progression,
and assignment rotation base needs of uniformed medical
professionals.
tricare and va issues
Assistance for Wounded Combat Veterans and Others Separating from
Military Service
In 2003, the President's Task Force (PTF) to Improve Health Care
Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans final report on DOD-VA collaboration
focused on the need to improve services and support for separating
servicemembers to ensure the receipt of timely, quality health care
benefits. The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue to work with
the Veteran's Affairs Committee, DOD, and the Department of Veterans
Affairs to move forward with greater interagency collaboration. At this
time when hundreds of thousands of servicemembers are deployed in
combat operations, the stakes are even higher--putting them at greater
risk for long-term, service-connected health, and disability problems.
In a more recent report, January 2005, Vocational Rehabilitation;
More VA and DOD Collaboration Needed to Expedite Services for Seriously
Injured Servicemembers, GAO recommends that VA and the DOD collaborate
to reach an agreement for VA to have access to information to promote
recovery and return to work for seriously injured servicemembers; and
to develop policy and procedures for regional offices to maintain
contact with the seriously injured servicemembers. Without systematic
data from DOD, the VA cannot reliably identify all seriously injured
servicemembers or know with certainty when they are medically
stabilized, when they are undergoing medical evaluation, or when they
are medically discharged from the military. Patient tracking and
quality and continuity in medical care then become bigger issues in
achieving seamless transition goals.
The Coalition is grateful that the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005
directed DOD to do a better job of collecting base line health status
data through a formal medical readiness tracking and health
surveillance system. The Coalition applauds the development of a single
separation physical supporting the transition between the DOD and VA
health systems. Offering one discharge physical, providing outreach and
referrals for a VA Compensation and Pension examination, as well as
following up on claims adjudication and rating is not just more cost
effective in terms of capital and human resources; it is the right
thing to do--to ensure that servicemembers receive the benefits they
have earned and deserve.
Both agencies are working toward implementing a single separation
exam at Benefits Delivery at Discharge (BDD) sites for Active and
Reserve component members within 180 days of separation. The Coalition
is pleased to learn that the One Exam discharge physical is being
implemented at several sites. However, we are concerned that
implementation service wide is lagging. The Coalition is particularly
concerned about the significant gaps in implementing the program in the
Washington, DC area. Key MTFs like Walter Reed Army Medical Center and
National Naval Medical Center do not have a single, systematic process
in place. This is particularly alarming considering the DOD and
Department of Veterans Affairs are headquartered in the area. It seems
reasonable to expect the Washington, DC MTFs to serve as models for
other DOD and VA medical delivery systems. We ask the subcommittee to
provide continued oversight to ensure that this important program is
implemented promptly and effectively at all sites.
The Coalition believes that both DOD and VA have critical,
complementary roles in ensuring returning combat veterans, and other
servicemembers scheduled for separation or retirement, receive prompt,
comprehensive quality care and services from each agency. But recent
``seamless transition'' initiatives have resulted in only modest
improvements in service delivery. With rising numbers of wounded combat
veterans and projected large numbers of Guard and Reserve separations,
we urge the subcommittee to insist on accelerating the PTF's ``seamless
transition'' initiatives recommended on DOD-VA collaboration--including
developing an electronic DD 214; an interoperable bi-directional
electronic medical record and enhanced post-deployment health
assessments.
Some of these efforts have been going on for years on end with
little or no substantive progress, in part because those responsible
for action have come to have low expectations. Time and again, progress
has been stymied by a combination of a lack of leadership priority and
oversight, management turnover, bureaucratic inertia, and technological
backwardness. The Coalition believes that only an extraordinary kind of
``Manhattan Project'' can provide the kind of leadership focus and
priority needed to finally deliver the broad, timely and effective
results our servicemembers and veterans so urgently need and deserve.
Additionally, the Coalition urges Congress to push for the
availability of robust preventive mental health counseling services for
servicemembers, families, and survivors, including training programs
that will help individuals know when to seek professional help by:
Promoting a smooth transition to TRICARE-covered
mental health services,
Expanding access to the full range of mental health/
family counseling services regardless of the beneficiary's
location, taking into consideration that the need for services
to assist servicemembers and families with deployment-related
issues may be long-term.
Mental health needs of our servicemembers and families are crucial
to maintaining a resilient fighting force, and much more should be done
in this area.
The Military Coalition asks the subcommittee to demand a
concerted ``Manhattan Project'' kind of effort to ensure full
and timely implementation of seamless transition activities, a
bi-directional electronic medical record, enhanced post-
deployment health assessments, implementation of an electronic
DD214, additional family and mental health counseling services,
and the single physical at time of discharge.
tricare improvements
The Coalition is pleased to report that, thanks to this
subcommittee's continued focus on beneficiaries, Military Coalition
representatives remain actively engaged in an Office of the Secretary
of Defense (OSD)-sponsored action group, the TRICARE Beneficiary Panel.
This group was formed initially in 2000 to address TFL implementation.
Subsequently, over the past 5 years the group has broadened its scope
from refining TFL to tackling broader TRICARE beneficiary concerns.
We are most appreciative of the positive working relationship that
has evolved and continues to grow between the Beneficiary Panel and the
leaders and staff of the TRICARE Management Activity (TMA). This
collegiality has gone a long way toward making the program better for
all stakeholders. From our vantage point, TMA continues to be committed
to implementing TFL and other health care initiatives consistent with
congressional intent and continues to work vigorously toward that end.
Selected Reserve TRICARE Eligibility
For reasons addressed above under Guard and Reserve issues, the
Coalition places a high priority on extending TRICARE eligibility to
all members of the Selected Reserve and their families.
Implementation of TRICARE Reserve Select
While the Coalition is most appreciative of efforts to extend
TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS), cost share access to members of the
Select Reserve (SELRES) and their families, we would like to bring to
the subcommittee's attention issues that need to be addressed.
The Coalition is concerned that National Guard members who complete
90 or more days `homeland security' duty under Title 32 as requested by
the President will not be eligible to purchase TRS. The Coalition asks
the subcommittee to extend eligibility for TRS for mobilized SELRES
members regardless of where they serve their nation during the global
war on terrorism.
Recently both the Army and Marine Corps have had to rely upon
members of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) to fill critical
positions. Under current TRS rules, despite their service and
sacrifice, these individuals will not be able to take advantage of TRS
should they return to IRR status post mobilization. The Coalition urges
the subcommittee to take steps to permit members of the IRR called to
Active-Duty for a contingency operation to participate in TRS, if they
remain in the IRR subject to future recall.
Gray-area reservists have been called out of retirement and are
precluded from TRS unless they commit to SELRES service after
mobilization. Their situation is similar to those in the IRR. Again
these individuals are called to service, but unable to take advantage
of an earned benefit post mobilization.
Members must agree to remain in the SELRES for the duration of
their TRS coverage, yet should they be mobilized during that time, they
will lose part or all of the remaining coverage they earned. During
activation, the TRS benefit continues to ``run'' but the benefit is
superceded because the member and family are covered by Active-Duty and
TAMP benefits. Once Active-Duty and TAMP coverage are completed, TRS
resumes with the original termination date. For example, 1 year of
activation earns 4 years of TRS coverage. If at year two of TRS, the
member is mobilized again for 6 months followed by 180 days of TAMP
benefits, the beneficiary will have only 1 year of coverage remaining.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to address this inequity by
permitting members to extend their previously earned TRS eligibility
periods despite any additional Active-Duty service. That is, the
running of TRS eligibility ``clock'' should be ``suspended'' during any
Active-Duty service and restarted thereafter with out loss of benefit.
Current rules require the member to decide on TRS and the
commensurate commitment to service before leaving Active-Duty status.
The Coalition is concerned that this will certainly result in sudden
decisions at demobilization sites. This is forcing a very important
decision at a time when a servicemember or their family may not have
enough information to make an informed decision about their health care
insurance coverage over 6 months out. Should they separate and make a
preliminary TRS agreement, their eligibility expires and they and their
families lose out on an earned benefits. The Coalition believes that
servicemembers should be able to elect TRS during the 180 days of TAMP
coverage.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to provide
oversight of implementations of the TRICARE Reserve Select
benefit, to extend eligibility for TRICARE Reserve Select for
mobilized SELRES members regardless of where they serve during
the global war on terrorism, to take steps to permit members of
the IRR called to Active-Duty for a contingency operation to
participate in TRICARE Reserve Select, if they remain in the
IRR subject to future recall, to address loss of TRICARE
Reserve Select benefits when members are mobilized during their
benefit period and to simplify enrollment procedures permitting
beneficiaries to elect TRICARE Reserve Select coverage during
the 180 days of Transitional Assistance Management Program.
TRICARE Standard Improvements
The Coalition is most grateful for the subcommittee's extraordinary
efforts in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004 to improve the TRICARE
Standard program. These provisions will be essential to ensure the 3.2
million Standard beneficiaries receive the necessary assistance to
ensure they can find a provider. The Coalition is firmly committed to
working with Congress, DOD, and the Managed Care Support Contractors
(MCSCs) to facilitate prompt implementation of these provisions.
DOD has reported on the initial surveys designed to track provider
participation (including willingness to accept new patients). Just as
important as the survey outcomes will be what the government does with
the data and what resources will be devoted to addressing problems
identified by the surveys.
Based on results so far, TMC has concerns on three issues. First,
OMB limited DOD to asking providers only three questions on the
participation survey, which provides only limited provider inputs and
constrains interpretation of the real meaning of the data. Second,
discussions with members and contractors indicate some likelihood that
beneficiaries who inquire as to the willingness of providers to accept
TRICARE may be getting different answers than those provided in the
survey. In part, this is because of disparities in various parties'
knowledge of the TRICARE program, and it may also be due to the
limitations of the DOD survey. Third, there remains no standard of what
level of provider participation should be considered adequate or
inadequate. Without a measure of what constitutes a problem, it's
difficult to establish standards for action. The Coalition is anxious
to ensure such standards are developed to be better able to assess the
adequacy of Department plans to assist beneficiaries experiencing
access problems or other difficulties
While the Coalition is pleased to learn that DOD has directed MCSCs
to offer 24/7-telephone access to health care finders, we are
disappointed to note this service only provides information regarding
network providers. For those beneficiaries residing where Prime is not
an option, there will be no network providers for them within easy
access. We urge the subcommittee to direct DOD, at a minimum, to have
call center staff assist such beneficiaries by consulting the Web based
TRICARE Standard provider directory at: www.tricare.osd.mil/
standardprovider or direct the beneficiaries to that site. While the
Standard provider website is a very useful tool, it is of little use to
those without Internet access. The Coalition is eager to learn of other
options to provide assistance in finding a Standard provider.
We will continue to work with DOD to implement these activities to
give Standard a more prominent role in the TRICARE program. These
improvements take on a greater importance in light of the increased
demands that will be placed on the Standard program as the NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2005 authorized Ready Reserve component beneficiaries cost-
share access to Standard benefits, and the potential for the next round
of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) to limit Prime service areas
resulting in a subsequent increase in demand for Standard services.
TRICARE Reserve Select will be an option for thousands of Ready
reservists and their families. This expansion of the benefit has raised
the stakes in the need to provide a robust Standard benefit for
beneficiaries living in all areas--not just those serviced by Prime
network areas. Beneficiary and provider education will be just as
important for both existing and new Standard beneficiaries.
The Coalition is well aware that DOD had a full plate last year
managing the transition of many new TRICARE contracts and
implementation of major legislative initiatives, including those for
the Guard and Reserve components. We are concerned that DOD's resources
may be stretched thin, and the Standard enhancements may take a low
priority while other issues are addressed.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee's continued
oversight to ensure DOD is held accountable to promptly meet
requirements for beneficiary education and support, and
particularly for education and recruitment of sufficient
providers to solve access problems for Standard beneficiaries.
Provider Reimbursement
The Coalition appreciates the subcommittee's efforts to address
provider reimbursement needs in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004 (P.L.
108-136). We recognize that part of the problem is endemic to the
flawed Medicare reimbursement system, to which TRICARE rates are
directly tied.
The Coalition is troubled to note that a flaw in the provider
reimbursement formula led the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS)
to propose cutting Medicare fees in recent years, which were only
forestalled by last-minute legislative relief. While the Coalition is
grateful for Congress's temporary fixes, the reimbursement formula
remains broken.
Once again, the Coalition wishes to bring to the subcommittee's
attention that the 2004 report of the Medicare Trustees predicts 5
percent annual cuts in Medicare reimbursements to providers for 2006
through 2012. However, MedPAC has recommended raising Medicare's
physician payment rate by 2.7 percent in 2006, stating that a ``small
but consistent share'' of beneficiaries have experienced some
difficulty in accessing providers.
Cuts in Medicare (and thus TRICARE) provider payments, on top of
providers' increasing overhead costs and rapidly rising medical
liability expenses, seriously jeopardizes providers' willingness to
participate in both these programs. Provider resistance is much more
pronounced for TRICARE than Medicare for a variety of social, workload,
and administrative reasons. Provider groups tell us that TRICARE is
seen as the lowest-paying program they deal with, and often causes them
the most administrative problems. This is a terrible combination of
perceptions if you are a TRICARE Standard patient trying to find a
doctor.
For patients in Prime, the situation is growing increasingly
problematic as deployments of large numbers of military health
professionals continues to diminish the capacity of the military's
direct health care system. In this situation, more and more TRICARE
patients have to turn to the purchased care sector--thus putting more
demands on civilian providers who are reluctant to take an even larger
number of beneficiaries with relatively low-paying TRICARE coverage.
The Coalition firmly believes this is a readiness issue. Our
deployed service men and women need to focus on their mission, without
having to worry whether their family members back home can find a
provider. Uniformed services beneficiaries deserve the Nation's best
health care, not the cheapest.
Congress did the right thing by reversing the proposed provider
payment cuts previously planned for March 1, 2003 and January 1, 2004,
and instead providing 1.6 percent and 1.5 percent payment increases
respectively. Unless Congress or the administration acts soon,
effective next year, providers will have to absorb a 5-percent cut for
TRICARE patients as well as Medicare patients. More importantly, the
underlying formula needs to be fixed to eliminate the need for
perennial ``band-aid'' corrections.
The Coalition is aware that jurisdiction over the Medicare program
is not within the authority of the Armed Services Committees, but the
adverse impact of depressed rates on all TRICARE beneficiaries warrants
a special subcommittee effort to solve the problem.
The Military Coalition requests the subcommittee's support of
any means to establish and maintain Medicare and TRICARE
provider payment rates sufficient to ensure beneficiary access,
and to support measures to address Medicare's flawed provider
reimbursement formula.
TRICARE Transition and Implementation of New Contracts
The Coalition is grateful that report language in Senate Armed
Services Committee Report 108-260 in last year's NDAA reinforced the
expectation for a seamless transition and required GAO monitoring to
evaluate effectiveness of the new contracts. The Coalition believes
Defense health officials and the TRICARE contractors are all making a
sincere effort to work through the problems associated with the
transition.
Since the electronic authorization and referral program was not
ready when the new contracts were implemented last year, a work around
was put in place. Despite all good intentions, the program continues to
have delays in authorizations and referrals, causing frustration on the
part of all stakeholders--providers, patients, contractors and the
government. Phone calls increase, hold times get longer, and our
members tell us of lost or delayed referrals for health care.
One area related to the authorization and referral program that
continues to raise alarms and has the potential for serous health care
problems concerns delays in referrals for TRICARE Prime beneficiaries
that exceed Prime access standards. With the manual system in place the
Coalition is having difficulty determining when the clock starts for
the very stringent Prime access standards. When the provider tells the
beneficiary they need another appointment? Or when the beneficiary
receives the paper referral up to one week later in the mail? The
Coalition firmly believes it ought to be when the provider determines
the need for the referral.
In late 2004, the National Military Family Association (NMFA)
conducted a web-based survey of TRICARE Prime enrollees. This self-
selected survey confirmed the Coalition's concerns that access
standards are not being met. NMFA has reported:
Among the 328 survey respondents, there was equal representation
from each of the three TRICARE regions--approximately 30 percent from
each region with a 1.6 percent response rate from overseas
beneficiaries. Sixty percent of the respondents were enrolled in the
direct care system and 40 percent were enrolled with a civilian network
provider.
Twelve percent drive more than 30 minutes to see their
Primary Care Manager (PCM).
Over 20 percent were not able to get an urgent care
appointment within 24 hours.
More than 27 percent were not able to get a routine
appointment within 7 days.
Approximately 14 percent were not able to get a
wellness appointment within 4 weeks.
Roughly 23 percent were not able to get a specialty
care appointment within 4 weeks of PCM referral
Almost 10 percent of the respondents drove more than
60 minutes to a specialist appointment.
Beneficiaries enrolled to a PCM at a MTF reported more difficulties
in obtaining appointments within the access standards than those
enrolled to a civilian network PCM. The top three issues reported by
Prime Enrollees were: lack of providers in the area, problems with
getting referrals and appointment issues.
As these contracts are implemented, a seamless transition and
accountability for progress remains the Coalition's primary concerns.
The Coalition is sensitive that massive system changes are being
implemented at a time of great stress for uniformed services
beneficiaries, especially Active-Duty members and their families.
Transitions to new contractors, even when the contract design has not
dramatically changed, have historically been tumultuous for all
stakeholders, especially beneficiaries. The Coalition believes
additional effort must be put forth to make current operations less
disruptive for the beneficiary.
One concern with awarding different contract functions to a variety
of vendors is that beneficiaries should not be caught in the middle as
they attempt to negotiate their way between the boundaries of the
various vendors' responsibilities. DOD must find ways to ensure
beneficiaries have a single source of help to resolve problems
involving the interface of multiple contractors.
Despite all the changes, the Coalition is hopeful that TRICARE
beneficiaries will benefit from the new contract structure. By
streamlining administrative requirements and being less prescriptive,
we hope DOD will be able to improve service delivery and enhance
access.
The Military Coalition recommends that the subcommittee
continue to strictly monitor implementation of TRICARE
contracts, especially the ability to meet Prime access
standards, and ensure that Beneficiary Advisory Groups' inputs
be sought in the evaluation process.
Prior Authorization under TNEX
One area of concern the Coalition has identified in the past that
we hoped would be addressed by the new contracts deals with Prior
Authorization. While the TNEX request for proposals purportedly removed
the requirement for preauthorization for Prime beneficiaries referred
to specialty care, each TRICARE Regional Managed Care Support (MCS)
contractor was given great leeway in determining requirements for their
region.
Notwithstanding the requirement for all MSCSs to include the six
TRICARE-mandated prior authorizations, the Coalition is dismayed to
learn that each region manages preauthorization differently. Two MCSCs
have instituted the same prior authorization requirements for Standard
beneficiaries as for Prime, with the third region being far less
prescriptive.
The Coalition believes strongly that this lack of uniformity in
benefit delivery is inequitable and confusing to beneficiaries who have
family members in different regions (e.g., college students, children
of divorced parents) or who are reassigned between regions. It also
undermines longstanding efforts of this subcommittee to simplify the
system and remove burdens from Standard providers and beneficiaries.
The Coalition questions the need to make the fee for service program's
requirements as restrictive as that of the managed care option.
Continuing these significant preauthorization requirements would seem
contrary to current private sector business practices, the commitment
to decrease provider administrative burdens, and the provision of a
uniform benefit.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee's continued
efforts to reduce and ultimately eliminate requirements for
pre-authorization for Standard beneficiaries and asks the
subcommittee to assess the impact of new prior authorization
requirements upon beneficiaries' access to care.
Uniform Formulary Implementation
The Coalition is committed to work with DOD and Congress to develop
and maintain a comprehensive uniform pharmacy benefit for all
beneficiaries. The Coalition expects DOD to establish a robust
formulary with a broad variety of medications in each therapeutic class
that fairly and fully captures the entire spectrum of pharmaceutical
needs of the millions of uniformed services beneficiaries. We believe
strongly that the uniform formulary should include the drugs in each
class that are most frequently prescribed for private sector patients.
The Coalition is grateful to this subcommittee for the role it
played in mandating a Beneficiary Advisory Panel (BAP) to comment on
the formulary. Several Coalition representatives are members of the BAP
and are eager to provide input to the program. While we are aware that
there will be higher costs and limitations to access for some
medications, our efforts will be directed to ensuring that the
formulary is as broad as possible, that prior authorization
requirements for obtaining non-formulary drugs and procedures for
appealing decisions are communicated clearly to beneficiaries, and that
the guidelines are administered equitably.
The Coalition is particularly concerned that procedures for
documenting and approving ``medical necessity'' determinations by a
patient's physician be streamlined, without posing unnecessary
administrative hassles for providers, patients, and pharmacists.
Beneficiaries' trust will be violated if the formulary is excessively
limited, fees rise excessively, and/or the administrative requirements
to document medical necessity are onerous.
One of the most problematic issues in the TRICARE pharmacy program
has been the policy requirement to substitute generic drugs for brand-
name pharmaceuticals whenever a generic version exists. Last summer the
Coalition learned from our members that while implementing the new
pharmacy contract, DOD arbitrarily voided all previous ``medical
necessity'' approvals that allowed beneficiaries to receive brand-name
prescriptions despite the existence of a generic substitute. The
Coalition is grateful that when we raised objection to DOD leadership
that these patients should have been ``grandfathered,'' DOD health
leaders agreed. A temporary waiver was put into place until
beneficiaries could be better informed about the need to obtain a new
medical necessity requirement.
On the eve of implementation of the Uniform Formulary, this
scenario causes the Coalition great alarm. This policy change was never
discussed in any of DOD's meetings with beneficiary groups. Nor did
beneficiaries or providers receive any advance notice--learning of the
brand-name denial at the pharmacy, finding themselves forced into
accepting a generic or paying the full (often very expensive) cost out
of their pockets. With the advent of the many anticipated changes
caused by implementation of the Uniform Formulary, beneficiaries and
their providers will need to be better informed of changes to their
benefit.
DOD must do a better job of informing beneficiaries about the scope
of the benefit--to include prior authorization requirements, generic
substitution policy, limitations on number of medications dispensed,
processes for determining medical necessity, and the need for
reasonable notice to beneficiaries of any significant program changes
(such as moving specific drugs to ``non-formulary'' status). The
Coalition is pleased to note that the department has improved its
beneficiary education via the TRICARE website. However, we remain
concerned that many beneficiaries do not have access to the Internet,
and this information is not available through any other written source.
As DOD approaches the Uniform Formulary implementation, it will be
critical to make this information readily available to beneficiaries
and providers.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure the
uniform formulary remains robust, with reasonable medical-
necessity rules and increased communication to beneficiaries
about program benefits, pre-authorization requirements,
appeals, and other key information.
Access to TSRx for Nursing Home Beneficiaries
Once again, the Coalition would like to bring to the subcommittee's
attention the plight faced by TRICARE Senior Pharmacy (TSRx)
beneficiaries residing in nursing homes who encounter limitations in
utilizing the TSRx benefit. The Coalition is most grateful for report
language contained in House Armed Services Committee Report PL 107-436
regarding waiver of TSRx deductibles. The subcommittee directed the
Secretary of Defense to implement policies and regulations or make any
legislative changes to waive the annual deductible for these patients,
and report to the Armed Services Committees by March 31, 2003.
The Coalition also is appreciative of the report language in the
Senate Armed Services Committee Report 108-260 in last year's NDAA
expressing concern that the Department has been ``unresponsive to the
concerns'' of those beneficiaries residing in nursing homes who are not
able to take advantage of TRICARE network pharmacies. The report
directs the Secretary to develop a way of handling nursing home
patients' non-network pharmacy claims so that beneficiaries are aware
of alternatives to the use of non-network pharmacies to avoid
deductible costs. The Coalition is not aware of any first steps taken
to develop any plan to provide outreach and education for beneficiaries
attempting to deem nursing homes or residential treatment facilities as
TRICARE authorized pharmacy services.
Because of State pharmacy regulations, patient safety concerns and
liability issues, the vast majority of nursing homes have limitations
on dispensing medications from outside sources. In rare cases where the
nursing home will accept outside medications, some beneficiaries have
been successful in accessing medications via a local TRICARE network
pharmacy or the TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy (TMOP).
However, the vast majority must rely on the nursing home to
dispense medications and seek TRICARE reimbursement and this is treated
as a non-network pharmacy--which means $150/$300 deductible plus higher
copayments per prescription. The non-network pharmacy policy was
intended to create an incentive for beneficiaries to use the TMOP/
retail network pharmacies. However, this policy unintentionally
penalizes beneficiaries who have no other options.
One solution is to work with the nursing home to have them to sign
on as a network pharmacy. But experience indicates that few if any
nursing homes are willing to become TRICARE authorized pharmacies, thus
subjecting helpless beneficiaries to deductibles and increased cost
shares--as if they had voluntarily chosen to use a non-network
pharmacy.
The Defense Department's May 2003 report states, ``The use of non-
network pharmacy services by TRICARE beneficiaries residing in nursing
homes is not widespread.'' The Coalition strongly disagrees. Because no
effort has been made to educate beneficiaries or nursing homes about
this problem, the vast majority of beneficiaries residing in nursing
homes are not even aware that they have the ability to file paper
claims for reimbursement.
The DOD report further states, that when these instances are
brought to their attention, they have been ``universally'' successful
in bringing the institution into the network or identifying a network
pharmacy that can serve the beneficiary. The Coalition takes great
exception to this unfounded assertion. Our experience with actual
members indicates a nearly universal lack of success in resolving this
issue.
Pharmacy cost shares were established to direct beneficiaries to a
more cost-effective point of access. However, many of our frail and
elderly beneficiaries are now residing in institutions where
circumstances preclude them from accessing the TRICARE pharmacy at
network cost shares. The Coalition asks the subcommittee to take action
to ease this financial burden for those who cannot deem their facility
a network pharmacy, nor avail themselves of the mail order or retail
network benefit--for those whose circumstances are out of their
control.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct DOD to
reimburse pharmacy expenses at TRICARE network rates to
uniformed services beneficiaries residing in residential
facilities that do not participate in the TRICARE network
pharmacy program, and who cannot access network pharmacies due
to physical or medical constraints.
TRICARE Benefits for Remarried Widows
The Coalition believes there is a gross inequity in TRICARE's
treatment of remarried surviving spouses whose subsequent marriage ends
because of death or divorce. These survivors are entitled to have their
military identification cards reinstated, as well as commissary and
exchange privileges. In addition, they have any applicable SBP annuity
reinstated if such payment was terminated upon their remarriage. In
short, all of their military benefits are restored--except health care
coverage.
This disparity in the treatment of military widows was further
highlighted by enactment of the Veterans Benefits Act of 2002. This
legislation (38 U.S.C. 103(g)(1)) reinstated certain benefits for
survivors of veterans who died of service-connected causes. Previously,
these survivors lost their VA annuities and VA health care (CHAMPVA)
when they remarried, but the Veterans Benefits Act of 2002 restored the
annuity--and CHAMPVA eligibility--if the second or subsequent marriage
ends in death or divorce.
Military survivors merit the same consideration Congress has
extended and the VA has implemented for CHAMPVA survivors.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to restore equity
for surviving spouses by reinstating TRICARE benefits for
otherwise qualifying remarried spouses whose second or
subsequent marriage ends because of death, divorce or
annulment, consistent with the treatment accorded CHAMPVA-
eligible survivors.
TRICARE Prime Continuity in BRAC Areas
In addition to our concerns about current benefits, the Coalition
is apprehensive about continuity of future benefits as Congress and DOD
begin to consider another round of base closures this year. Many
beneficiaries deliberately retire in localities close to military
bases, specifically to have access to military health care and other
facilities. Base closures run significant risks of disrupting TRICARE
Prime contracts that retirees depend on to meet their health care
needs.
Under current TRICARE contracts and under DOD's interpretation of
TNEX, TRICARE contractors are supposed to continue maintaining TRICARE
Prime provider networks in Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) areas.
However, these contracts can be renegotiated, and the contracting
parties may not always agree on the desirability of maintaining this
provision.
The Coalition believes continuity of the TRICARE Prime program in
base closure areas is important to keeping health care commitments to
retirees, their families and survivors, and would prefer to see the
current contract provision codified in law.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to amend Title 10
to require continuation of TRICARE Prime network coverage for
uniformed services beneficiaries residing in BRAC areas.
conclusion
The Military Coalition reiterates its profound gratitude for the
extraordinary progress this subcommittee has made in advancing a wide
range of personnel and health care initiatives for all uniformed
services personnel and their families and survivors. The Coalition is
eager to work with the subcommittee in pursuit of the goals outlined in
our testimony. Thank you very much for the opportunity to present the
Coalition's views on these critically important topics.
STATEMENT OF JOYCE WESSEL RAEZER, DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION
Ms. Raezer. Mr. Chairman and Senator Nelson, thank you for
the opportunity to discuss the quality-of-life of
servicemembers and their families.
Military families were most grateful to Congress for making
recent increases in imminent danger pay (IDP) and family
separation allowance (FSA) permanent. As Mr. Strobridge has
stated, continued increases in pay and allowances are necessary
to retain a quality force.
Among the benefit improvements for which the National
Military Family Association (NMFA) and The Military Coalition
ask your help this year is to increase the household goods
weight allowance for mid-grade and senior enlisted
servicemembers to more accurately reflect the accumulation of
goods over the course of a career.
We ask that you continue your support of a robust
commissary benefit and your oversight of potential changes in
the military exchange systems.
Longer and more frequent deployments are indications that
the force is stretched thin. Military families are also
stretched thin. Our message to you today is family support
programs work, but over the long term, it will take more than
bonuses to help families deal with the continued mission
stress.
We have been impressed by improvements in family support
provided to Guard and Reserve families through State National
Guard family assistance centers, expansion of child care
resources and subsidies, and the many State and local community
programs that support families who live too far from military
installations to access services. Programs such as Military
OneSource make even more assistance available. The increased
emphasis on family support is making a difference, but it is
still sporadic. Services continue to refine programs to help
families deal with deployment and return and reunion, but must
be able to update those programs to meet families' changing
needs.
Preventive mental health resources must be more accessible
for families and servicemembers over the long term, and special
care must be taken to support injured servicemembers and their
families. Families and servicemembers must be assured that,
should the worst happen, the survivor benefit package will
ensure the long-term financial stability of the family members
of all servicemembers who die on Active-Duty, regardless of
whether or not that death occurs in a combat situation.
The NMFA has been concerned to hear recently of cutbacks in
family supported quality-of-life programs at many
installations. The outlook for future funding of base support
programs such as child care, family centers, spouse employment
readiness, and youth and recreation programs seems grim, as the
Army, for example, has identified a need for an additional $1.2
billion for base operations support funding for fiscal year
2006. Cutting bedrock installation support services to fund
military operations may be penny wise, but it is pound foolish
if the lack of these services make it more difficult for
families to deal with the continued high operational tempo.
A significant element of families' readiness is quality
education for military children. April is the month of the
military child. This month and every month, military children
need you to ensure that both DOD and civilian schools can meet
the counseling, staffing, and program challenges arising from
new ongoing and changed missions. We especially ask that you
authorize DOD funding of at least $50 million to supplement
Impact Aid for civilian schools educating military children to
help these districts provide the support children need to
receive a quality education despite their frequent relocations
and the stress of deployments. Like Senator Nelson, we believe
that a plan must be in place soon to assist these districts in
dealing with surges in enrollment caused by service
transformation and housing privatization issues, global
rebasing, or BRAC.
NMFA asks that you continue your vigilant oversight of the
defense health system. As Mr. Strobridge indicated, we also
believe the direct care system faces a multitude of stressors
that affect patient access to care. We are concerned that some
military treatment facilities (MTFs) are cutting back on hours
or services at exactly the time when they are supposed to be
pulling in more care under the new TRICARE contract. The future
of successful initiatives such as the family-centered care is
in jeopardy if the direct care system must divert essential
resources to other demands.
Mr. Chairman, the concern you and Senator Nelson have
expressed today sends an important message to servicemembers
and their families. Congress understands the link between
military readiness and the quality-of-life of the military
community. Strong families ensure a strong force. Thank you for
your work in keeping our families and our force strong.
Now Ms. Holleman will talk about retiree and survivor
issues.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Raezer follows:]
Prepared Statement by Joyce Wessel Raezer
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this subcommittee, the
National Military Family Association (NMFA) would like to thank you for
the opportunity to present testimony on quality of life issues
affecting servicemembers and their families. NMFA is also grateful for
your leadership in the 108th Congress in:
Making increases in the Family Separation Allowance
and Imminent Danger Pay (IDP) permanent.
Ending the age-62 Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) offset.
Providing funding to support the education of military
children.
Including quality of life factors in considerations
regarding commissary closures.
Allowing the ``Families First'' re-engineering of the
DOD household goods movement process to continue on schedule.
As a founding member of The Military Coalition, NMFA subscribes to
the recommendations contained in the Coalition's testimony presented
for this hearing. We especially endorse the Coalition's recommendations
to:
Eliminate the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation
(DIC) offset to SBP.
Enhance education and outreach to improve military
family readiness and support families of deployed Active-Duty,
National Guard, and Reserve servicemembers.
Gradually adjust grade-based housing standards used to
determine Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) to a more realistic
and appropriate level reflecting the responsibilities and
seniority of each pay grade.
Increase household goods weight allowances for mid-
grade and senior enlisted servicemembers and allow the shipment
at government expense of a second privately-owned vehicle for
servicemembers on accompanied assignments to overseas locations
(including Alaska and Hawaii).
Expand access to the full range of mental health/
family counseling services regardless of the beneficiaries'
location
Allow servicemembers to establish flexible spending
accounts for pre-tax payment of dependent care and health care
expenses.
Fully-fund the commissary benefit and scrutinize
proposals to close commissaries or combine exchange services.
Ease the transition of Guard and Reserve families to
TRICARE when the servicemember is mobilized by providing a
choice of purchasing TRICARE coverage when in drill status or
receiving Federal payment of civilian health care premiums when
the servicemember is mobilized.
Fully-fund the Defense Health Program budget to
provide access to quality care for all beneficiaries.
Authorize full BAH for Guard and Reserve members
mobilized for more than 30 days.
In this statement, NMFA will address issues related to military
families in the following subject areas:
Family Readiness throughout the Deployment Cycle
Health Care
Survivors
Injured Servicemembers
Spouse Employment
Child Care
Education of Military Children
Transformation, Global Re-basing, and Base Realignment
and Closure (BRAC)
family readiness throughout the deployment cycle
NMFA is pleased to note the Services continue to refine the
programs and initiatives to provide support for military families in
the period leading up to deployments, during deployment, and the return
and reunion period. Our message to you today is simple: the increased
emphasis on family readiness is paying off! However, family readiness
over the long term requires that resources must be directed not just at
deployment-related support programs, but also to sustain the full array
of baseline installation quality of life programs. We have visited
installations that benefited from new and enhanced family programs and
outreach to families of deployed servicemembers, provided partially
through wartime appropriations funding. The National Guard Bureau has
opened additional Family Assistance Centers in areas with large numbers
of mobilized Guard and Reserve members. The Services are providing
additional child care for Active-Duty families through their military
child development centers and Family Child Care providers and
developing arrangements with child care providers in other locations to
serve Guard and Reserve families. Families are better able to
communicate with deployed servicemembers and enhanced Service efforts
ease servicemembers' return and reunion with their families.
Increased funding and prioritization given to family support is
making a difference, but still sporadically. As referenced in its 2004
analysis report, ``Serving the Home Front: An Analysis of Military
Family Support from September 11, 2001 through March 31, 2004,''
consistent levels of targeted funding are needed, along with consistent
levels of command focus on the importance of family support programs.
NMFA is very concerned about recent reports from Service leadership and
from individual installations about potential shortfalls in base
operations funding and appropriated fund support for morale, welfare,
and recreation (MWR) and other quality of life programs. While some of
these cuts may be temporary, in programs and facilities seeing declines
in patronage due to the deployment of units from the installations,
others are in services that support families, such as spouse employment
support, volunteer support, child development center hours, or family
member orientation programs. These core quality of life programs,
family center staff, chaplains, other support personnel, MWR, child
care, commissary and exchange programs make the transition to military
life for new military members easier and lessen the strain of
deployment for all families. NMFA does not have the expertise to ferret
out exact MWR funding levels from Service Operations and Maintenance
(O&M) budgets. We are concerned about the state of this funding--both
appropriated and non-appropriated fund support--because of what we hear
from servicemembers and families, what we read in installation papers
chronicling cutbacks, and from Service leaders who have identified
shortfalls in base operations funding in the administration's fiscal
year 2006 budget request.
We are also apprehensive about the potential impact of multiple and
simultaneous initiatives by the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD) and the military services--including transformation, Global
Repositioning, Army Modularity, and BRAC--on these essential quality of
life benefits. NMFA continues to hear that installations or Service
commands or agencies must divert resources from the basic level of
installation quality of life programs to address the surges of
mobilization and return. Resources must be available for commanders and
others charged with ensuring family readiness to help alleviate the
strains on families facing more frequent and longer deployments.
NMFA is particularly troubled by what we see as mixed signals
regarding DOD's long-term commitment to quality of life services and
programs. During a recent hearing on recruiting and retention before
the Personnel Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee, an
official from OSD and the Service Personnel Chiefs emphasized bonuses
as a priority, making little to no reference to the importance of
support for military families and quality of life programs in meeting
recruiting and retention challenges. On the other hand, in a hearing
last month before the Military Quality of Life and Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, the Service Senior
Enlisted Advisors emphasized the importance of addressing quality of
life issues for Active, National Guard, and Reserve servicemembers and
their families. They listed child care and housing as top priorities,
in addition to pay, health care, and educational opportunities for
servicemembers and their families. NMFA is concerned that this
inconsistent emphasis among military leaders may give the perception
that DOD is not serious about the value of non-pay elements of the
military benefit package.
What's Needed for Family Support?
Family readiness volunteers and installation family support
personnel in both Active-Duty and Reserve component communities have
been stretched thin over the past 3\1/2\ years as they have had to
juggle pre-deployment, ongoing deployment, and return and reunion
support, often simultaneously. Unfortunately, this juggling act will
likely continue for some time. Volunteers, whose fatigue is evident,
are frustrated with being called on too often during longer than
anticipated and repeated deployments. Family member volunteers support
the servicemembers' choice to serve; however, they are worn out and
concerned they do not have the training or the backup from the family
support professionals to handle the problems facing some families in
their units. Military community volunteers are the front line troops in
the mission to ensure family readiness. They deserve training,
information, and assistance from their commands, supportive unit rear
detachment personnel, professional backup to deal with family issues
beyond their expertise and comfort level, and opportunities for respite
before becoming overwhelmed. NMFA is pleased to note that the Army's
paid Family Readiness Group assistants are getting rave reviews from
commanders and family readiness volunteers--more of these positions are
needed.
NMFA knows that complicated military operations can result in
deployments of unexpected lengths and more frequent deployments. But we
also understand the frustrations of family members who eagerly
anticipated the return of their servicemembers on a certain date only
to be informed at the last minute that the deployment will be extended.
Others hope to enjoy a couple of years of family time with the
servicemember only to be told that the unit will be deployed again
within a year or less. Other than the danger inherent in combat
situations, the unpredictability of the length and frequency of
deployments is perhaps the single most important factor frustrating
families today. Because of this unpredictability, family members need
more help in acquiring the tools to cope. They also need consistent
levels of support throughout the entire cycle of deployment, which
includes the time when servicemembers are at the home installation and
working long hours to support other units who are deployed or gearing
up their training in preparation for another deployment. As one spouse
wrote to NMFA:
This is really starting to take a toll on families out here
since some families are now on the verge of their third
deployment of the servicemember to Iraq. Families are not so
much disgruntled by the tempo of operations as they are at a
loss for resources to deal with what I've started calling the
``pivotal period.'' This is the point where the honeymoon from
the last deployment is over, the servicemember is starting to
train again for the next deployment in a few months and is gone
on a regular basis, the family is balancing things with the
servicemember coming and going and also realizing the
servicemember is going to go away again and be in harm's way.
We have deployment briefs that set the tone and provide
expectations for when the servicemember leaves. We have return
and reunion briefs that prepare families and provide
expectations for when the servicemember returns. These two
events help families know what is normal and what resources are
available but there is an enormous hole for that ``pivotal
period.'' No one is getting families together to let them know
their thoughts, experiences and expectations are (or aren't)
normal in those in between months. Deployed spouses have
events, programs, and free child care available to them as they
should--but what about these things for the in-betweeners who
are experiencing common thoughts and challenges?
As deployments have continued, the Services have refined their
programs to educate servicemembers and family members about issues that
may surface after the homecoming and immediate reunion. Efforts to
improve the return and reunion process must evolve as everyone learns
more about the effects of multiple deployments on both servicemembers
and families, as well as the time it may take for some of these effects
to become apparent. Information gathered in the now-mandatory post-
deployment health assessments may also help identify servicemembers who
may need more specialized assistance in making the transition home over
the long term. Many mental health experts state that some post-
deployment problems may not surface for several months after the
servicemembers return. Assessments done at crowded de-mobilization
sites where servicemembers' primary wish is to complete their
outprocessing checklist and go home may not capture either the
immediate needs of the servicemember for counseling services or be an
accurate predictor of future needs. NMFA applauds the announcement made
in January by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs
that DOD would mandate a second assessment at the 4-to-6 month mark
following the servicemember's return. We urge Congress to ensure the
military Service medical commands have the personnel resources needed
to conduct these assessments.
NMFA is concerned that much of the research on mental health issues
and readjustment has focused on the servicemember. More needs to be
done to study the effects of deployment and the servicemembers' post-
deployment readjustment on family members. Families also tell us they
need more information and training on how to recognize signs of Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in their servicemember and how to
handle the situations they are told may be common after the
servicemember's return. While return and reunion training is getting
better and more families are participating, some family members are
saying more must be done to support families following the return.
According to one spouse:
The problem comes in when it's you and hubby at home and he
just woke up screaming, or threw an object across the room
because he's angry or freaks out in a crowd. Yes, they tell you
it could happen, but what do you do when it does? Where is the
help when this stuff happens? We don't think the problem is the
reunion classes, it's the follow-up.
Return and reunion issues are long-term issues. NMFA believes more
also needs to be done to ensure proper tracking of the adjustment of
returning servicemembers. This tracking becomes more difficult when
servicemembers are ordered to a new assignment away from the unit with
which they deployed. Post-deployment assessments and support services
must also be available to the families of returning Guard and Reserve
members and servicemembers who leave the military following the end of
their enlistment. Although they may be eligible for transitional health
care benefits and the servicemember may seek care through the Veterans'
Administration (VA), what happens when the military health benefits run
out and deployment-related stresses still affect the family?
NMFA is pleased that DOD has intensified its marketing efforts for
Military OneSource as one resource in the support for families
throughout the entire deployment cycle. Military OneSource provides 24/
7 access, toll-free or online, to community and family support
resources, allowing families to access information and services when
and where they need them. DOD, through OneSource, has committed to
helping returning servicemembers and families of all Services access
local community resources and receive up to six free face-to-face
mental health visits with a professional outside the chain of command.
While NMFA believes OneSource is an important tool for family
support, it is not a substitute for the installation-based family
support professionals or the Family Assistance Centers serving Guard
and Reserve families. NMFA is concerned that some of the recent cuts in
family program staff at installations suffering a shortfall in base
operations funding may have been made under the assumption that the
support could be provided remotely through OneSource. The OneSource
information and referral service must be properly coordinated with
other support services, to enable family support professionals to
manage the many tasks that come from high operational tempo. The
Services must also ensure the OneSource contractor has up-to-date
information on military installation services and military benefits,
such as TRICARE. The responsibility for training rear detachment
personnel and volunteers and in providing the backup for complicated
cases beyond the knowledge or comfort level of the volunteers should
flow to the installation family center or Guard and Reserve family
readiness staff. Family program staff must also facilitate
communication and collaboration between the rear detachment,
volunteers, and agencies such as chaplains, schools, and medical
personnel. The OneSource counseling must be provided with an
understanding of the TRICARE benefit and assist with a smooth handoff
if the provider determines that the beneficiary needs medical mental
health services rather than the relationship and ``coping with stress''
counseling offered by OneSource.
Guard and Reserve Families
NMFA appreciates the focus that has been placed on enhancing
programs for the families of deployed Guard and Reserve members.
Ongoing training programs for family readiness volunteers and family
readiness liaisons and rear detachment commanders address the concern
that was raised in the NMFA analysis report, ``Serving the Home
Front,'' that all members of the family readiness team train together
in order to more effectively serve their families. NMFA staff observed
the effectiveness of this training first hand at a Reserve unit
training in January where servicemembers training as family readiness
liaisons or ``frills'' experienced epiphanies as they viewed problems
and miscommunications from the family side instead of the command side.
This collaboration can go a long way in bettering communication on all
sides.
Geographically-isolated Guard and Reserve families must depend on a
growing but still patchy military support network. As indicated in the
NMFA analysis report, one way to effectively multiply resources is an
increased use of community programs to reach out to those families who
are geographically dispersed. Countless local and state initiatives by
government organizations and community groups have sprung up to make
dealing with deployment easier for Guard and Reserve family members.
One new initiative that has the potential to network these local
efforts is the National Demonstration Program for Citizen-Soldier
Support. This community-based program is designed to strengthen support
for National Guard and Reserve families by building and reinforcing the
capacity of civilian agencies, systems, and resources to better serve
them. Initiated by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
with $1.8 million in seed money provided in the fiscal year 2005
Defense Appropriations Act, the Citizen-Soldier Support Program will be
coordinated closely with existing military programs and officials in
order to avoid duplication of effort and to leverage and optimize
success. Communities want to help. Leveraging this help with Federal
funding and programs can be a win-win situation. NMFA recommends
authorization of this program and continued funding to allow it time to
develop a model that can be replicated in other locations and to set up
training to achieve this replication.
NMFA applauds the various initiatives designed to meet the needs of
servicemembers and families wherever they live and whenever they need
them and requests adequate funding to ensure continuation both of the
``bedrock'' support programs and implementation of new initiatives.
Higher stress levels caused by open-ended deployments require a higher
level of community support. We ask Congress to ensure that the Services
have base operations funding at the level necessary to provide robust
quality of life and family support programs during the entire
deployment cycle: pre-deployment, deployment, post-deployment, and in
that ``pivotal period'' between deployments. Accurate and timely
information on options for obtaining mental health services and other
return and reunion support must be provided to families as well as to
servicemembers. NMFA recommends increased funding for community based
programs to reach out to meet the needs of geographically dispersed
servicemembers and their families.
health care
This year, NMFA is monitoring the after-effects of the transition
to the new round of TRICARE contracts and the continued transition of
mobilized Guard and Reserve members and their families in and out of
TRICARE. We are concerned that the Defense Health Program may not have
all the resources it needs to meet both military medical readiness
mission and provide access to health care for all beneficiaries. The
Defense Health Program must be funded sufficiently so that the direct
care system of military treatment facilities and the purchased care
segment of civilian providers can work in tandem to meet the
responsibilities given under the new contracts, meet readiness needs,
and ensure access for all TRICARE beneficiaries. Families of Guard and
Reserve members should have flexible options for their health care
coverage that address both access to care and continuity of care
tricare prime
The change to three TRICARE Regions and three regional Managed Care
Support Contractors (MCSC) did not go as smoothly as expected. The
large number of Primary Care Manager (PCM) changes, particularly in the
West Region, created significant angst among beneficiaries. NMFA
believes that most of these issues have been resolved, but it certainly
did not make for a hassle free transition for many beneficiaries!
The most egregious problem that surfaced during the transition was
the inability of DOD to satisfactorily roll-out its electronic referral
program. The program was intended to facilitate electronic referrals by
the PCM to specialists, often while the beneficiary was still in the
PCM's office. At the last minute, it became apparent that the system
was not ready for ``prime time'' and, in fact, is still not up and
running. A date for it to be so has not been determined. In order for
referrals to be made, both the MCSCs and the military treatment
facilities (MTF) had to quickly devise a paper process that met the
contract specifications of ``first refusal'' by the MTF. Some rather
obvious bottlenecks within the process were identified and have for the
most part been rectified. Originally some MTFs were holding referrals
in-house even though they or any other MTF within the drive time Prime
standard did not have the necessary specialty. While that issue is
being improved, the time the paper process is taking in most cases
increases the likelihood that the Prime access standard of 28 days for
specialty care may be exceeded by anywhere from a week to 2 or 3 weeks.
The MCSCs were forced to quickly hire and train hundreds of new
employees in order to facilitate the paper referral process. They, we
assume, will be reimbursed for their extra expenses by DOD. The MTFs,
on the other hand, have had to handle the problem without any increase
in staffing. While the MCSCs are in most cases meeting the 28 day
standard from the time they receive the referral, the delay appears to
be in receiving the referral from the MTF. We have had few complaints
of the 28 day access window being exceeded when the referral was
totally within the civilian network. The problems seem to be almost
totally tied to the ``first refusal'' right of MTFs. NMFA has no
problem with the concept of ``first refusal'' as we support a well-
utilized direct care system and believe the vast majority of Prime
enrollees prefer to receive their care in an MTF. We are most
concerned, however, that the promised access standards for Prime are
not being met. We believe that just as the enrollee is tied to certain
contract requirements to receive care, the government should be held
accountable for its side of the contract that includes promised access
standards.
In late 2004, NMFA conducted a voluntary web survey of TRICARE
Prime access standards. We were disappointed to note that in each
category where Prime access standards were not being met, beneficiaries
enrolled at MTFs had higher rates of noncompliance than did those
enrolled in the civilian network. Most notably, the 1 hour drive time
for a specialist appointment was exceeded more than 15 times as often
for those enrolled at an MTF. In addition, four out of ten respondents
enrolled at an MTF were unable to get an urgent care appointment within
24 hours and more than one in three enrolled at an MTF were unable to
get a routine appointment within the one week Prime access standard. We
were surprised at the number and length of comments provided on the
survey. Some beneficiaries were most complimentary of the TRICARE
program. By far the largest number of negative comments referenced
referrals and difficulty accessing assistance on the toll free numbers
both in length of time on the phone and ability of the representative
to answer questions or solve problems.
The change of PCMs and the convoluted referral and authorization
process overwhelmed the MCSCs' telephone systems, with long waits for
beneficiaries who sometimes found their problems remained unresolved
once they were finally connected. All of the MCSCs have worked hard on
the problem and the telephone situation has vastly improved. NMFA
appreciates that both the MCSCs and DOD are working to expedite the
referral and authorization process. We are concerned about the cost of
the additional manpower and of the work-around procedures needed in the
absence of DOD's promised electronic referral system.
NMFA believes that ``rosy'' predictions when significant contract
changes are being made are a disservice to both beneficiaries and the
system. NMFA is appreciative of the intense effort being made to
improve the referral and authorization process, but is concerned about
the cost of the work-around and the prospect of a new round of
disruptions when DOD's electronic referral and authorization system is
implemented. It is imperative that whatever changes are made, the
promised Prime access standards must be met.
tricare standard
NMFA is most appreciative of the requirements included in the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2004 for
improving TRICARE Standard. The results of the first survey of market
areas required in the NDAA have proved disappointing as the Office of
Management and Budget limited the number of questions to three. ``Are
you accepting new patients?'' ``Are you accepting new TRICARE Standard
patients?'' If the answer to the second question was no, then the
providers were asked ``Why?'' Obviously one cannot tell if the provider
is accepting new Medicare patients and not new TRICARE Standard
patients (the reimbursement would be the same in most cases). One
cannot tell even if the provider was aware of the difference between
being in the TRICARE network or simply being an authorized TRICARE
provider. One does not know if the new patients that are being accepted
are private pay versus insured. One also does not know how long the
provider has not been accepting new TRICARE Standard patients, so one
does not know if the more complicated claims process, that no longer
exists, could be the reason for not accepting TRICARE patients. Perhaps
the biggest unknown is whether or not the provider previously accepted
new TRICARE Standard patients and has stopped doing so and the reason
for the change. In other words, the results gave a piece of the
picture, but by no means the entire picture.
Even with this limited information, the survey results show a
significant difference between providers accepting any new patients and
those accepting new TRICARE Standard patients. The difference in
percentages ranged from a low of 4 percent to a high of 35 percent with
the average for all market areas being 15.5 percent. Without additional
knowledge, getting to the root cause of the difference is problematic.
NMFA hopes the DOD surveys of additional market areas will be able to
include more questions so the picture can be complete.
DOD has added a Standard provider directory on its TRICARE web site
to assist beneficiaries in finding physicians. However, the law allows
providers to decide for each appointment whether or not they will
accept TRICARE Standard reimbursement. Hence a provider whose name is
in the directory may not take a particular TRICARE Standard patient or
may not accept TRICARE reimbursement for all of that patient's care.
NMFA would like to note that, with the start of the new TRICARE
contracts, DOD also sent a beneficiary handbook to every household with
a TRICARE (not TRICARE for Life) beneficiary. Having DOD provide a
handbook to every beneficiary has long been a goal for NMFA. We are
exceedingly grateful that this action was taken! We note, however, that
more needs to be done to educate Standard beneficiaries about their
benefit and any changes that might occur to that benefit--they should
not have to wait for the next contract turnover to receive another
handbook!
NMFA believes ending the TRICARE Standard access problem that is a
constant complaint of beneficiaries cannot be accomplished if the
reasons providers do not accept TRICARE Standard cannot be ascertained.
guard and reserve family health care
Despite increased training opportunities for families, the problem
still persists of educating Guard and Reserve family members about
their benefits. New and improved benefits do not always enhance the
quality of life of Guard and Reserve families as intended because these
families lack the information about how to access these benefits. NMFA
is closely watching the impending implementation of the TRICARE Reserve
Select health care benefit for the Reserve component. We have several
concerns about the implementation of this program, especially regarding
beneficiary education on the new benefit. Presently, when Guard or
Reserve members are mobilized, their families have the option of
enrolling in TRICARE Prime or TRICARE Prime Remote. Under TRICARE
Reserve Select, families will only be allowed to use the TRICARE
Standard option. The rules governing the program state that the
servicemember must declare his/her intention to commit to further
service in the Reserve component and sign up for Reserve Select before
leaving Active-Duty. Both the servicemember and the family need to
understand the coverage provided under Reserve Select, the costs, and,
most importantly, how Reserve Select differs from the TRICARE Prime or
Prime Remote benefit the family used while the servicemember was on
Active-Duty. We do not want servicemembers to believe they are signing
up for a TRICARE Prime-like benefit when they are, in reality, signing
up for TRICARE Standard.
NMFA is grateful to Congress for its initial efforts to enhance the
continuity of care for National Guard and Reserve members and their
families. Unfortunately, these improvements, including Reserve Select,
are not all that is needed. Information and support are improving for
Guard and Reserve families who must transition into TRICARE; however,
NMFA believes that going into TRICARE may not be the best option for
all of these families. Guard and Reserve servicemembers who have been
mobilized should have the same option as their peers who work for the
Department of Defense: DOD should pay their civilian health care
premiums. The ability to stay with their civilian health care plan is
especially important when a Guard or Reserve family member has a
special need, a chronic condition, or is in the midst of treatment.
While continuity of care for some families will be enhanced by the
option to allow Guard and Reserve members to buy into Reserve Select
after they return from a deployment, it can be provided for others only
if all Selected Reserve are allowed buy into TRICARE or to choose to
remain with their civilian health insurance while receiving a subsidy
from DOD.
NMFA also believes it is time to update the Transitional Assistance
Management Program (TAMP) health care benefit to reflect recent changes
in the TRICARE Prime benefit. Currently, servicemembers who have been
demobilized and their families are eligible for 180 days of TAMP health
care benefits. If TRICARE Prime is available, they may re-enroll in
Prime during the TAMP benefit period. Servicemembers and families who
live in areas where there is no Prime network were eligible for TRICARE
Prime Remote when the servicemember was on Active-Duty. During the TAMP
benefit period, they are no longer eligible for Prime Remote because
the servicemember is no longer on Active-Duty. In some cases, the
family must find another provider, thus disrupting continuity of care.
Families formerly in Prime Remote must revert to Standard, with its
higher cost shares and deductibles. NMFA believes that the legislative
language governing the TAMP benefit should be updated to reflect the
availability of TRICARE Prime Remote and that servicemembers and
families in TAMP be allowed to remain in Prime Remote.
Emphasis must continue on promoting continuity of care for families
of Guard and Reserve servicemembers. NMFA's recommendation to enhance
continuity of care for this population is to allow members of the
Selected Reserve to choose between buying into TRICARE when not on
Active-Duty or receive a DOD subsidy allowing their families to remain
with their employer-sponsored care when mobilized. NMFA also recommends
that the rules governing health care coverage under TAMP be updated to
allow the servicemember and family to remain eligible for TRICARE Prime
Remote.
Alarming Discovery
Over the years, NMFA has received anecdotal information from family
members that providers are not accepting them as TRICARE patients
because the TRICARE reimbursement level was below that provided by
Medicaid. Needless to say, family members have been outraged! However,
since TRICARE reimbursement is tied by law to Medicare reimbursement,
NMFA has believed the problem far larger than the military health care
system.
Alarm bells resounded, however, when NMFA was recently informed of
the situation in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia. Medicaid
reimbursement for a normal pregnancy, including prenatal care, delivery
and post partum care is $2,200 in that area. The maximum TRICARE
allowance is $1,500. The largest network provider group in the area has
therefore dropped out of the Prime network. Some of its providers are
refusing to accept TRICARE at all, and others will only take TRICARE
Standard patients if the patients pay the allowed 15 percent above the
TRICARE allowable. NMFA cannot even imagine the reaction of a deployed
servicemember when his spouse reports that she cannot go back to her
usual obstetrician for the baby that will be delivered while the member
is in Iraq, because TRICARE reimbursement rates are $700 less than
Medicaid! Since learning of the situation in Virginia, NMFA has learned
of other locations where the Medicaid reimbursement for obstetrical or
pediatric procedures exceeds that of TRICARE. NMFA believes the people
of this country would not feel comfortable with these statistics.
NMFA does not know how prevalent this problem may be across the
country and urgently requests that Congress require DOD to compare the
reimbursement rates of Medicaid with those of TRICARE. We are
particularly concerned with the rates for pediatric and obstetrical/
gynecological care where Medicare has little experience in rate
setting.
survivors
NMFA believes that the government's obligation as articulated by
President Lincoln, ``to care for him who shall have borne the battle
and for his widow and his orphan,'' is as valid today as it was at the
end of the Civil War. As seen in media reports and in questions we hear
from military families and others concerned about military families,
there is a lot of misinformation and confusion about what the complete
benefit is for those whose servicemembers have made the ultimate
sacrifice. We know that there is no way to compensate them for their
loss, but we do owe it to these families to help ensure a secure
future.
NMFA strongly believes that all servicemembers' deaths should be
treated equally. Servicemembers are on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, 365 days a year. Through their oath, each servicemember's
commitment is the same. The survivor benefit package should not create
inequities by awarding different benefits to families who lose a
servicemember in a hostile zone versus those who lose their loved one
in a training mission preparing for service in a hostile zone. To the
family, the loss is the same.
After the death of the servicemember, the spouse encounters a
confusing array of decisions that must be made, the consequences of
which will influence his or her life and the lives of the children for
years to come. NMFA has heard surviving spouses say ``My husband told
me I'd be well taken care of if something were to happen to him. I
don't feel that he would be happy with the way things have been
handled''. These spouses feel betrayed and poorly served as they
transition from Active-Duty status to the confusing status of widow or
widower. What should be a seamless transition is often complicated by
unnecessary hurdles presented when people who are supposed to help the
survivors do not understand the nuances of the survivor benefits, from
the widow whose SBP payment was delayed because ``her husband was too
young to retire'' to the pharmacy that charges a widow to fill
prescriptions because they believe she is no longer eligible for the
TRICARE benefit.
NMFA believes the benefit change that will provide the most
significant long term protection to the family's financial security
would be to end the DIC offset to the SBP. The DIC is a special
indemnity (compensation or insurance) payment that is paid by the VA to
the survivor when the servicemember's service causes his or her death.
It is a flat rate payment, which for 2005 is $993 for the surviving
spouse and $247 for each surviving child. The SBP annuity, paid by the
DOD, reflects the longevity of the service of the military member. It
is ordinarily calculated at 55 percent of retired pay.
Two years ago, surviving spouses of all servicemembers killed on
Active-Duty were made eligible to receive SBP. The amount of their
annuity payment is calculated as if the servicemember was medically
retired at 100 percent disability. The annuity varies greatly,
depending on the servicemember's longevity of service. As the law is
currently written, if the amount of SBP is less than $993, the
surviving spouse receives only the DIC payment of $993 per month. If
the amount of SBP is greater than $993, the surviving spouse receives
the DIC payment of $993 per month (which is non-taxable) plus the
difference between the DIC and the SBP. For example, if the SBP is
$1,500, the surviving spouse receives $993 from DIC (non-taxable) and
$507 from SBP that is subject to tax each month. The DIC payment of
$247 for each child is not offset.
Surviving Active-Duty spouses have the option of several benefit
choices depending on their circumstances and the ages of their
children. Because SBP is offset by the DIC payment, the spouse whose
SBP payment would be less than the amount of DIC may choose to waive
her SBP benefit and select the ``child only'' option. In this scenario,
the spouse would receive the DIC payment and her children would receive
the full SBP amount until the last child turns 18 (23 if in college),
as well as the individual child DIC until each child turns 18 (or 23 if
in college). Once the children have left the house, the spouse who has
chosen this option will be left with an annual income of $11,916 (in
2005 dollars). If there are no dependent children, the surviving spouse
whose SBP benefit is less than the $993 DIC payment will experience
this income decline just 6 months following the servicemember's death.
In each case, this is a significant drop in income from what the family
had been earning while on Active-Duty. The percentage of income loss is
even greater for survivors whose servicemembers had served longer on
Active-Duty. Those who give their lives for their country deserve
fairer compensation for their surviving spouses.
As we have described, the interaction between SBP and DIC is a
complex procedure to understand. Consider trying to make decisions
about this payment distribution a month after losing your spouse, while
still in a state of shock and denial. The military service casualty
assistance officer (CAO) has received training to help the family
through these difficult times. This assistance, however, is often
performed as an extra duty and the officer is not an expert in survivor
issues or financial counseling. Understanding all the benefits and
entitlements is a complex process. We have heard from surviving
families that they greatly appreciated the help and support provided by
the CAO in those first days as he or she served as a representative of
their parent service. The presence of the CAO demonstrates to the
family that ``we take care of our own'' and can be a great comfort to
the family as they go through the military funeral and honors.
Sometimes, however, training for this extra duty can be hurried or
incomplete and may result in misinformation or a missed step in a
procedure that is not discovered until months down the road with
consequences that are irrevocable.
NMFA recommends the following changes to support surviving family
members of Active-Duty deaths:
Treat all Active-Duty deaths equally. The military
services have procedures in place to make ``line of death''
determinations. Do not impose another layer of deliberation on
that process.
Eliminate the DIC offset to SBP. Doing so would
recognize the length of commitment and service of the career
servicemember and spouse. Eliminating the offset would also
restore to those widows/widowers of those retirees who died of
a service-connected disability the SBP benefit that the
servicemember paid for.
Improve the quality and consistency of training for
CAOs and family support providers so they can better support
families in their greatest time of need.
In cases where the family has employer sponsored
dental insurance treat them as if they had been enrolled in the
TRICARE Dental Program at the time of the servicemember's
death, thus making them eligible for the 3-year survivor
benefit.
Update the TRICARE benefit provided in 3-year period
following the servicemember's death in which the surviving
spouse and children are treated as their Active-Duty family
members and allow them to enroll in TRICARE Prime Remote.
Allow surviving families to remain in government or
privatized family housing longer than the current 6-month
period if necessary for children to complete the school year,
with the family paying rent for the period after 6 months.
Expand access to grief counseling for spouses,
children, parents, and siblings through Vet Centers, OneSource,
and other community-based services.
To provide for the long-term support of surviving
families, establish a Survivor Office in the Department of
Veterans' Affairs.
wounded servicemembers have wounded families
Post-deployment transitions could be especially problematic for
servicemembers who have been injured and their families. NMFA asserts
that behind every wounded servicemember is a wounded family. Wounded
and injured servicemembers and their families deserve no less support
than survivors. Spouses, children, and parents of servicemembers
injured defending our country experience many uncertainties. Fear of
the unknown and what lies ahead in the weeks, months, and even years,
weighs heavily on their minds. Other concerns include the injured
servicemember's return and reunion with their family, financial
stresses, and navigating the transition process to the VA.
Comprehensive Support and Assistance
Support, assistance, and above all, counseling programs, which are
staffed by real people who provide face to face contact, are needed for
the families of wounded/injured servicemembers. Whenever feasible,
Military OneSource should be used as a resource multiplier. Mental
health services and trained counselors need to be available and easily
accessible for all servicemembers and their families who may suffer
``invisible'' injures like PTSD. Distance from MTFs or VA Centers
should not preclude servicemembers and their families from seeking and
receiving care. Even those families of servicemembers who are not
considered severely disabled could have difficulties in making the
transition from Active-Duty to civilian life and should have safety net
programs available. Respite care options should be provided and
accessible for family members who care for the seriously wounded.
The transition between the DOD and the VA health system can be
confusing for servicemembers and their families. Transition time lines
and available services extended to wounded servicemembers sometimes
vary by Service. Each military Service has developed unique programs
for treating seriously injured servicemembers: the Army Disabled
Soldier Support System (DS3), the Marine For Life (M4L) and the Air
Force Palace HART. These programs do not offer the same support
services for the injured servicemember. NMFA has been told that the new
DOD Military Severely Injured Joint Operations Center can only provide
assistance when the parent Service requests it for an injured
servicemember. The role of the DOD and the VA should be clearly
explained and delineated and joint efforts between all the Services and
the VA in support of the servicemember and family must be the priority.
In the case of severely disabled, there should be an individual written
transition plan that is explained in full to the supporting family
members. Robust transition, employment and training programs for
wounded/injured servicemembers and their family members are also
important for seamless transition to occur.
Providing for family financial stability
Both immediate and long-term financial pressures affect the family
of a wounded/injured servicemember. The initial hospitalization and
recovery period often requires the servicemembers' family to leave work
for an extended period of time in order to be with their loved one,
thus potentially losing a source of income and incurring tremendous
travel expenses, childcare costs and other unexpected living expenses
during an already stressful time. Although servicemembers continue to
draw basic pay and some other allowances during their hospitalization,
some families need financial assistance in the immediate period
following the injury or during the critical transition until
eligibility for VA benefits and disability compensation programs is
established or until the servicemember is returned to Active-Duty. NMFA
encourages Congress to consider initiatives to provide additional
compensation to the servicemember during hospitalization and recovery.
Possible solutions would be to continue the servicemember's combat pays
and eligibility for the combat zone tax exclusion during the recovery
period; provide a disability ``gratuity'' to the severely injured; or
establish a premium-based Servicemember Group Disability Insurance
Program as a rider on the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI)
Program, to provide a lump sum or monthly payment while the
servicemember is recovering.
NMFA also recommends extending the same 3-year medical and dental
benefit now provided to survivors of those killed on Active-Duty to the
servicemembers who have been medically retired and his/her family.
MTF Family Assistance Centers
Family Assistance Centers (FACs) established at Walter Reed and
other major medical centers have proved invaluable in assisting
families of wounded servicemembers and in providing a central location
to filter community offers of help. NMFA believes these centers are
urgently needed in every MTF that treats injured servicemembers. In
addition to the recreation, travel and emergency support that these
centers already provide, part of the mission of these centers should be
to prepare the family for the servicemember's transition back home.
Because ``wounded servicemembers have wounded families,'' NMFA
recommends the following changes to support wounded and injured
servicemembers and their families:
Direct the military services, OSD, and the VA to
improve their coordination in support of the wounded
servicemember and family.
Consider initiatives to enhance the short term
financial stability of the wounded servicemember's family, such
as: continuing combat pays and tax exclusion, creating a
disability gratuity, or implementing a Servicemember Group
Disability Insurance Program.
Extend the 3-year survivor health care benefit to
servicemembers who are medically retired and their families.
Enhance servicemember and spouse education benefits
and employment support.
Establish a Family Assistance Center at every MTF
caring for wounded servicemembers.
education for military children
A significant element of family readiness is an educational system
that provides a quality education to military children, recognizing the
needs of these ever-moving students and responding to situations where
the military parent is deployed and/or in an armed conflict. Children
are affected by the absence of a parent and experience even higher
levels of stress when their military parent is in a war zone shown
constantly on television. The military member deployed to that
dangerous place cannot afford to be distracted by the worry that his or
her child is not receiving a quality education. Addressing the needs of
these children, their classmates, and their parents is imperative to
lowering the overall family stress level and to achieving an
appropriate level of family readiness. But it does not come without
cost to the local school system.
NMFA is pleased to report that most schools charged with educating
military children have stepped up to the challenge. They are the
constant in a changing world and the place of security for military
children and their families. The DOD is supporting this effort in
several significant ways. It has an education website
(www.militarystudent.org) to provide information on a variety of
education topics to parents, students, educational personnel, and
military commanders. NMFA is also pleased to report that other Services
are following the Army's lead and hiring fulltime School Liaison
Officers at certain installations. The Army not only has School Liaison
Officers at all locations, but has also expanded to provide these
information services to the Reserve components, recruiters and other
remotely-assigned personnel and their families.
NMFA is appreciative of the support shown by Congress for the
schools educating military children. It has consistently supported the
needs of the schools operated by the DOD Education Activity (DODEA),
both in terms of basic funding and military construction. Congress has
also resisted efforts by a series of administrations to cut the Impact
Aid funding so vital to the civilian school districts that educate the
majority of military children. NMFA is also appreciative of the
approximately $30 million Congress adds in most years to the Defense
budget to supplement Impact Aid for school districts whose enrollments
are more than 20 percent military children and for the additional
funding to support civilian school districts who are charged with
educating severely disabled military children. NMFA does not believe,
however, that this amount is sufficient to help school districts meet
the demands placed on them by their responsibilities to serve large
numbers of military children. Additional counseling and improvements to
security are just 2 needs faced by many of these school districts. NMFA
requests asks this subcommittee for its assistance in securing an
increase in the DOD supplement to Impact Aid to $50 million so that the
recipient school districts have more resources at their disposal to
educate the children of those who serve.
DODEA
Department of Defense schools are located in overseas locations
(DODDS) and on a small number of military installations in the United
States (DDESS). The commitment to the education of military children in
DOD schools between Congress, DOD, military commanders, DODEA
leadership and staff, and especially military parents has resulted in
high test scores, nationally-recognized minority student achievement,
parent involvement programs and partnership activities with the
military community. This partnership has been especially important as
the overseas communities supported by DODDS and many of the
installations with DDESS schools have experienced high deployment
rates. DOD schools have responded to the operations tempo with
increased support for families and children in their communities. We
ask that Congress work with DOD to ensure DOD schools have the
resources they need to handle their additional tasks.
NMFA also asks this subcommittee to understand the importance
military parents attach to schools that educate their children well.
DOD recently released the findings of a congressionally-requested study
to determine whether it could turn some DDESS districts over to
neighboring civilian education agencies. While NMFA did not object to
the concept of a report to determine whether school systems are
providing a quality education, using tax dollars well, or are in need
of additional maintenance or other support funding, we are concerned
about the timing of the study and the reaction it has caused in
communities already dealing with the stress of the war and deployments.
Families in these communities wonder why something that works so well
now seems to be threatened. We were relieved that DOD officials
announced they would suspend any consideration of the recommendations
in the report until after the selection of installations affected by
BRAC. We encourage Members of Congress to study those recommendations
closely before making any decision that could damage the educational
success the DDESS schools have achieved.
Schools serving military children, whether DOD or civilian schools,
need the resources available to meet military parents' expectation that
their children receive the highest quality education possible. Because
Impact Aid from the Department of Education is not fully funded, NMFA
recommends increasing the DOD supplement to Impact Aid to $50 million
to help districts better meet the additional demands caused by large
numbers of military children, deployment-related issues, and the
effects of military programs and policies such as family housing
privatization. Initiatives to assist parents and to promote better
communication between installations and schools should be expanded
across all Services.
spouse employment
Today's military is comprised of predominantly young adults under
the age of 35. Sixty-nine percent of all military spouses and 86
percent of junior enlisted spouses are in the labor force. For many
families this second income is a critical factor in their financial
well being. However, a 2003 RAND study found that the husband-and wife-
earnings of a military family were $10,000 a year less than similar
civilian families largely due to military wives' lower income potential
because of frequent moves. With such statistics and a concern that
spouses desiring better careers will encourage servicemembers to leave
the military, DOD is paying much-needed attention to spouse employment.
In the DOD Report of the 1st Quadrennial Quality of Life Review:
``Families also Serve,'' numerous initiatives were outlined that
support military spouses career aspirations. DOD initiatives include:
Milspouse.org: A military spouse employment web page,
created in partnership with the Department of Labor, that
provides easy access to employment and education opportunities.
Military Spouse Corporate Employment Opportunities
(MSCEO). Currently 15 corporations and 3 government entities
have partnerships with MSCEO, an Army initiative.
A no-cost partnership with the ADECCO Group, one of
the world's largest employment and staffing agencies, to
provide job skills assessments and temporary and permanent
placements for spouses.
Impact Jobs/Employment for Military Spouses (JEMS).
Pilot program at Scott Air Force Base, IL, that provides
placement services with links to 187 employers with a wide
range of full- and part-time job opportunities.
DOD is also planning a partnership with Monster.com to promote
spouse employment. Spouses can also receive career counseling through
Military OneSource.
With 700,000 Active-Duty spouses, the task of enhancing military
spouse employment is too big for DOD to handle alone. Improvements in
employment for military spouses and assistance in supporting their
career progression will require increased partnerships and initiatives
by a variety of government agencies and private employers. NMFA
encourages more private employers to step up to the plate and form
partnerships with local installations and DOD. One such initiative is
the Military Spouse Corporate Career Network (MSCCN), which is a not
for profit organization sponsored by Concentra, Inc. The MSCCN is in
the process of launching a web portal that will provide military
spouses opportunities to apply for employment with Concentra and its
corporate partners.
Despite greater awareness of the importance of supporting military
spouse career aspirations, some roadblocks remain. State laws governing
unemployment compensation vary greatly. At this time very few states
generally grant unemployment compensation eligibility to military
spouses who have moved because of a servicemember's government ordered
move. Although reimbursed for many expenses, military families still
incur significant out-of-pocket expenses when the servicemember is
ordered to a new assignment. Lacking the financial cushion provided by
the receipt of unemployment compensation, the military spouse must
often settle for ``any job to pay the bills'' rather than being able to
search for a job commensurate with his or hers skills or career
aspirations. NMFA has been pleased to note, however, that some states
are examining their in-State tuition rules and licensing requirements.
These changes ease spouses' ability to obtain an education or to
transfer their occupation as they move. NMFA is appreciative of the
efforts by DOD to work with states to promote the award of unemployment
compensation to military spouses, eligibility for in-state tuition, and
reciprocity for professional licenses. Its website,
usa4militaryfamilies.org, provides details on these state initiatives.
NMFA is currently collecting input from spouses on this issue
through a Spouse Employment Survey on its website that it hopes will
provide additional insights to the career needs and goals of military
spouses and the type of employment support they need. NMFA also
recognizes that educational opportunities must be expanded for spouses
and, with the support of corporate donors, has established a military
spouse scholarship program. The program is in its second year. The
1,850 applications we have received for fewer than 40 scholarships
attest to the need for more support for spouse education.
We ask Congress to promote Federal and State coordination to
provide unemployment compensation for military spouses as a result of
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders. State governments should be
encouraged to look at ways that college credits and fees are more
easily transferable and also create a combined task force to explore
paths towards national standards for licensing and professional
certification. DOD and private sector employers who protect employment
flexibility of spouses and other family members impacted by deployment
should be applauded and used as role models for others to follow. Last,
but not least, military spouses should be encouraged to use the current
resources available to educate themselves about factors to consider
regarding employment benefits, to include investments, health care,
portability, and retirement.
child care
On a recent visit to Europe, President and Mrs. Bush stopped at
Ramstein Air Base, Germany, to thank the troops for their service and
dedication to our Nation. While visiting with families there, Mrs. Bush
was made aware of a situation that is getting worse as time goes on:
the lack of child care providers and options to meet the needs of
military families in the community. This information is not new to
NMFA. We have been hearing from our field representatives that this is
an ongoing problem, especially outside the continental United States
(OCONUS) where child care options are limited. As one of our members in
Germany stated:
Drawing from the pool of military spouses is no longer working
over here. Big shortages. They are asking too much of the
spouses as it is.
A recent online survey conducted by NMFA further outlines the need
for more child care. Among survey respondents:
71 percent needed hourly or nights and weekends child
care.
57.1 percent of Guard and Reserve needed full time
care.
Only 18 percent of all respondents and 14 percent of
Guard and Reserve respondents stated that they have been
offered free or low cost respite care.
Almost 60 percent of respondents felt they did not
have enough information about child care options.
More than 30 percent of the respondents use word of
mouth as their main source of information about child care.
Eighteen percent use the military units or volunteer groups and
6 percent have used Military OneSource.
Of special interest in the survey results was the frustration from
dual military parents. Dealing with deployments, drill weekends and
lack of child care facilities were of great concern. Families also
cited concerns about finding child care after relocating to a new area.
Because the servicemember is often quickly deployed after relocation,
the spouse must deal with the added stress as he/she looks for
employment and childcare in the new location.
Senior military leaders are also taking note of these child care
concerns. At the first meeting of the new Military Quality of Life and
Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee,
three of the four Service Senior Enlisted Advisors cited child care as
their number one concern for their servicemembers and families. The
advisors spoke of lost duty time by servicemembers unable to find child
care. DOD officials estimate that the Department needs at least 38,000
more slots. According to the Enlisted Advisors, the need may be
greater: all spoke of waiting lists stretching into the thousands.
DOD is expanding partnerships to meet the demand described by the
NMFA survey respondents and the Senior Enlisted Advisors. The National
Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA)
initiated a program entitled Operation Child Care. The initiative
provides donated short term respite and reunion child care for members
of the National Guard and Reserve returning from Operation Enduring
Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom for the 2-week Rest and Recreation
leave period. Another initiative through Military OneSource offers 10
hours of free childcare to each servicemember returning on R&R leave.
NACCRAA is also partnering with DOD on ``Operation Military Child
Care,'' which will help provide much needed government-subsidized, high
quality child care for mobilized and deployed military parents who
cannot access a military child development center. Other partnerships
are being initiated in local communities with local bases and
Installations.
NMFA asks Congress and DOD to consider authorizing military
members' participation in Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs) for child
care. Ninety percent of private sector employers, plus the Federal
civil service, allow their employees to pay dependent and health care
expenses on a pre-tax basis through these accounts. Exempting military
members from Federal and State income tax and payroll taxes saves
employees 15-40 percent or more, depending on tax rates.
More must be done to meet the Active-Duty and Reserve component
requirement for full time child care, as well as innovative and
effective ways to meet increased demand due to deployments and
servicemember work schedules, regardless of the location of the family
transformation, global rebasing, and brac
As the BRAC Commission prepares to receive DOD's list of
installations recommended for realignment and closure, military
beneficiaries are looking to Congress to ensure that key quality of
life benefits and programs remain accessible. Members of the military
community, especially retirees, are concerned about the impact base
closures will have on their access to health care and the commissary,
exchange, and MWR benefits they have earned. They are concerned that
the size of the retiree, Guard, and Reserve populations remaining in a
location will not be considered in decisions about whether or not to
keep commissaries and exchanges open.
In the case of shifts in troop populations because of Service
transformation initiatives, such as Army modularity, or the return of
servicemembers and families from overseas bases, community members at
receiving installations are concerned that existing facilities and
programs may be overwhelmed by the increased populations. NMFA does not
have a position on whether or not downsizing overseas should occur or
how or where troops should be based. Our interest in this discussion is
in raising awareness of the imperative that military family and quality
of life concerns be considered by policymakers in their decisionmaking
process and in the implementation of any rebasing or transformation
plans.
Quality of life issues that affect servicemembers and families must
be considered on an equal basis with other mission-related tasks in any
plan to move troops or to close or realign installations. The quality
of life infrastructure needed to support the military community
includes housing, quality schools, commissaries, exchanges, child and
youth programs, MWR facilities, family centers, chaplains' programs,
and medical care. Maintaining this infrastructure cannot be done as an
afterthought. Planning must include the preservation of quality of life
programs, services, and facilities at closing installations as long as
servicemembers and families remain AND the development of a robust
quality of life infrastructure at the receiving installation that is in
place before the new families and servicemembers arrive.
Ensuring the availability of quality of life programs, services,
and facilities at both closing and receiving installations and easing
servicemembers and families' transition from one to another will take
additional funding and personnel. DOD must program in the costs of
family support and quality of life as part of its base realignment and
closure calculations from the beginning, ask for the resources it
needs, and then allocate them. It cannot just program in the cost of a
new runway or tank maintenance facility; it must also program in the
cost of a new child development center or new school, if needed.
NMFA will closely monitor the Army's plan for stabilizing families
and servicemembers at one installation for longer assignments. While
stabilization has the potential to offer families more stability and a
better quality of life, we know that the success of the program depends
on the implementation and on the plan for European bases. Families are
quick to note that, while they will stay put for a longer time under
the plan, the servicemember will still deploy, perhaps frequently, and
in many cases to Europe. Concerned about the constant routine of
deployment and related family separations on their morale and quality
of life, families point out that a deployment to a bare bones
installation in Eastern Europe is still a deployment: the servicemember
is still gone!
Additionally, NMFA would like to know what consideration has been
given to the single soldier. The housing and support service needs will
increase for the single soldier if they are expected to stay in one
area for 6 to 7 years.
The early moves connected with the Army transformation are causing
some upheaval at some installations and in the surrounding communities.
The world in which the American overseas downsizing occurred a decade
ago no longer exists. Troop movements and installation closings and
realignments today occur against the backdrop of the ongoing war on
terrorism and a heavy deployment schedule. The military of today is
more dependent on contractors and civilian agencies to perform many of
the functions formerly performed by uniformed military members. Changes
in military health care delivery and the construction and operation of
military family housing will have an impact on the ability of an
installation to absorb large numbers of servicemembers and families
returning from overseas. Increased visibility of issues such as the
smooth transition of military children from one school to another and a
military spouse's ability to pursue a career means that more family
members will expect their leadership to provide additional support in
these areas. Army transformation is already having an impact at some
continental United States (CONUS) installations. Installations such as
Fort Drum, Fort Campbell, and Fort Lewis and their surrounding
communities expect strains on housing availability--both on and off-
base--health care access, and school capacity. The DOD must ensure that
communities have the resources to support increased populations before
they arrive.
NMFA urges that every effort be made to preserve the availability
of health care, commissaries, exchanges, and MWR programs during shifts
in troop populations because of a CONUS BRAC or realignment of troops
from overseas. The size of the military retiree, National, Guard and
Reserve population in the vicinity of a closing installation and the
impact of closure on these beneficiaries should be considered before
decisions are made to close commissaries and exchanges. We look to
Congress to ensure DOD's plans for these troop shifts will maintain
access to quality of life programs and support facilities until the
last servicemember and family leaves installations to be closed. In the
same manner, we ask you to ensure that houses, schools, child
development and youth programs, and community services are in place to
accommodate the surge of families a community can expect to receive as
a result of the movement of troops to a new location.
strong families ensure a strong force
Mr. Chairman, NMFA is grateful to this subcommittee for ensuring
funding is available for the vital quality of life components needed by
today's force. As you consider the quality of life needs of
servicemembers and their families this year, NMFA asks that you
remember that the events of the past 3\1/2\ years have left this family
force drained, yet still committed to their mission. Servicemembers
look to their leaders to provide them with the tools to do the job, to
enhance predictability, to ensure that their families are cared for,
their spouses' career aspirations can be met, and their children are
receiving a quality education. They look for signs from you that help
is on the way, that their pay reflects the tasks they have been asked
to do, and that their hard-earned benefits will continue to be
available for themselves, their families, and their survivors, both now
and into retirement.
STATEMENT OF DEIRDRE PARKE HOLLEMAN, ESQ., CO-DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL MILITARY AND VETERANS ALLIANCE
Ms. Holleman. Mr. Chairman, I too on behalf of the
Alliance, want to thank you very much for allowing us to
testify on these crucial issues.
I would also ask that one of our member group's, the
Reserve Officers Association, full written statement be made a
part of the record.
Senator Graham. Absolutely.
[The prepared statement of General McIntosh follows:]
Prepared Statement by Major General (Ret.) Robert A. McIntosh
introduction
The Reserve Officers Association (ROA) applauds the efforts by
Congress to address recruiting and retention with several provisions in
the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2005. An
increase in bonus authorities for Active and Reserve components was
passed along with an across the board pay raise of 3.5 percent. Other
benefits and compensation changes were targeted towards mobilized
reservists.
These changes included TRICARE for Selected Reserve offering
medical coverage based of 1 year for every 90 days served and
authorizing a percentage of Montgomery G.I. Bill (MGIB). Both of these
changes provided benefits after mobilized service. Congress also made
permanent the temporary authority for care on the date of issuance of a
delayed-effective date Active-Duty order or 90 days before the date on
which the period of Active-Duty commences, whichever is later, for
Reserve component members called to Active-Duty for a period of more
than 30 days in support of a contingency. Another temporary authority
was made permanent by authorizing 180 days of transitional health care
coverage to certain Active and Reserve members.
Over a decade ago when the country first engaged with Iraq in
Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm there were several military
personnel problems identified in mobilizing the Guard and Reserve.
These problems included: medical, pay, education, employment, training,
equipment and family support. The mobilization for Iraq ended quickly
and with the end of one administration and the beginning of another,
the scrutiny and interest in fixing the identified problems shifted to
events in Somalia, Haiti, and Bosnia. Unfortunately, the problems
didn't go away, they just faded to the background until the war on
terrorism began with Operations Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Enduring
Freedom (OEF). As discussed above Congress is now working again on
those problems.
recruiting, retention and military personnel policy
There are several challenges facing the services with recruiting,
retention and military personnel policy. The Naval Reserve (USNR)
recruiting is softer than many of the Navy's leadership would like to
admit. The USNR has been slow to implement recruiting bonuses and the
result is that the USNR is behind the power curve when compared to the
other Services with recruiting incentives for prior servicemembers. The
combined recruiting command has falling short of U.S. Navy (USN) and
USNR goals, and its Reserves are receiving short shrift for recruiting
priorities. Even though the Navy is supporting deep cuts for its Naval
Reserve (10,300 in fiscal year 2006) the need to recruit for the USNR
has not lessened. To meet its shortcomings, the USNR is turning to
activating drilling reservists to fill the recruiter gap. When a
problem exists, you call up the Reserves.
Prior Service Availability: In a 10-year period the
Air Force Reserve went from accessing 50,507 in 1992 to 14,564
in 2002 and this trend has continued for the past 3 years. All
of the Services are experiencing this trend as the Guard and
Reserve have gradually shifted to an operational force. The
significance of recruiting fewer prior service personnel is
lower average levels of experience residing in the Reserve
components and loss of investment in specialty training.
According to the Air Force Reserve the most frequent reasons
ADAF separatees give for not joining Air Force Reserve
component (AFRC) are:
Want to wait and see what happens (with world
events)
Have seen reservists deployed and don't want
to risk same
Done my time, not interested in continuing
Have been told reservists are first to be
deployed
Concerned Reserve status will negatively
impact civilian employment
Negative feedback from activated individual
mobilization augmentees (IMA)
Bad press coverage--impression Active Forces
place reservists and guardsman on front lines
Recruiting Non-Prior Service Personnel: A decrease in
prior service means an increase in the need for non-prior
service personnel to meet recruiting goals. A corresponding
increase in the need for training dollars results at a time
when the administration wants to decrease budgets. The use of
non-prior service also results in less availability of forces
as they move through the training pipeline. Once formal
professional military education is completed training continues
in a member's specialty, which means it can take between 1 to 2
years before an individual can perform duty somewhat
independently.
Mobilization/Demobilization Impacts: The impact of
mobilization and demobilization does not rest just with the
military member; it also affects their families and employers.
This is important to note because they in turn factor in an
individuals decision on whether or not to stay in the military.
Two of the biggest problem areas that ROA members continue to
share information on are with medical and pay problems.
Comment: I am a mobilized Reserve colonel at Walter Reed with
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The problem I see that
reservists and guardsmen are seeing is that the burden of proof
for absence of preexisting is on us. I have seen soldiers with
severe PTSD (suicidal/homicidal) be valued by the board here at
Walter Reed with 0 percent because they concluded he was
bipolar when he entered service, never mind the war
exacerbating the condition. I am seeing extremely low
valuations of disabilities for loss of limb and other traumatic
wounds.
Comment: Here's the issue in a nutshell: soldiers, according
to the Army Reserve Magazine, are eligible for TRICARE benefits
90 days prior to mobilization. We have a group order from First
Army. When soldiers call TRICARE they are told that they cannot
be enrolled in TRICARE without an individual order. Soldiers
are eligible for this insurance but cannot get it. Individual
orders will not come until soldiers arrive at the mobilization
station. Basically, we're eligible, but there is no vehicle to
provide this insurance. One example, our new officer's wife may
be pregnant. (the 2LT type) They currently have no medical
coverage. He is covered while on 29 day orders, but his wife
has no coverage. According to the Army Reserve Magazine, he
should be covered. This is a wonderful benefit, but de facto
nothing has changed since individual orders, which are required
to get coverage, don't come until the Active-Duty period
commences.
Comment: Just wanted you to know that DEERS has dropped my
family from TRICARE dental for the 4th or 5th time.
Comment: Well, today is Day 12 of 12 in a row, with a 3-day
weekend ahead to recover. Of note, however--and I really hate
to continue to bring up pay issues, but I (and hundreds of
other recently demobilized reservists) have not been paid our
accrued pay--and it's been over 3 months now. Someone has to do
something to force DFAS to pay us . . . but who? I'm convinced
no one cares or they simply can't fight the bureaucracy. I am
owed over $6,000 (after taxes) . . . the issues with DFAS
continue--that organization needs to be seriously investigated
and heads need to roll! I will have to take out a loan rather
than pay with the cash that I earned--how sad is that?
Comment: I just wanted to touch base with you prior to
leaving Active-Duty. I wanted to check on the status of any
potential article that was being written and also any help from
the ROA regarding the way that reservists (especially Army
reservists) have been treated with regard to reimbursements and
pay. Since October 1st, I have been receiving only one third of
my normal paycheck. Fortunately, I will be demobilizing on
November 2004. Regardless, a large portion of any article
written must include how DFAS (Indianapolis office) made
multiple errors and, yet, reservists (and their families) are
paying for their mistakes daily.
Comment: In late September I received a letter from DFAS
stating that I had received per diem in error and now owed the
government $11,696. I contacted an individual at DFAS and he
said that the Army had decided to use Department of Defense
(DOD) Directive 4515.14 as a guide to determine payment of per
diem for soldiers in the Washington DC area. He also told me
that there were lots of other soldiers in the same situation
and everyone had been assessed with a debt for travel advances
paid. I asked what could be done and he said that he will
submit a request for waiver of debt for me to DFAS Denver. A
few months later we learned that DFAS Denver had denied waivers
close to 900 soldiers in this situation. We attempted to find
out from DFAS Denver how to file an appeal of their decision to
the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) and received
no help. October 1, I checked my bank account and discovered
that my direct deposit was only $548, I quickly determined that
amount to be approximately 1/3 of my usual deposit and guessed
that DFAS had decided to collect on the debt in the punitive
manner of 2/3 confiscation. With no warning from DFAS or the
Army that this was about to occur I was placed immediately in a
dire financial situation. I sought help from Army Community
Services by applying for a no interest loan from Army Emergency
Relief only to be denied a loan because I only had 35 days left
on Active-Duty, which would not guarantee loan repayment.
Force Shaping: The U.S. Naval Reserve has become a
test bed for Active and Reserve Integration (ARI) and Zero
Based Review (ZBR). While these two policies make for good
endorsements on transformation, the impact of these policies
will have a negative impact on retention.
The bottom line of these new policies has been a
recommendation within the Presidential budget of a cut of
10,300 to the USNR in fiscal year 2006. Many within the Naval
Reserve question the validity of these recommendations. The
near term plan for the USNR is to force shape to Army support;
which isn't necessarily preparing the force for the next at sea
battle.
The force being fashioned by Iraq is a USNR made up of
SeaBee's, security forces, port security, custom agents and
intelligence. This will be a more junior force. While the gain
may be less in pay and compensation; the cost will be to
experience and skillsets.
These cuts and force shaping are based on an ARI which has
been more a vision with an accelerated timetable rather than a
detailed plan with a time line. In large part it was generated
by polling Active-Duty commands for their time-phased force
deployment (TPPFD) requirements. Demand for reservists out
stripped TPPFD immediately after September 11.
The ZBR which has recommended cutting the Naval Reserve from an end
strength of 84,300 to about 64,000 members did not include all of the
roles, missions, and demands for reservists. Among the roles left out
of this calculation were joint and homeland security requirements.
Ironically, as Congress is being asked to cut the USNR to 70,000 by
the USN, the Naval Reserve leadership is telling its Reserve component
members that a future increase in end strength may be recommended by
the next ZBR in another 4 to 5 years. RIFF and rehire is a failed
corporate practice.
The combination of proposed cuts to the USNR and conflicting
explanations of future end strength is having negative impact on
retention. While naval reservists want to make a contribution and fight
the fight, they also feel that advocacy, for USNR roles, is not as
comprehensive as it could be. If given a choice between working for the
Navy as a Kelly Girl warrior, or in their civilian capacity; the trend
will be USNR members will choose careers, as civilians. Promised
predictability, periodicity, pay and benefits, reservists are seeing a
slow down in promotions, longer periods in non-pay, and benefits that
are perceived as not being at parity with the Active-Duty Force. Many
junior reservists even question whether they will be allowed to reach
retirement.
To reverse a growing trend ROA recommends that we need to:
Slow down and reduce the cuts planned for fiscal year
2006; at a minimum the cut of 10,300 should be spread out over
4 to 5 years.
Determine what future roles the USNR will be
supporting which could lead to increases in end strength, and;
Redo the USNR Zero Based Review to include joint and
homeland defense requirements. This ZBR should be ongoing
rather than periodic.
benefits and compensation overview
Cost of a Reserve Component Member: Currently
attention is being focused on the personnel costs of
maintaining a military force. The Reserve components remain a
cost effective means for meeting operational requirements. Most
pay and benefits are given on a participating base only. When
health care has been extended beyond a participating base it is
established with Guard and Reserve members sharing the cost by
paying premiums. Retirement costs are also typically only one-
fourth of an Active-Duty retirement. While much has been made
of the non-pay benefits provided to military members the cost
estimates for a Reserve component member have not factored in
non-pay costs that they bring to the table. The military
benefits from the civilian employment training and experience.
Targeting Mobilized Members: As shown in last year's
NDAA several of the authorization provisions were targeted
towards mobilized members. The language did not take into
account that support for the war on terrorism includes a
population of Guard and Reserve serving in a voluntary status.
The DOD has stated on several occasions that the need for
volunteers to meet operations will increase.
proposed legislation
ROA crafted this year's legislative agenda to address recruiting,
retention, and mobilized issues. Consideration was given to budget
concerns and the acknowledgement that there could be non-pay solutions.
Retirement: Several years ago Congress proposed
legislation to lower the retirement age. Twice during the 108th
the Senate offered this legislation as amendments to other
bills and twice they voted it down. ROA reported to their
members that the vote was for a budget technicality and not for
the legislation per se but quite honestly they didn't care for
the packaging. The members saw two things in 2004: the Senate
did not support the legislation and DOD made statements against
the legislation.
The Reserve components have seen a gradual increase in their
peacetime participation and Congress recognized this by
increasing the number of points allowed. The Air Force Guard
and Reserve increased their participation significantly when
the Air Expeditionary Force concept was put into place. The
Army recognizes an increased participation as their new reality
and is considering a similar program. A mobilization
requirement up to 2 years makes further demands. ROA members
have stated they feel that military personnel programs need to
change in response to this new reality, specifically by
reducing the retirement age. ROA encourages Congress to pass
reduced retirement legislation while also considering force
management options by extending mandatory retirement/separation
dates.
Active-Duty, Guard, and Reserve are experiencing medical
disabilities with their service in Iraq and Afghanistan. In
2003 and 2004 Congress addressed the issue of concurrent
receipt of uniformed services pay and VA disability
compensation. As with all legislation, further adjustments of
concurrent receipt needs to be addressed to ensure military
members are not penalized for receiving disabilities. This
matter includes repealing the Survivor Benefit(SBP)/Dependency
Indemnity Clause (DIC) offset. ROA encourages Congress to
continue refining concurrent receipt legislation to include all
disability categories.
Healthcare: The legislation to extend permanent
authorization for 180-day transitional health care coverage
overlooked the need to include dental transition assistance.
When military members are mobilized they do not necessarily
have the time or facilities to take care of needed dental care
until after they are demobilized. ROA encourages Congress to
extend 180-day transitional dental care.
TRICARE Select Reserve extended military care to demobilized
members but did not address the requirement to meet medical
standards for worldwide duty before mobilization. ROA
encourages Congress to extend TRICARE coverage as an option for
Reserve component members during all phases of their service to
include consideration for a civilian healthcare premium offset.
Education: To assist in recruiting efforts for the
Marine Reserve ROA urges Congress to reduce the obligation
period from 6 years in the Selected Reserve to 4 years in the
Selected Reserve and 4 years in the Individual Ready Reserve,
thereby remaining a mobilization resource for 8 years.
An area that affects both education and employment is the
problem surfacing when Reserve component members demobilized.
If their employment is contingent on maintaining special
licensing or continuing education requirements, military duty
beyond 1 year means they have not maintained their requirements
and can no longer be employed. ROA urges legislation that
provides a reasonable period to meet State or Federal
professional license or certifications.
Comment: I would appreciate your comments on the following
situation. The grace period for renewal of my professional
license as a merchant marine officer lapsed during my
mobilization for Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). I was
mobilized from February 2003 through November 2004. The license
expired in June 2003 and the 12 month grace period for renewal
lapsed in June 2004. In this situation the U.S. Coast Guard
normally requires the individual to retake the entire license
examination (a 5 day affair) in order to have the license
reinstated. I am seeking an extension or waiver from the 12
month grace period so I can renew the license. I cannot find
any provision within Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) or the SSCRA that addresses
the continuation of professional licenses that lapse during the
period of mobilization.
Comment: I have been a licensed real estate agent for several
years. I work through only one real estate firm, but the firm
considers me to be an ``independent contractor'' and not an
``employee.'' I receive no salary--only commissions on the
sales that I arrange. The company does not withhold State and
Federal income tax from my commissions. I am licensed by the
State, and to keep my license current I must complete a
substantial continuing professional education requirement. My
5-year license expired in November 2004, while I was on Active-
Duty in Iraq. I was recalled to Active-Duty in January 2003 and
did not leave Active-Duty until January 2005. After I was
released from Active-Duty, I sought to return to work selling
real estate. The real estate firm told me that I must not do
that because my license has expired and both the firm and I
would be in violation of State law if I sold real estate. Now,
I am in a real ``Catch 22'' situation. The real estate courses
are expensive. Without income coming in, I cannot afford to
take the courses necessary to renew my license. But without my
license, I cannot earn income. All of these problems relate to
my mobilization. If I had not been mobilized, I would easily
have completed the professional education classes in time to
renew my license in November 2004. All I am asking for is some
time to be allowed to sell real estate while catching up on my
professional education requirement.
Spouse Support: ROA continues to receive feedback on
difficulties spouses and caregivers face with employers during
mobilization. Extended mobilization has not been an issue since
Korea and since that time society has seen an increase in
spouse employment. Legislation is needed to respond to the
current world situation. ROA urges Congress to update the
Family Military Leave Act to include mobilization and consider
employment protections similar to USERRA.
Congress and the Services responded to the needs of families
during Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm by extending
Family Support to the Guard and Reserve. The war on terrorism
is the first true challenge of this program. ROA encourages
Congress to continue supporting and providing oversight to
Family Support.
Comment: I am a Lieutenant Colonel in the Air National Guard
and scheduled to deploy in support of OEF from January to May
2005. My wife works part time at a bank and was denied a leave
of absence while I'm gone because, ``She is not the one
deploying.'' We have two children, 4 and 8, and she wanted the
leave of absence since I wouldn't be there to watch them while
she is at work. He supervisor told her that if she needed to
stay home and watch the kids, then she should quit her job. She
has been working at the bank for over 9 years.
Comment: My husband will be returning from a 120 day
deployment to Iraq--I am aware of the laws regarding his 14 day
readjustment to civilian life prior to returning to work, is
there any such laws for spouses to give them the ability to
reconnect with their servicemember?
Comment: My questions is this, my husband has been called to
Active-Duty status with the Texas Army National Guard. As of
September 1, I will be on TRICARE Health Insurance. Without a
lengthy story, I have decided not to continue my employer
sponsored health insurance. This was a decision I made to save
on the premium cost. My employer has decided to drop my hours
below 1,000/yr so that I am not even eligible for the
insurance. When my husband returns from his 18 month tour in
Iraq, I would like to pick up the health insurance from my
employer, unfortunately, that would require a vote from the
board and since his return is after the first of the year they
may require me to wait until the following year to pick my
hours up again.
Comment: Recently my wife was fired from her job for
``excessive tardiness.'' The termination occurred shortly after
my return from a 3 week overseas as TDY. When I am home I would
take my daughter to daycare which opens at 7 a.m. My wife's job
started at 7 a.m. which is why I would take her in. Because I
was deployed my wife had to take my daughter in to day care
which meant she was approximately 30 minutes late to work
everyday. On some occasions her boss would be waiting in the
parking lot waiting for her to arrive. On another occasion her
boss said to her ``why don't you just quit instead of me
forcing to fire you.'' Her boss was informed a head of time
about the impending family hardship due to my upcoming
deployment. A few weeks after I returned from overseas she was
fired.
Employer Support: ROA continues to see an increase in
employment issues for Guard and Reserve members. For years ROA
has supported employer tax credits as a way to help offset
costs associated with Reserve participation as a way to
encourage continued employment. ROA encourages Congress to
support tax credits for employers and continue exploring other
means with which employers could be supported.
Comment 1: While I cannot provide concrete evidence, there's
a pervasive consensus among U.S. Army Reserve soldiers that
civilian employers are reluctant to hire them out of concern
over potential mobilization. Some return from deployments to
find their positions eliminated or outsourced while they were
away. A concern of others is the possibility of getting
``blacklisted'' if such a situation is contested and the
soldier wins. (Indeed, you'll only win a fight like this once.)
Pay and Benefits: ROA understands that DOD has taken a
position that they do not want the Reserve component to look
like Active-Duty which if you think about it could not be done
because they are not a full-time force. Regardless they are
reluctant to give the Reserve components the same pay and
benefits. There are certain instances though where what has
been put in place is not understandable.
Delete Basic Allowance for Housing II (BAH II)
for Reserve components and ensure parity with the
standard Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH I). This pay
is only given when a member performs duty. To date ROA
has not been able to find out why this disparity
exists.
Authorize a housing allowance for Reserve
component members without dependents when provided
government housing during short periods of Active-Duty
or full-time National Guard duty. This is a reflection
that Guard and Reserve members do not maintain on-base
quarters full-time and have homes off-base that they
are responsible for regardless of their duty status.
Remove the 90-point Inactive-Duty per
retirement/retention cap. A research of historical
files fails to find why the Reserve components are
discriminated against in receiving accounting for duty
they perform.
Delete the 1/30th rule for Aviation Career
Incentive Pay, Diving Special Pay, Career Enlisted
Flyers Incentive Pay, Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay and
Special Duty Assignment Pay. Guard and Reserve have
never been able to receive this pay even though they
maintain the same standard as Active-Duty because it
was typified as incentive pay. With recruiting and
retention goals slipping now may be the time to
consider granting authority for award of this pay
monthly to the Reserve components.
USERRA: In 2004 a USERRA regulation was posted in the
Federal Register but to date it has not yet been published. ROA
continues to be contacted on problems between military members
and their employers and after publication believe many of these
cases will be taken care of in the future at the local level
once the USERRA regulation is available to employers. There are
still many areas not addressed in the regulations:
Allow the employee who is absent for service
an imputed evaluation (and the pay raise that goes with
it) based on his/her average evaluation for the last 3
years before the military-related absence. If the
person is a new employee of that employer, the person
should receive a catch-up pay raise 3 years after
returning to work.
Exempt from age restrictions for Federal law
enforcement when deployment causes the member to miss
completion of the application and they agree to buy
back retirement eligibility. (100-238)
Exempt employees from penalties when their
insurance lapses if their motor carrier license expires
while mobilized (i.e. the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration).
Amend 38 U.S.C. 4323(d)(1)(C)--the
``liquidated damages'' provision in the amount of
$20,000 or the amount of the actual damages, whichever
is greater. Provide a provision in section 4324--for
Federal executive agencies provision such as found in
section 4323--it applies to States, political
subdivisions of States, and private employers.
Devise a method to tie the escalator principle
to merit pay systems.
Update the attorney's fee provision to induce
private counsel to take these cases.
Include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) commissioned corps in the USERRA.
conclusion
DOD, as we all know, is in the middle of executing a war--the
global war on terrorism and operations in Iraq are directly associated
with that effort. For the Department, worries have emerged about
additional spending during these military actions. Almost every
initiative to include proposed changes to personnel practices and
improvements in compensation programs are quickly placed under a ``what
will it cost?'' scrutiny. It is ROA's view that this scrutiny is too
often oriented toward immediate costs with a lack of appropriate regard
for long-term benefit versus life cycle costs. This is not to say that
prudent, fiscal personnel and budget policies and processes should be
ignored. At all times what is being achieved should respectfully be
balanced with how something is being achieved.
From a positive aspect, I believe that DOD's work to change and
transform are admirable. Although many issues effecting reservists are
difficult and complex, the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security,
Health and Human Services have all accomplished much in streamlining
and updating mobilization and demobilization and in working health care
challenges of wounded military members. Proposed improvements in
personnel policies and in Reserve training constructs look promising--
as long as consideration for Reserve readiness is protected.
Ms. Holleman. As Ms. Raezer said, my subjects are going to
be survivor and military retiree benefits.
Of course, we are all aware that this session of Congress
has already focused on two important survivor issues, the death
gratuity and Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI), the
military life insurance plan. The Alliance is very grateful for
your efforts to improve both programs and, indeed, to include
both in this year's supplemental. We do urge, however, that the
increase in the death gratuity apply to all in the line of
Active-Duty deaths, as that term is presently defined. As my
learned colleague already said, all of these losses should be
treated in the same manner. Different treatment would cause
great discontent. We hope that in conference, this language
will be clarified to acknowledge that the loss and financial
needs that all these families suffer are the same and should
all be compensated at the same level.
As to SGLI, we simply want to thank you for the changes,
and we hope and expect that they will be made permanent.
Our main legislative focus for this session of Congress in
the area of survivor benefits, as it was last year, is to
correct and improve the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). Last year,
Congress ended the drop of SBP benefits from 55 to 35 percent
when the beneficiary reaches the age of 62 in a 3\1/2\-year
phase-out. The alliance is very grateful to you for this
important change, which will markedly improve the lives of a
quarter of a million military widows. But two problems with SBP
still remain.
The first is the SBP-Dependency and Indemnity Compensation
(DIC) offset. It is a complicated plan, because it is a
complicated mesh of two programs. Mr. Strobridge's Military
Officers Association of America (MOAA) has created a beautiful
publication that will explain in detail the finances involved,
and which will save you from me speaking of today. But we
strongly hope that this Congress will end this offset. This
takes $1 of SBP payment for every dollar a survivor receives
from the VA's DIC payments. This offset badly disadvantages two
types of military widows.
The first type is a woman or a man whose spouse served a
full career in the military, paid 6.5 percent of his or her
retired pay to buy SBP to provide for their survivors and then
died of a service-connected disability. This use of the SBP is
the sort of behavior that society wishes to encourage. However,
all that planning and sacrifice is made totally ineffective due
to this offset.
The second group of widows are those covered by the new
Active-Duty SBP benefit. This newly created benefit is a hollow
one for the vast number of widows or widowers from the present
war. Most of the people we are losing during this war are young
and in the lower grades, and the DIC payment of $993 a month
completely eats up any SBP payment. Meanwhile, the families of
the more senior members who are lost are left with much less
monthly income to pay for normally more substantial and
established debts. It is clear that this offset makes it
impossible for the Federal Government to compensate and
acknowledge the longer service given by these servicemembers.
Congress obviously intended to help these families when it
created this benefit. The offset makes the law ineffective. It
should be changed.
The last correction that we would suggest for SBP is moving
up the paid-up provision to October 1, 2005. When you created
the paid-up provision for SBP, you decided that military
retirees who are at least 70 years old and have paid into the
program for 30 years could still be covered while paying no
additional premium. However, this provision will not go into
effect until October 1, 2008. Since SBP started in 1972, we
have numerous retirees who reached the 30 years of payments and
the age requirement and are still paying. Most of these couples
are in their 70s and 80s. This 6.5 percent of the retired pay
they are still contributing could make these elderly couples'
lives much more comfortable. This change will be an enormous
help to these people, and we hope that you can move up the
effective date.
While focusing on retired families, we hope that you can,
once again, look at concurrent receipt or, as it is now called
concurrent retirement and disability payment. Again, I must
first thank you for all the steps you have taken to end this
unfair offset. I know you will not be surprised that there is
more to do.
First, there have been difficulties in implementing last
year's accelerated payments for all 100 percent disabled
retirees. You may have read in yesterday's Washington Post that
the VA's 100 percent unemployables are not being included in
these payments. They were included in the basic concurrent
receipt phase-out for those 50 percent or more disabled. These
are some of the people last year's change was intended to help,
the service-connected, seriously disabled who cannot work.
Hopefully, this problem will be solved before too long.
We would also like to briefly include for your
consideration enlarging the combat-related, special
compensation to include medical retirees with less than 20
years of service. These loyal servicemembers are not able to
serve a full career due to their combat injury, but because of
this great sacrifice, they take the full brunt of concurrent
receipt. To obtain the normally greater VA disability pay, they
must waive their entire or substantial part of their military
retired pay. Again, hopefully Congress will be able to look at
this inequity.
We know that the House will be having a full hearing later
this week on morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR), including
commissaries and exchanges. As Ms. Raezer has said, this is a
very important benefit, and it is also important to the
retirees and survivors. Not only does it mean a great deal of
financial savings for them, but it also helps keep their ties
to the military world and culture that they love and have
dedicated their lives to.
Finally, we request that this subcommittee consider
scheduling a hearing on the Former Spouses' Protection Act
during this session of Congress. As an attorney who practiced
matrimonial law for years, I certainly know that there are
strongly held different opinions on how this act has been
working out, but a full hearing of the different points of view
would, we believe, be helpful to all concerned parties.
Again, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to
you on these issues. I would be happy to try and answer any
questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Holleman follows:]
Prepared Statement by Deirdre Parke Holleman
Mr. Chairman and distinquished members of the subcommittee. On
behalf of the National Military and Veterans Alliance (NMVA) we are
very grateful to the subcommittee for this opportunity to appear before
you and express our members' views on current issues affecting members
of the uniformed services, their families, and survivors.
The NMVA was founded in 1996 as an umbrella organization to be
utilized by the various military and veteran associations as a means to
work together towards their common goals. Each individual association's
membership interests and requirements are represented, understood and
promoted within/by NMVA.
The Alliance expands the military and veteran communities ability
to present a united front to the Department of Defense (DOD),
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Congress, and the White House. By
working together, the larger voice of the combined associations'
memberships and their families help to promote the objectives
concerning a wide-range of military quality of life pay, personnel,
medical, survivor benefits, military housing and education, veterans,
and military retiree issues and legislation.
The NMVA represents almost 5 million members. Collectively, our
organizations represent some 80 million Americans--those who serve or
have served their county and their families.
American Logistics Association National Gulf War Resource
Center
American Military Retirees Association Naval Enlisted Reserve
Association
American Military Society Naval Reserve Association
American Retirees Association Paralyzed Veterans of
America
American WWII Orphans Network Reserve Enlisted Association
AMVETS Reserve Officers Association
Association of Old Crows Society of Military Widows
Catholic War Veterans The Retired Enlisted
Association
Class Act Group TREA Senior Citizen League
Gold Star Wives of America Tragedy Assistance Program
for Survivors
Korean War Veterans Uniformed Services Disabled
Retirees
Legion of Valor Veterans of Foreign Wars
Military Order of the Purple Heart Vietnam Veterans of America
Military Order of the World Wars Women in Search of Equity
National Association for Uniformed
Services
The NMVA receives no grants or contracts from the Federal
Government.
introduction
In this time of war the burdens that are being placed on all
members of the uniformed services and their families have grown
enormously. At the same time the needs of the uniformed services
retired and survivor community are growing. The retiree needs and how
our government is responding to them are being studied by our present
Active-Duty and Guard and Reserve families as well as the American
public at large. While our citizenry is concerned about our National
Defense and about those who are now or who have protected our way of
life in the past we should move to make improvements in several crucial
programs. This is the time that progress can be made.
national guard and reserve
More than 437,000 Guard and Reserve members have been mobilized
since September 11, 2001. This operational tempo has placed enormous
strains on reservists, their family members, and their civilian
employers. This, the Alliance is well aware, is inevitable in a Total
Force structure, but we believe that the National Guard and Reserve's
pay, bonuses, benefits, and retirement should reflect these added
obligations, multiple activations and increased training requirements.
The following briefly outline some of our suggestions for improvements
that would make the added obligations of our Guard and Reserve members
easier to bear and maintain.
Health Care
The NMVA appreciates the steps you took in the last session of
Congress by establishing the TRICARE Reserve Select program and the
permanent pre- and post-activation TRICARE coverage. However, these
authorities do not provide the coverage necessary to address long-term
readiness issues that will continue with the current and future use of
our Guard and Reserve members. We still have approximately 20 percent
of Guard and Reserve members--40 percent of our junior enlisted force--
without health care coverage in their civilian lives. It is our strong
recommendation that we provide permanent access to TRICARE, on a cost-
share basis, to all Selected Reserve members and their families. We are
extremely grateful to Chairman Lindsey Graham's (R-SC) championship of
this proposal. S337 would provide the opportunity for all our Guard and
Reserve members and their families to purchase a first rate subsidized
health care plan. This opportunity would ensure our Nation that our
Guard and Reserve members would be medically ready when they are needed
while also providing continuity of care for them and their families and
a powerful recruiting tool for the Services.
We also believe that Federal payment of civilian health care
premiums should be an option for mobilized Guard and Reserve members.
Many families prefer to preserve the continuity of their own health
insurance rather than switching to TRICARE and frequently pick up the
cost of those premiums. The DOD pays the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Plan (FEHBP) premiums for its own reservist-employees when
they are activated, and we believe that non-Federal employees deserve
the same consideration.
Retirement System
When the Reserve Force retirement system was established in 1947,
it was assumed that a Guard or Reserve member has a primary career in
the civilian sector. The changing and increasing demands on Reserve
Forces over the past 14 years have cost tens of thousands of Guard and
Reserve members significantly in terms of their civilian retirement
accrual, civilian 401(K) contributions and civilian job promotions.
The Reserve retirement system must be adjusted to sustain its value
as a complement to civilian retirement. Failing to acknowledge and
respond to the changed environment that Guard and Reserve members face
will have far reaching effects on Reserve participation and career
retention. Again, Chairman Graham's S337 would correct this growing
inequity. Depending on years of service and age a member of the Guard
and Reserve could start receiving his or her retired pay at age 55.
Again in addition to the simple fairness of acknowledging the changed
situation this would be another power recruiting and retention tool for
the Services to have.
Compensation
Increasing demands on Guard and Reserve members call for changes in
their compensation so that the Reserve component can continue to
attract and retain those willing to shoulder the added
responsibilities.
Needed improvements include increasing Selected
Reserve Montgomery GI Bill (SR MGIB) benefits to 50 percent of
the Active-Duty Montgomery GI bill rate. Recently, the value of
the benefit has slipped to 28 percent of the basic program. The
Selected Reserve benefit needs to keep pace with the Active-
Duty benefit.
We also recommend lifting the cap on Inactive-Duty
points that can be earned annually by a Guard or Reserve
member. A limit on the amount of training that can be credited
for retirement purposes creates a disincentive to professional
development.
Special and incentive pays need to be increased. Many
Guard and Reserve members feel cheated when they receive 1/30th
of a month's pay for each day duty is performed for many
special and incentive pays. These pays are based upon
proficiency, not time. The disparity, even if it is only a
perceived disparity, needs to be addressed.
Changes to the Reserve Duty system need to be
considered carefully. We understand why the DOD would wish
simplify the duty status for Reserve component members, but any
change that would result in the loss of pay must not be
implemented.
Another compensation issue that should be addressed is
Basic Allowance for Housing II (BAH II). BAH II is paid to
Guard and Reserve members on Active-Duty for less than 140 days
instead of the standard, locality-based BAH. BAH II is far less
than BAH in most localities and doesn't have anything to do
with real housing costs. BAH should be authorized for anyone
activated for 30 days or more.
We believe that full veteran status should be awarded
to Guard and Reserve retirees who do not otherwise qualify.
Their 20 years of service make them deserving of veterans
status.
Stress on Guard and Reserve Forces
The Alliance urges that Congress provides additional resources for
Reserve recruitment, retention, and family support to relieve enormous
pressure on overstressed Guard and Reserve Forces, as well as a
moratorium and review of any manpower draw-downs at this time--when we
are calling on these critically important assets to fight our Nation's
wars.
Guard/Reserve Family Support Programs
We urge support and funding for a core set of family support
programs and benefits that meet the unique needs of geographically
dispersed Guard and Reserve families who do not have ready access to
military installations or current experience with military life.
Programs should promote better communication and enhance education for
Reserve component family members about their rights and benefits and
available services.
survivor benefit programs
The Alliance wishes to deeply thank this subcommittee for your
championship of improvements in the myriad of survivor programs. The
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP), the Death Gratuity, and the
Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI) plan (though administered
through the VA) are all programs under DOD's auspices. Substantial
improvements have been made in the last few years. Last year's total
abolition of the SBP age 62 benefit reduction in a 3\1/2\ year phase
out will create a wonderful improvement in the lives of the survivors
of the military retirees who dedicated the best years of their lives to
a career with our military. However, there are still two remaining
issues to deal with to make SBP the program Congress always intended it
to be: ending the SBP/Dependency Indemnification Compensation (DIC)
offset and moving up the effective date for paid up SBP to October 1,
2005. Senator Bill Nelson's bill S185 would correct both issues. The
Alliance urges this committee to support this bill and correct both
inequities. As this committee well knows there has already been a
substantial push on the Hill this year to increase and improve the
death gratuity and SGLI programs. The Alliance hopes that this is the
session of Congress when all these problems can be solved.
SBP-DIC Offset
In last year's testimony the Alliance respectfully requested this
subcommittee to end the SBP/DIC offset and we are here to again ask you
to support this improvement. There are two types of families that are
affected by this offset. The first group is the family of a retired
member of the uniformed services. At this time the SBP annuity he or
she has paid for is offset dollar for dollar for the DIC survivor
benefits paid through the VA, This puts a disabled retiree in a very
unfortunate position. If he or she is leaving the service disabled it
is only wise for him or her to enroll in the Survivor Benefit Plan
(indeed he may very well not be insurable in the private sector). After
all he or she may die from a cause that has nothing to do with his or
her military service. But if he or she does die of his service
connected diagnosis then again his survivor looses dollar for dollar
for what the DIC pays. This is not logical. SBP is a purchased annuity,
an earned employee benefit. This is a retirement plan. DIC's name makes
clear that it was created for a very different reason. It is an
indemnity program to compensate a family for the lose of a loved one
due to his or her military service. They are different programs created
to fill different purposes and needs. The survivor does receive a pro-
rated share of the paid SBP premiums back without interest and taxable
in a lump sum. But that cannot make up for the cost and difficulty
paying those premiums all those years of retirement caused. If a
disabled veteran earns a civilian pension as a Federal civil servant
the family will never lose either their survivor payment or their DIC
to any offset. The servicemember did what he could to provide for his
spouse. This is behavior the Federal Government wishes to encourage.
This offset makes his attempts a failure. The offset should be
abolished.
The second group affected by this dollar for dollar offset is made
up of families whose servicemember died on Active-Duty. Recently
Congress created Active-Duty SBP. These servicemembers never had the
chance to pay into the SBP program. But clearly Congress intended to
give these families a benefit. With the present off-set in place the
vast majority of families receive NO benefit from this new program.
That is because the vast number of our losses are young men or women in
the lower ranks. They will get no benefit whatsoever. The other
families affected are servicemembers who have already served a
substantial time in the military. Their widow is, if anything left in a
worse financial position than the younger widow. (There is no way to
estimate the emotional loss to either group of women.) The older
widow's will normally not be receiving benefits for her children from
either Social Security or the VA and will normally have more
substantial financial obligations (mortgages etc.). They also have less
time to adjust their financial situation. This woman (or man) is very
dependent on the SBP and DIC payments and should be able to receive
both. Congress did not mean to give a hollow benefit to either group of
people. By ending this off-set the intention of your law can be
accomplished.
30 Year Paid Up SBP
In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999,
Congress created a simple and fair paid up provision for the SBP. A
member who had paid into the program for 30 years and reached the age
of 70 could stop paying premiums and still have the full protection of
the plan for his or her spouse. However, the effective date of this
provision is October 1, 2008.
This means that many retirees who signed up for SBP when it first
started in 1972 and are well over 70 are still paying premiums to cover
their spouses. Moving the effective date back to October 1, 2005 would
be an act of simple fairness. Most of the couples affected by this date
are both elderly and will never draw anything like they have paid into
SBP. Additionally, until all these retirees were paying 10 percent of
their retired pay rather than the present 6\1/2\ percent today. Moving
up this effective date would allow these couples to live in more
comfort and ease for the next 3 years.
Death Gratuity Improvement
Since the beginning of this session Congress has been working very
hard to improve the immediate death benefits. Presently there are
provisions in both the Senate and House supplemental to raise the death
gratuity from the present $12,400 to $100,000. However the language in
the legislation states that this will apply to those who die ``in the
line of duty'' but the definition of that is left to be determined by
the Secretary of Defense. Clarity is crucial at such a traumatic time.
It would be a great help if all families whose servicemember relation
dies on Active-Duty would be granted this increased benefit. Hopefully,
such language may be agreed to during the supplement's conference
meetings.
Life Insurance
The fiscal year 2006 Supplemental Budget also includes a provision
to raise the limit of available SGLI coverage from $250,000 to
$400,000. This is a wonderful improvement and the Alliance urges that
present language be retained.
Again, the Alliance is very grateful to both the Senate and the
House for their early focus on survivor issues.
retirement issues
Retirement issues is a varied category because it covers everything
in a persons' life. This includes money, health care where they shop
and the state of their marriage. The uniformed services is a way of
life and a community that does not end when someone retires. This is
still the retirees' world and why these issues are essential
Concurrent Receipt of Military Retired Pay and VA Disability
Compensation
All the Retiree and Military Organizations in the Alliance are very
grateful for the historic movement in ending the 100 year long unfair
denial of a military retiree being allowed to collect both his or her
retired pay and their service connected disability pay. This dollar for
dollar offset will be phased out in 10 yearly steps for those with 50
percent or greater service connected disabilities. Additionally,
Congress has ended concurrent receipt completely for longevity retirees
with combat related service connected disabilities. These are wonderful
steps. But concurrent receipt is as unfair for those who are 10
percent-40 percent disabled as for those whose disabilities are 50
percent and higher. Senator Tim Johnson's bill would cover longevity
military retirees with the lower disability ratings. The Alliance urges
this subcommittee to support this bill.
The Alliance also strongly urges Congress to correct by statute if
necessary the unfair distinction being made in the implementation of
last year's immediate restoration retired pay for 100 percent service
connected disabled longevity retirees. Again, the Alliance was very
pleased with your decision last year to do this. However at this date
military longevity retirees who are paid at 100 percent service
connected disables because if a determination by the VA of unemployable
(IU) are not being included in this speed up. In the VA the two groups
of 100 percent disabled are treated exactly the same. They should be
treated the same way under this benefit. We have been told that the
administration is still studying this question. If the DOD does not act
to include this group we hope that Congress will.
Military Health Care
It has been wonderful to see the improvements you have made in the
last several years in the health care benefit available to the men and
women and their families and survivors who have spent the best years of
their lives defending our country. TRICARE for Life and the pharmacy
program has greatly improved the life of tens of thousands of retirees.
Still there are some problems that should be dealt with. The greatest
problem facing all of TRICARE today is reimbursement rates. While this
is clearly a matter that is overseen by other committees the provider
reimbursement rate for Medicare, which TRICARE is tied to is well known
to be insufficient. The problem of finding a civilian health care
provider willing to accept TRICARE is more and more difficult. The
problem is particularly acute when retirees are not near a TRICARE
network. Improving the reimbursement rates for TRICARE health care
providers would greatly ameliorate this problem. The Alliance hopes
this can be accomplished during the 109th session of Congress.
Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA)
The USFSPA has caused great discontent and inequity for over 20
years. This discontent is above and beyond the normal disappointment
and anger caused by any divorce. It is time for a complete study and
overhaul of this statute.
The Alliance strongly urges the Senate Armed Services Committee to
hold a full hearing on this issue. This hearing could be the basis of a
complete analysis of this statute and a consensus might be reached on
needed improvements including requiring amount of payments to be linked
to the servicemember's rank at the time of the divorce.
Commissary and Exchange Benefits
The Alliance is well aware that this subcommittee will be holding a
full hearing this week on morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR) issues
including Commissaries and Exchanges. In this present testimony we wish
to note that the Commissary and Exchange benefits are vitally important
to military retirees, their families and survivors as well as to the
active Duty, the Guard and Reserve and their families. The Commissary
and Exchange benefits need to remain fully funded and strong for all
the members of the Uniformed Services and their families. Additionally
the Alliance hopes that Congress encourages the DOD and the Department
of State to negotiate agreements with host nations under FOPHA to
permit U.S. military retirees to shop at our Commissaries and Exchanges
at all overseas locations.
conclusion
This is a time that tries men's souls. There are great and growing
requirements being placed upon the Active-Duty and their families, upon
the National Guard and Reserve members and their families, upon the
uniformed services retirees and their families and upon all their
survivors. They have happily taken up or continued these duties. It is
also true that great calls are presently being placed upon the Federal
Government. The National Military and Veterans Alliance is enormously
grateful for the tremendous progress we have made over the last several
years in the areas of retiree, National Guard and Reserve and Reserves,
and survivor benefits. These programs are far better at doing their
jobs than they were several years ago. But we believe that these
programs can be greatly improved by following the suggestions we have
made in this testimony. Thank you so much this chance to testify on the
Alliances concerns and for the focus and support that all of you have
always given to the uniformed services and their families.
Senator Graham. Well, thank you all again. Ask and you
shall receive. You all have been very good about telling us
what we can do to improve quality-of-life, and we will do the
best we can. This war is wearing on our people, and it is
wearing out our equipment. Our country has $40 trillion
underfunded Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, and we
have to work all this puzzle together. We will take all of your
counsel and advice and do the best we can and get these
proposals scored.
Ms. Raezer you testified before the Veterans' Affairs
Committee. One thing I think we can do, as quickly as possible,
is to make sure that when bad things happen to military people,
that that experience is not worsened. It is blunted the best
that we can blunt it. When you talk about recruiting, I think
it matters about what people hear. There are a lot of stories
out there right now about people feeling less than satisfied
about what happens to their family when bad things come from
military service. If you want to turn recruiting around, I
think that is one of the good places to start.
Could you reinforce or restate what you see to be the
problem with the casualty assistance program and, for our
edification, what we could do to make it better?
Ms. Raezer. Yes, sir. Actually it was my deputy who
testified before that committee on behalf of our association.
But we do believe that there needs to be more consistent,
high quality training for the casualty assistance officers
(CAOs) and better connections for the survivors at places where
they have to access their survivor benefits. Many military
families have issues with TRICARE when they move. Survivors who
move and have trouble accessing their TRICARE benefit will
interpret that problem as a problem because they are a survivor
and not simply this is a problem with the TRICARE system.
So what we need to see are folks who are educated about
survivor benefits working for the TRICARE contractors,
available to help the military treatment facilities in the case
of TRICARE, help in the housing arena, if there are issues, so
that people know what the survivor benefit is in terms of
permission to stay in housing or receipt of a housing
allowance. Some of that starts with the CAO, but some of these
issues are beyond the scope of what we should expect from a
CAO, and the whole system needs to support that.
Senator Graham. For people who are not aware, usually the
CAO responsibility is an additional duty for an Active-Duty
person.
Ms. Raezer. Yes, exactly.
Senator Graham. I have actually had that task at one time
when I was a Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps officer.
Counseling by the casualty assistance officer--it is really
hard. So what we are proposing in the Veterans' Committee, and
maybe we will try to build on here, is trying to get more of an
institutional component because the Active-Duty person has TDY
commitments. They have military education commitments. They
have PCS commitments. We will try to make this more civilian-
based. The military involvement is indispensable. Having
someone in the unit, someone on base, providing grief
counseling and support is indispensable, but on the benefits
side, I think you will see an effort to institutionalize this
to get better information out, somebody who is going to be
there in a more continuous fashion.
Ms. Raezer. Yes, thank you, sir. I think the long-term
issue is very important in that support, and that is why we
have recommended a survivors office in the VA, because with
these young families, you are going to see survivor questions
and issues over a very long time. So that long-term support
needs to be somewhere, and we believe perhaps a survivors
office in the VA would help that.
Senator Graham. Mr. Strobridge, you are obviously very
connected to military people. Do you believe that the problems
we are seeing in recruiting and somewhat retention are chronic
or acute?
Mr. Strobridge. I definitely think they are chronic, sir.
From your discussion, it sounded like we share very common
views. I think these things do not happen overnight. What has
happened is we have extracted more and more service from the
folks in uniform in the hope that we will be able to stop at
some point, and it has not stopped. At some point, that starts
to wear on people, and stories get into the newspapers, and
once that happens, you get--I do not like to use the word
``downward spiral'' because I do not think we are there, but
there is this self-reinforcing issue, where the more problems
people have, the more stories you hear about it, the more news
gets out, and then people do not want to join and it is harder
to get people to stay.
We may talk about how the troops who deploy are the most
satisfied troops, and that may be true once. It may be true on
the second time. But the third time, their family starts to be
very dissatisfied, and then you either have a divorced force or
a gone force.
Senator Graham. I think you are absolutely right. Being a
military lawyer to a unit that deployed in a Reserve
environment, you really have to make this up as you go. There
is no family counseling service on base because usually there
is no base. There is no day care center. You have to make this
up as you go, and we are doing better with it.
But you see pressure from the equipment being over-utilized
and a lot of the money that we are trying to extract to go into
the capital accounts, particularly in the Navy by reducing
personnel and benefits and services. I think we need to
understand that that is not the way to fund your capital
accounts because it does have a consequence.
This whole idea about how offsets work and how retirees
have access to military care is very important to me, because I
think it is a word of mouth problem. You want to be fair and
you want to make sure that benefit fairness is achieved. But I
do not want to leave you with a false impression. I am very
much in the reform mold. I am doing all I can for Social
Security to put some new ideas and hard choices out there. For
the force in the future, we may have to look at these benefit
packages anew and let people know when they come in that the
deal may be different, but we are not going to change the deal
for anybody that is already in.
Anybody else have anything you would like to share with us?
Mr. Strobridge. Sir, I would just add one comment about
your last observation, and I think that is perfectly
legitimate. Any program should be able to stand up to scrutiny
in my view, but I get concerned, very frankly. I have been in
the compensation business since the mid-1970s when things were
really terrible. I have been through two down cycles where the
Services could not keep enough people and saw that we had to go
back and change things. There is a great interest in becoming
more efficient. There is a great interest in saying, as we did
in the 1986 ``Redux'' retirement system--there was a big deal
at the time--we are not going to change any rules on the people
who are already in, but we are going to change them for the
people who come in in the future.
At the time we warned folks, if you reduce the incentives
for people to stay for a career, the sacrifices of a career do
not change. Because civilian retirement changes, the sacrifices
of a military career do not change. If we reduce the incentives
for people to stay for a career, then fewer people are going to
stay.
Senator Graham. I guess what I am saying is we need to
logically manage the force from start to bottom and not make
false promises that we cannot afford.
The last question is for each of you. We are making a real
Yeoman effort, thanks to you and others, to upgrade the benefit
packages and upgrade the services. I would like some feedback
from your point of view. Offering TRICARE to the Guard and
Reserves I think--obviously, I am biased because I wrote the
bill--is paying dividends. I think the things that we are
talking about with the CAOs and changing the offset rules do
matter. Is it penetrating the force out there? I know you
represent people maybe not on Active-Duty completely, but is
the word getting out? Is it helping?
Mr. Strobridge. I think it is, sir. I think people are very
conscious of the things that the committee has done. We are
always a little bit sensitive to that too because there are
always additional things to be addressed, and sometimes I fear
we do not express our appreciation enough for all the great
things the committee has done.
Senator Graham. Before we go to the next topic, we need to
get everybody focused on what is available.
Mr. Strobridge. In terms of the health care for the Guard
and Reserve, we go out and make a conscious effort to go visit
the State adjutants general and ask them what their problems
are. Invariably to a man, they say the single best thing you
could do is extend health care to all Guard and Reserve.
Senator Graham. More than incentive pays?
Mr. Strobridge. Yes, sir. Well, maybe I ought to qualify
that. The incentive pays are very important. There is a
difference between the cash and the non-cash kinds of benefits.
Senator Graham. Well, security versus immediate
gratification. Security trumps that.
Mr. Strobridge. There is a sense the institution is going
to look out for you.
Ms. Raezer. What we hear from families is a plea for
continuity of care. This is not a one-size-fits-all population.
For some, the ability to have TRICARE when the servicemember is
mobilized or with the Reserve Select to be able to stay in it
once that servicemember has demobilized may be a solution. For
a lot of other Guard and Reserve families, the solution would
be for a subsidy to remain in the employer-sponsored insurance
because some families are looking for access to insurance, but
a lot more, because a lot more have some kind of insurance
through their employer, are just looking for continuity. The
switch between their employer-sponsored insurance and TRICARE
and then back to the employer-sponsored insurance is very
difficult for some of these folks. So families look for
continuity of care and there is not just one way to get that.
Senator Graham. Senator Nelson.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you. I am sorry I had to step out
a couple of times. I have constituents in town that think that
they need to see me, and I know I need to see them. [Laughter.]
You were here, I believe, and heard the questions I asked
about adoption leave as opposed to maternity leave. I wondered
if you had any thoughts on that kind of a program. If we are
really going to push for a family-friendly military, child
care, whether it is maternity oriented or adoption oriented,
seems to me to be a high priority.
Ms. Raezer. Mr. Nelson, one of the top issues that brings
phone calls to our association is the adoption issue. A lot of
military families want to adopt. They have a lot of
difficulties because, as you referenced, they move around. One
of the complaints we get is that for some folks it is very hard
to convince a commander that having some adoption leave is
essential even if they have the leave accumulated. To get that
leave at the time when they need it is very difficult. So I
would agree with General Osman who said having that in law or
in a regulation or some kind of requirement that, yes, you will
get adoption leave may be very helpful.
Now, given the high operational tempo and deployment, you
are going to have to work out how that is going to work, if the
expectation will be that this is a guarantee even if someone is
deployed or on a ship. That is something that will have to be
worked out because certainly if it is in law, there will be an
expectation that people will get this. As you point out, you
cannot always time when you need the leave.
Senator Ben Nelson. Moving on to the education requirements
and the Impact Aid issue for our schools that are providing, in
many cases, excellent educational opportunities and others
perhaps in improving the educational environment. Do you have
any thoughts about what we could do to make sure that the money
follows the impact on the school system where you have
transfers in and out because the money does not always follow
exactly, and certainly the time frame is not consistent with
the poor school's budget.
Ms. Raezer. As I referenced in my oral statement--and you
were out of the room--we agree with you wholeheartedly that
this is a very serious issue, and we believe this is something
that Congress will need to deal with sooner rather than later.
We are already seeing some impact in some communities because
of the movements associated with Army modularity. We have seen
problems with housing privatization where there have been
significant increases in the housing stock because of the
privatization efforts.
We are hearing from school districts serving some
installations who believe they are going to get some of those
folks coming from Europe, and they are very concerned about
school construction, hiring teachers, and having the money
ahead of time. So we would ask you to help come up with a plan.
Whatever input we can provide to help with that, we would be
glad to work on that because we do see a very significant need.
Thank you for raising attention to that.
Senator Ben Nelson. Well, let me turn to something that is
a bit different but important as well. Repeated and lengthy
deployments obviously are taking a toll on the military
members, both Active and Reserve, as well as their families. Of
course, mental health and family counseling are vital sources
for families. In your prepared statement, Ms. Raezer, you
endorse efforts to expand access to the full range of mental
health and family counseling services regardless of the
beneficiaries. Do you have thoughts about how we might expand
the services available to make those available to our families
and to the members?
Ms. Raezer. We believe this is another one of those
national efforts. The Military OneSource counseling that
provides up to six free sessions for relationship issues, just
normal return and reunion, or deployment-related adjustments,
is one piece of that. We have been pleased to hear that the VA,
through the veterans centers, are providing more bereavement
counseling for survivors, but also some counseling for folks
who cannot access a military facility. We believe that more
needs to be done to entice mental health care providers into
the TRICARE network. This gets difficult in some places,
because there are certain fields and certain areas where there
is just a shortage of mental health providers. There is a
national shortage of adolescent mental health care, and if we
have military children who need these services, that is even
worse. So we believe it has to be a combined effort between the
DOD, the VA, and civilian communities. We are all working
together on behalf of these families.
Senator Ben Nelson. Ms. Holleman, in your prepared
statement, you were urging support and funding for family
support programs and benefits which obviously are as critical
to families as the mental health care and support is as well.
We obviously have the geographically challenged in dispersed
Guard and Reserve, particularly the families of the Guard and
Reserve because of the way in which they are not necessarily
located near a military facility where it is otherwise
available to them.
Do you have any programs in mind that would help us go
through this so we can get better congressional support for
providing for those isolated families that are away from the
support system?
Ms. Holleman. Well that, of course, is the problem of all
of Guard and Reserve and all the benefits. People are scattered
and non-centralized.
As in all things of the day, the immediate answer we all
give is computers, or having everything be computerized. Well,
it is better than nothing. It gives you information. It gives
you quick information. It answers questions.
But the military is a way of life. It is a community. The
ability to talk to other people in your situation is crucial
and something that the Active-Duty family has. Ms. Raezer's
organization is helping with the Sears Corporation to have a
program to have camps for children in this situation, which I
think is a marvelous thing. It is wonderful of Sears to have
done it.
A lot of this has to be help within communities. It has to
be help, unfortunately, in broader communities because you have
to bring people in because they are scattered.
Obviously, what Congress could do and what the military
could do is help them financially.
But particularly with the Guard and Reserve scattered
about, this is a real problem. They need the sociability. They
need to talk to people who are looking at the situation they
have.
I am sure Ms. Raezer has something to add to that too.
Ms. Raezer. I agree. The programs that have been put in
place since September 11 to support Guard and Reserve families
are light years ahead of what was available in the first Gulf
War and earlier, but the geographic problems still do cause
some isolation. So efforts to improve child care, improve
support for those volunteers who need to be encouraged and
continuing as Ms. Holleman said, looking at the community for
support.
There are several initiatives that are springing up in
communities to bring resources together, identify resources to
then get that information to Guard and Reserve families where
they can go for assistance on various issues. We need more of
that. We need more community resources through schools, health
care, churches, and civic organizations pulling together to
support those families to provide that sense of community that
a military installation provides many of the Active-Duty
families who live there.
Those kinds of community efforts would also help another
population under a lot of stress right now, the recruiters and
their families who are out there in the hinterlands.
Senator Ben Nelson. They can be isolated as well.
Ms. Raezer. Yes, very.
Senator Graham. Thank you all very much. I appreciate it.
We have a statement from the American Legion I believe. Any
other organizations that would like to provide a written
statement will be allowed to do so, and we will insert them
into the record.
[The prepared statement of Dennis Michael Duggan follows:]
Prepared Statement by Dennis Michael Duggan
Mr. Chairman: The American Legion is grateful for the opportunity
to present its views on defense appropriations for fiscal year 2006.
The American Legion values your leadership in assessing and authorizing
adequate funding for quality of life features of the Nation's Armed
Forces to include the Active, Reserve, and National Guard Forces and
their families, as well as quality of life for military retirees and
their dependents.
Since September 2001, the United States has been involved in the
war against terrorism in Operations Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Enduring
Freedom (OEF). American fighting men and women are again proving they
are the best-trained, best-equipped, and best-led military in the
world. As Secretary of Defense Donald Rusted has noted, the war in Iraq
is part of a long, dangerous global war on terrorism. The war on
terrorism is being waged on two fronts: overseas against armed
insurgents and at home protecting and securing the homeland. Casualties
in the shooting wars, in terms of those killed and seriously wounded,
continue to mount daily. Indeed, most of what we as Americans hold dear
is made possible by the peace and stability that the Armed Forces
provide by taking the fight to the enemy.
The American Legion adheres to the principle that this Nation's
Armed Forces must be well-manned and equipped, not just to pursue war,
but to preserve and protect the peace. The American Legion strongly
believes past military downsizing was budget-driven rather than threat
focused. Once Army divisions, Navy warships and Air Force fighter
squadrons are downsized, eliminated or retired from the force
structure, they cannot be reconstituted quickly enough to meet new
threats or emergency circumstances. The Marine Corps, Army National
Guard, and the Reserves have failed to meet their recruiting goals and
the Army's stop-loss policies have obscured retention and recruiting
needs. Clearly, the Active Army is struggling to meet its recruitment
goals. Military morale undoubtedly has been adversely affected by the
extension and repetition of Iraq tours of duty.
The administration's fiscal year 2006 budget requests $419.3
billion for defense or about 17 percent of the total budget. The fiscal
year 2006 defense budget represents a 4.8 percent increase in defense
spending over current funding levels. It also represents about 3.5
percent of our Gross National Product. Active-Duty military manpower
end strength is now over 1.388 million. Selected Reserve strength is
about 863,300 or reduced by about 25 percent from its strength levels
during the Gulf War of 14 years ago.
Mr. Chairman, this budget must advance ongoing efforts to fight the
global war on terrorism, sustain and improve quality of life and
continue to transform the military. A decade of over use of the
military and past underfunding, necessitates a sustained investment.
The American Legion believes the budget must continue to address
increases in Army end strengths, accelerate improved Active and Reserve
components quality of life features, provide increased funding for the
concurrent receipt of military retirement pay and Department of
Veterans' Affairs (VA) disability compensation (``Veterans Disability
Tax''); and elimination of the survivors benefit plan (SBP) and
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) that continues to penalize
military survivors.
If we are to win the war on terror and prepare for the wars of
tomorrow, we must take care of the Department of Defense's (DOD)
greatest assets--the men and women in uniform. They do us proud in
Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world. They need help.
In order to attract and retain the necessary force over the long
haul, the Active-Duty Force, Reserves, and National Guard continue to
look for talent in an open market place and to compete with the private
sector for the best young people this Nation has to offer. If we are to
attract them to military service in the Active and Reserve components,
we need to count on their patriotism and willingness to sacrifice, to
be sure, but we must also provide them the proper incentives. They love
their country, but they also love their families--and many have
children to support, raise and educate. We have always asked the men
and women in uniform to voluntarily risk their lives to defend us; we
should not ask them to forego adequate pay and allowances, adequate
health care and subject their families to repeated unaccompanied
deployments and substandard housing as well. Undoubtedly, retention and
recruiting budgets need to be substantially increased if we are to keep
and recruit quality servicemembers.
The President's fiscal year 2006 defense budget requests over $105
billion for military pay and allowances, including a 3.1 percent
across-the-board pay raise. It also includes billions to improve
military housing, putting the Department on track to eliminate most
substandard housing by 2007--several years sooner than previously
planned. The fiscal year 2005 budget further lowered out-of-pocket
housing costs for those living off base. The American Legion encourages
the subcommittee to continue the policy of no out-of-pocket housing
costs in future years.
Together, these investments in people are critical, because smart
weapons are worthless to us unless they are in the hands of smart,
well-trained soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and Coast Guard
personnel.
The American Legion National Commanders have visited American
troops in Europe, the Balkans, and South Korea as well as a number of
installations throughout the United States, including Walter Reed Army
Medical Center and Bethesda National Naval Medical Center. During these
visits, they were able to see first hand the urgent, immediate need to
address real quality of life challenges faced by servicemembers and
their families. Severely wounded servicemembers who have families and
are convalescing in military hospitals clearly need to have their
incomes increased when they are evacuated from combat zones. Also, the
medical evaluation board process needs to be expedited so that military
severance and disability retirement pays will be more immediately
forthcoming. Our National Commanders have spoken with families on
Women's and Infants' Compensation (WIC), where quality of life issues
for servicemembers, coupled with combat tours and other operational
tempos, play a role in recurring recruitment and retention efforts and
should come as no surprise. The operational tempo and lengthy
deployments, other than combat tours, must be reduced or curtailed.
Military missions were on the rise before September 11 and deployment
levels remain high. The only way to reduce repetitive overseas tours
and the overuse of the Reserves is to increase Active-Duty and perhaps
Reserve end strengths for the Services. Military pay must be on a par
with the competitive civilian sector. Activated reservists must receive
the same equipment, the same pay, and timely health care as Active-Duty
personnel. If other benefits, like health care improvements,
commissaries, adequate quarters, quality child care and impact aid for
DOD education are reduced, they will only serve to further undermine
efforts to recruit and retain the brightest and best this Nation has to
offer.
To step up efforts to bring in enlistees, all the Army components
are increasing the number of recruiters. The Army National Guard sent
1,400 new recruiters into the field last February. The Army Reserve is
expanding its recruiting force by about 80 percent. If the recruiting
trends and the demand for forces persist, the Pentagon under current
policies could eventually ``run out'' of Reserve Forces for war zone
rotation, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) expert warned. The
Pentagon projects a need to keep more than 100,000 reservists
continuously over the next 3 to 5 years. The Defense Appropriations
bill for fiscal year 2005 provides the funding for the first year force
level increases of 10,000. The Army's end strength increased 30,000 and
the Marine Corps end strength increased 3,000.
Army restructuring will increase the number of Active Army maneuver
brigades by 30 percent by fiscal year 2007. The Army National Guard
will reach 34 brigades. The Marine Corps will increase by two
battalions.
The budget deficit is projected to be $427 billion; the largest in
U.S. history and it appears to be heading higher perhaps to $500
billion. National defense spending must not become a casualty of
deficit reduction.
force health protection (fhp)
As American military forces are again engaged in combat overseas,
the health and welfare of deployed troops is of utmost concern to The
American Legion. The need for effective coordination between the VA and
the DOD in the force protection of U.S. forces is paramount. It has
been 14 years since the first Gulf War, yet many of the hazards of the
1991 conflict are still present in the current war.
Prior to the 1991 Gulf War deployment, troops were not
systematically given comprehensive pre-deployment health examinations
nor were they properly briefed on the potential hazards, such as
fallout from depleted uranium munitions they might encounter. Record
keeping was poor. Numerous examples of lost or destroyed medical
records of Active-Duty and Reserve personnel were identified. Physical
examinations (pre- and post-deployment) were not comprehensive and
information regarding possible environmental hazard exposures was
severely lacking. Although the government had conducted more than 230
research projects at a cost of $240 million, lack of crucial deployment
data resulted in many unanswered questions about Gulf War veterans
illnesses.
The American Legion would like to specifically identify an element
of FHP that deals with DOD's ability to accurately record a
servicemember's health status prior to deployment and document or
evaluate any changes in his or her health that occurred during
deployment. This is exactly the information VA needs to adequately care
for and compensate servicemembers for service-related disabilities once
they leave Active-Duty. Although DOD has developed post-deployment
questionnaires, they still do not fulfill the requirement of
``thorough'' medical examinations nor do they even require a medical
officer to administer the questionnaires. Due to the duration and
extent of sustained combat in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring
Freedom, the psychological impact on deployed personnel is of utmost
concern to The American Legion. VA's ability to adequately care for and
compensate our Nation's veterans depends directly on DOD's efforts to
maintain proper health records/health surveillance, documentation of
troop locations, environmental hazard exposure data and the timely
sharing of this information with the VA.
The American Legion strongly urges Congress to mandate separation
physical exams for all servicemembers, particularly those who have
served in combat zones or have had sustained deployments. DOD reports
that only about 20 percent of discharging servicemembers opt to have
separation physical exams. During this war on terrorism and frequent
deployments with all their strains and stresses, this figure, we
believe, should be substantially increased.
military quality-of-life
Our major national security concern continues to be the enhancement
of the quality-of-life issues for Active-Duty servicemembers,
reservists, guardsmen, military retirees, and their families. During
the last congressional session, President Bush and Congress made marked
improvements in an array of quality-of-life issues for military
personnel and their families. These efforts are vital enhancements that
must be sustained.
Mr. Chairman: During this period of the war on terrorism, more
quality-of-life improvements are required to meet the needs of
servicemembers and their families as well as military retiree veterans
and their families. For example, the totally inadequate $12,000 death
gratuity needs to be increased to $100,000 and the Servicemembers'
Group Life Insurance (SGLI) needs to be increased to at least $400,000;
the improved Reserve MGIB for education needs to be completely funded
as well; combat wounded soldiers who are evacuated from combat zones to
military hospitals need to retain their special pay (combat pay, family
separation pay, etc) and base pay and allowances during the period of
their convalescence continued at the same level to not jeopardize their
families financial support during recovery. Furthermore, the medical
evaluation board process needs to be expedited so that any adjudicated
military severance or military disability retirement payments will be
immediately forthcoming; recruiting and retention efforts, to include
the provision of more service recruiters, needs to be fully funded as
does recruiting advertising. The Defense Health Program and in
particular the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
must also be fully appropriated.
Likewise, military retiree veterans as well as their survivors, who
have served their Country for decades in war and peace, require
continued quality-of-life improvements as well. First and foremost, The
American Legion strongly urges that full concurrent receipt and Combat-
Related Special Compensation (CRSC) be authorized for disabled retirees
whether they were retired for longevity (20 or more years of service)
or military disability retirement with fewer than 20 years. In
particular, The American Legion urges that disabled retirees rated 40
percent and below be authorized CRPD and that disabled retirees rated
between 50 percent and 90 percent disabled be authorized non-phased-in
concurrent receipt. Additionally, The American Legion strongly urges
that all military disability retirees with fewer than 20 years service
be authorized to receive CRSC and VA disability compensation provided,
of course, they're otherwise eligible for CRSC under the combat-related
conditions.
Second, The American Legion urges that the longstanding inequity
whereby military survivors have their SBP offset by the DIC be
eliminated. This ``Widows' Tax'' needs to be eliminated as soon as
possible. It is blatantly unfair and has penalized deserving military
survivors for years. A number of these military survivors were nearly
impoverished because of this unfair provision. As with concurrent
receipt for disabled retirees, military survivors should receive both
SBP and DIC. They have always been entitled to both and should not have
to pay for their own DIC. The American Legion will continue to convey
that simple, equitable justice is the primary reason to fund full
concurrent receipt of military retirement pay as well as the SBP and
DIC for military survivors. Not to do so merely continues the same
inequity. Both inequities need to be righted by changing the unfair law
that prohibits both groups from receiving both forms of compensation.
Mr. Chairman: The American Legion as well as the Armed Forces and
veterans continue to owe you and this subcommittee a debt of gratitude
for your support of military quality-of-life issues. Nevertheless, your
assistance is needed in this budget to overcome old and new threats to
retaining and recruiting the finest military in the world.
Servicemembers and their families continue to endure physical risks to
their well-being and livelihood as well as the forfeiture of personal
freedoms that most Americans would find unacceptable. Worldwide
deployments have increased significantly and the Nation is at war. The
very fact that over 300,000 guardsmen and reservists have been
mobilized since September 11, 2001 is first-hand evidence that the
United States Army desperately needs to increase its end strengths and
maintain those end strengths so as to help facilitate the rotation of
Active and Reserve component units to Active combat zones.
The American Legion congratulates and thanks congressional
subcommittees such as this one for military and military retiree
quality-of-life enhancements contained in past National Defense
Appropriations Acts. Continued improvement however are direly needed to
include the following:
Completely Closing the Military Pay Gap with the
Private Sector: With U.S. troops battling insurgency and
terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan, The American Legion supports
the proposed 3.1 percent military pay raise as well as
increases in Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH).
Commissaries: The American Legion urges Congress to
preserve full Federal subsidizing of the military commissary
system and to retain this vital non-pay compensation benefit
for use by Active-Duty families, reservist families, military
retiree families and 100 percent Service-connected disabled
veterans and others.
DOD Domestic Dependents Elementary and Secondary
Schools (DDESS): The American Legion urges the retention and
full funding of the DDESS as they have provided a source of
high quality education for military children attending schools
on military installations.
Funding the Reserve Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) for
Education.
Increasing the death gratuity to $100,000 and $400,000
for SGLI for all Active-Duty or activated reservist who are
killed or who dies while on Active-Duty after September 11,
2001 during the war on terrorism.
Improving the pay of severely wounded servicemembers
and expediting the medical evaluation board process.
Providing full concurrent receipt of military
retirement pay and VA disability compensation for those
disabled retirees rated 40 percent and less; providing non-
phased concurrent receipt for those disabled retirees rated
between 50 percent and 90 percent disabled by the VA; and
authorizing those military disability retirees with fewer than
20 years service to receive both VA disability compensation and
CRSC.
Eliminating the offset of the SBP and DIC for military
survivors.
other quality-of-life institutions
The American Legion strongly believes that quality-of-life issues
for retired military members and their families are augmented by
certain institutions which we believe need to be annually funded as
well. Accordingly, The American Legion believes that Congress and the
administration must place high priority on insuring these institutions
are adequately funded and maintained:
The Uniformed Services University of the Health
Sciences (USUHS): The American Legion urges Congress to resist
any efforts to less than fully fund, downsize, or close the
USUHS through the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process.
It is a national treasure, which educates and produces military
physicians and advanced nursing staffs. We believe it continues
to be an economical source of career medical leaders who
enhance military health care readiness and excellence and is
well-known for providing the finest health care in the world.
The Armed Forces Retirement Homes: The United States
Soldiers' and Airmen's Home (USSAH) in Washington, DC and the
United States Naval Home in Gulfport, Mississippi, are under
funded as evidenced by the reduction in services to include
onsite medical health care and dental care. Increases in fees
paid by residents are continually on the rise. The medical
facility at the USSAH has been eliminated with residents being
referred to VA Medical Centers or Military Treatment Facilities
(MTFs) such as Walter Reed Army Medical Center. The American
Legion recommends that Congress conduct an independent
assessment of these two facilities and the services being
provided with an eye toward federally subsidizing these two
Homes as appropriate. Both facilities have been recognized as
national treasures until recent years when a number of mandated
services have been severely reduced and resident fees have been
substantially increased.
Arlington National Cemetery: The American Legion urges
that the Arlington National Cemetery be maintained to the
highest of standards. We urge also that Congress mandate the
eligibility requirements for burial in this prestigious
Cemetery Reserved for those who have performed distinguished
military service and their spouses and eligible children.
2005 Defense Base Realignment and Closure Commission:
The American Legion urges that certain base facilities such as
military medical facilities, commissaries, exchanges, and
training facilities and other quality-of-life facilities be
preserved for use by the Active and Reserve components and
military retirees and their families.
the american legion family support network
The American Legion continues to demonstrate its support and
commitment to the men and women in uniform and their families. The
American Legion's Family Support is providing immediate assistance
primarily to activated National Guard families as requested by the
Director of the National Guard Bureau. The American Legion Family
Support Network has reached out through its Departments and Posts to
also support the Army Disabled Soldier Support System (DS3). Many
thousands of requests from these families have been received and
accommodated by the American Legion Family across the United States.
Military family needs have ranged from requests for funds to a variety
of everyday chores which need doing while the ``man or woman'' of the
family is gone. The American Legion, whose members have served our
Nation in times of adversity, remember how it felt to be separated from
family and loved ones. As a grateful Nation, we must ensure than no
military family endures those hardships caused by military service, as
such service has assured the security, freedom and ideals of our great
country.
conclusions
Thirty-two years ago, America opted for an All-Volunteer Force to
provide for the national defense. Inherent in that commitment was a
willingness to invest the needed resources to bring into existence and
maintain a competent, professional and well-equipped military. The
fiscal year 2006 defense budget, while recognizing the war on terrorism
and homeland security, represents another good step in the right
direction. Likewise our military retiree veterans and military
survivors, who in yesteryear served this Nation for decades, continue
to need your help as well.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes our statement.
Ms. Raezer. Thank you very much.
Ms. Holleman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Strobridge. Thank you.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much. Thank you for your
testimony.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Saxby Chambliss
domestic dependent elementary and secondary schools transfer study
1. Senator Chambliss. Dr. Chu, the Domestic Dependent Elementary
and Secondary Schools (DDESS) Transfer Study that was recently released
recommended transferring most of Department of Defense Education
Activity (DODEA) Schools in the United States, to include all of these
schools in Georgia, to local school districts. The transfer of these
high-quality schools raises concerns within the military and with the
local school districts that would have to absorb the additional
students.
At Fort Benning, the local school districts have already expressed
their concern about the influx of new students based on the activation
of a new brigade there under the Army's Modularity Initiative and the
delay in receiving Federal Impact Aid funding in advance. Now this
report recommends increasing the student population in the
Chattahoochee School District outside Fort Benning from under 500
students to over 3,500 students. To say that this change would be
significant is an understatement. The report also notes that the
transfer of the Linwood Elementary School at Robins Air Force Base in
2001 resulted in the school going from a ``National Blue Ribbon School
of Excellence'' to a school rated as ``Not Making Adequate Yearly
Progress Under the No-Child Left Behind Act.'' So, I think a great deal
of the concern is very justified.
What does the Department of Defense (DOD) plan to do with this
study, and what are the DOD's plans in terms of transferring these
schools?
Dr. Chu. Your concerns regarding the recommendations pertaining to
the DDESS schools at Fort Benning are appreciated. As you are aware,
these recommendations were made by a National Panel of Experts as one
part of a three-phase study of all DDESS schools in the continental
United States. The overarching purpose of the study was to determine
how best to provide quality education to military dependents while
balancing the stewardship of taxpayers' dollars. It should be noted
that the study was begun prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom as well as
prior to planned overseas basing changes, major force structures
planned by the Services, and domestic base closures. Based on these
activities, the DOD has not formulated a response to the
recommendations and took specific action to suspend all deliberations
on the study until the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
recommendations take legal effect. Further discussions will take place
with Congress before any decision is implemented that would transfer
students to local education authorities. DOD continues to be committed
to assuring that our students receive a quality education and would not
transfer students to a local education agency (LEA) if there were any
questions regarding the quality of education or their commitment to
students.
With respect to your comments regarding the Linwood Elementary
School, the DDESS Transfer Study does not report on the school's status
with respect to the No Child Left Behind Act after being transferred to
Houston County Schools as the result of a housing privatization
initiative. However, in an April 4, 2005, article in the Army Times,
Houston County officials state that the rating of failing to make
``adequate yearly progress'' was due to a mistaken assessment by State
education officials, and that upon appeal, the rating was amended.
tricare reserve select
2. Senator Chambliss. Dr. Chu, as you begin implementing TRICARE
Reserve Select (TRS) for reservists, I will be closely following your
assessments on how TRS impacts on the readiness and retention of our
reservists. I do continue to have some concerns with the medical
readiness of our reservists, and I'm studying the best way to address
their health readiness issues. I'm not sure that providing every
reservist and family member with health care coverage regardless of
mobilization status is financially feasible. However, every year, our
reservists undergo an annual health assessment that identifies
conditions that would potentially make a reservist medically non-
deployable. What are your views on whether we could devise a method to
treat reservists for conditions identified during their annual
screening that would hinder them from deploying?
Dr. Chu. The Department is in the process of revising its periodic
health assessment program for the Total Force, with specific focus on
how it might best be implemented within the Reserve components. This
revised program calls for an annual age and gender specific evidence-
based Periodic Health Assessment (PHA) to assess individuals for
occupational, familial and behavioral health risk factors and to
conduct, as required, specified arid/or directed physical examinations
and laboratory testing. The PHA is optimized when it is combined with a
review of the individual's records of medical care. As a condition of
continued employment, DOD considers every servicemember, whether Active
or Reserve component, personally responsible for taking initiatives to
meet DOD's individual medical readiness and fitness standards. The
annual PHA assessment will identify necessary actions on the part of
the individual and the medical community to sustain medical readiness.
Resourcing of medical readiness for Reserve component servicemembers is
currently the responsibility of the six Reserve components.
Offering medical and dental insurance does not assure that even
those who subscribe to the insurance will use it to maintain good
health and to seek medical attention early for problems, which are
perceived as minor.
TRICARE Reserve Select will not provide a complete picture of
medical readiness status because reservists' civilian clinical records
are not available to the Department to make a more comprehensive
assessment.
servicemembers group life insurance spousal consent
3. Senator Chambliss. Dr. Chu, I think that many of the steps we
have taken in Congress and in the President's budget proposal to
increase the benefits for those servicemembers that are killed in
action or die on Active-Duty in the global war on terrorism are all
positive steps in the right direction. I think raising the value of
Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI) is the least we could do to
honor those who have lost their lives in service to our Nation.
There has been some debate about whether a servicemember's spouse
should be involved in the servicemember's decision to pay for a reduced
amount, or to name someone other than the servicemember's spouse as the
beneficiary. This process would be similar to the consent provisions of
the Survivors Benefit Plan (SBP).
What are your thoughts about how and whether or not the consent
provisions should apply to SGLI?
Dr. Chu. The Department favors requiring spousal consent when
members elect to reduce or decline the amount of SGLI provided or
designate any other person as a beneficiary. Additionally, the
Department prefers spousal/designee notification be required when
members elect to reduce or decline the amount of insurance applicable
to such member.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Daniel K. Akaka
defense language transformation roadmap
4. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, I am pleased to see that the DOD has
taken great efforts to improve the recruitment, retention, and training
of individuals with foreign language skills. For example, the Defense
Language Transformation Roadmap proposes requiring junior officers to
complete language training and making foreign language ability a
criterion for general officer and flag officer advancement.
How will the DOD fund these proposals and provide the language
teachers needed to make this goal a reality?
Dr. Chu. Language Transformation in the Department is a long-term
initiative and we will work closely with the Services to explore the
best ways to reach the Roadmap's desired goals. We have been and will
continue to work with the members of the Defense Foreign Language
Steering Committee (DFLSC) to present various approaches. As to the
requirement that junior officers complete language training, we are
currently formulating plans to address this action. Funding will be
addressed as part of the approval process for the plans.
To improve language proficiency and provide for language teacher
training and development, we have worked with Army, which is the
executive agent for the Defense Language Institute Foreign Language
Center (DLIFLC). We increased DLIFLC funding by $56 million in fiscal
year 2005 to fund critical requirements, training development, ``crash
courses'' for deployed forces, and kick off the Proficiency Enhancement
Program. For fiscal year 2006, we have included a request for an
additional $44.7 million in our budget submission. This will fund
critical requirements and continue proficiency enhancement in support
of the Intelligence Community needs. In all, we have programmed $362
million over the Fiscal Year Defense Plan (fiscal year 2006-2010) for
the DLIFLC to teach to advanced level of proficiency.
5. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, how long will it take to implement this
proposal?
Dr. Chu. Language transformation is a long-term initiative
involving significant changes to our core competency. Roadmap actions
extend through 2010. The Defense Language Transformation Roadmap
outlines our plan and we are currently gathering the milestones for
each action to track our progress. However, we have already made great
strides. We have: (1) assigned responsibility for language to Personnel
and Readiness, (2) established Senior Language Authorities at the
general/flag officer and Senior Executive Service level in the
Services, agencies, and combatant commands, (3) created a Defense
Language Office in Personnel and Readiness (P&R), (4) revised our
Foreign Area Officer Directive to develop a more robust corps of these
elite officers, (5) initiated the Army 09L program to recruit heritage
speakers of Arabic, Dari, and Pashto into the Individual Ready Reserve,
(6) conducted a study of language and regional expertise in
Professional Military Education, and (7) increased funding for the
DLIFLC to fund critical requirements and proficiency enhancement.
6. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, is the DOD prepared to provide support
to the education community in order to generate individuals who have
studied foreign languages and other cultures to a degree of competency
so that the DOD has an applicant pool with the critical skills needed
from which to recruit?
Dr. Chu. We recognize that support to the education community is
essential to generate individuals who have studied foreign languages.
In fact, one of the reasons DOD hosted the ``National Language
Conference: A Call for Action'' in June 2004 was to focus on the need
to build a language competent nation. At this conference more than 300
representatives identified a number of areas in need of national
leadership and presented some recommendations. We hosted a luncheon
with other Federal agencies on April 25 to discuss some ``ways ahead''
in the Federal sector. We are pleased with the interest of our Federal
partners and plan to pursue this further.
One asset to the education system is the National Security
Education Program (NSEP), created by the ``David L. Boren National
Security Education Act of 1991,'' which provides scholarships to
outstanding U.S. undergraduate and graduate students to study languages
and cultures critical to DOD, the Intelligence Community, and the
Nation. Recipients of NSEP scholarships incur a service obligation to
seek employment in the national security community. NSEP, through their
National Flagship Language Initiative (NFLI), has partnered with U.S.
colleges and universities to implement programs of study to expand
opportunities to graduate students at the superior levels of foreign
language skills. Just recently, NSEP issued a request for proposals
seeking a university to host a new NFLI program: Chinese K-16 Flagship.
The selected university will work with an elementary, middle and
secondary school system to establish a program that will allow students
to pursue Chinese as an integral component of their studies. The
contract will be awarded this fall.
While the U.S. education system will serve as the primary source of
these language skills, parents, school counselors, and business leaders
must encourage students to study more difficult languages. Such changes
in our education system will require the involvement of State
governments and other concerned government organizations and
institutions. We believe that our heritage communities are national
assets waiting to be developed. Only by pursuing a nation-wide
resolution to the growing demand for language skills will the U.S. be
able to meet the complex national security needs of a changing world.
7. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, the Defense Language Transformation
Roadmap notes the DOD's plan to coordinate with the NSEP to focus on
attracting university students possessing foreign language skills to
the DOD. Please provide additional information on the DOD's efforts to
recruit individuals with foreign language skills.
Dr. Chu. DOD is exploring innovative ways to guarantee job
placement for National Security Education Program graduates. DOD
determined that employment with contractors working in direct support
of DOD missions could qualify as part of the statutory service
requirement for NSEP graduates. This decision resulted in immediate
placement of some NSEP graduates in important positions. We are
exploring other flexible personnel approaches that would allow Defense
and Intelligence agencies to benefit immediately from graduates'
knowledge, to include direct hire authorities.
8. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, the Defense Language Transformation
Roadmap also notes Departmental efforts to improve language training
through study abroad programs and the incorporation of regional area
content into language training in order for students to better
understand different cultures. Please describe the study abroad
opportunities cited in the report.
Dr. Chu. The Roadmap requires the Services to ``Exploit `study
abroad' opportunities to facilitate language acquisition.'' Immersion
is a very effective way to acquire and enhance both foreign language
and cultural knowledge because the student lives in the culture and is
required daily to utilize foreign language and cultural skills.
Currently, study abroad opportunities exist in Service academies;
Personnel Exchange Programs, where military personnel from two
countries swap positions for an assignment; the Olmsted Scholar
Program, which is a privately funded opportunity for military personnel
to study abroad; the NSEP, which provides funding for study of less
commonly taught languages; and the Air Force Language and Area Studies
Immersion Program, which gives opportunities to Air Force members to
study and travel abroad. Interest in these programs is increasing and
we intend to expand these programs.
9. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, how much funding will be set aside for
this program?
Dr. Chu. Interest in foreign language. and study abroad is
increasing. The number of graduates majoring in a foreign language at
the U.S. Military Academy is increasing, as is the number of
participants in their study abroad program. However, language
transformation is a new initiative and will take a concerted effort and
much time. The Defense Language Transformation Roadmap outlines our
goals for this implementation. The Services, Joint Staff, and offices
within the Office of the Secretary of Defense are currently formulating
plans to meet the required actions. Because these plans are still being
developed, full costs cannot be cited at this time.
10. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, please provide additional information
on how DOD employees will gain cultural understandings as well as
language proficiency.
Dr. Chu. DOD employees who attend professional military education
currently have the option of taking courses that focus on regional
studies. Additionally, DOD civilians may attend special courses on
regional knowledge at the Joint Special Operations University, Joint
Military Intelligence College, and the Foreign Service Institute.
Outside of the Federal system, civilian colleges and universities also
offer many courses specializing in regional studies. We intend to
encourage more DOD civilians to participate in these opportunities. We
also hope to partner with other Federal agencies to identify and share
training resources.
11. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, the Roadmap also states that civilian
job applications will permit individuals to identify their language
skills and regional expertise on job application forms. What weight
will the identification of these skills on the application form have on
the hiring of the individual and how will the DOD verify these skills?
Dr. Chu. Several standard questions are asked on civilian job
applications, such as, are you a veteran or what is your education
level. Asking about language skills is just one other piece of
information that we would like to collect, so we could have a database
with civilians possessing language skills in case of an emergency
situation. If we needed the civilians for their language capability, we
would test them at that time. If a job required language skills, then
DOD would weight these skills. In those cases, the applicant would be
tested on their language capability before employment was offered.
12. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, given the flexibility under the
National Security Personnel System (NSPS), what special authorities, in
the areas of hiring, classification, and pay, are you considering to
improve the recruitment and retention of individuals possessing
critical language skills?
Dr. Chu. NSPS provides flexibilities to improve the hiring process,
attract high-quality applicants, and enhance the Department's ability
to meet critical mission requirements, while preserving principles of
merit and veterans' preference. This provides the Department with an
expanded set of tools for assigning and reassigning employees in
response to mission changes and priorities. The direct hire authority
for severe shortages or critical needs, such as critical languages, is
vested with the Secretary and DOD will be able to improve and
streamline examining procedures to speed up the hiring process. By
using new hiring mechanisms and pay setting flexibilities, Department
managers will have a greater ability to acquire, advance, and shape
their workforce in response to organizational needs and to compete for
the best talent.
13. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, does the DOD believe a scholarship for
service program, similar to the one detailed in S.589 in the 108th
Congress and included in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 for
employees in the Intelligence Community, would be helpful to recruit
individuals with critical language skills?
Dr. Chu. Yes, we do think it would be helpful to have a scholarship
for service program to recruit individuals with critical language
skills. It would also be helpful to have provisions in place to
expedite hiring and non-competitive placement of these individuals. We
will look carefully at the provisions of the Intelligence Community
program as a model for development of a program to meet DOD's specific
requirement.
14. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, the draft White Paper from the National
Language Conference hosted by the DOD last June called for national
language leadership; the development of cross-sector language and
cultural competency; the engagement of Federal, Sate, and local
Governments in solving the Nation's language deficiency; the
integration of language training across career fields; the development
of critical language skills; strengthened teaching capabilities in
foreign languages and cultures; the integration of language into
education system requirements; and the development and distribution of
instructional materials and technological tools for language education.
What progress has been made in reaching these goals and what has been
or will be the DOD's role?
Dr. Chu. First, if I may, let me clarify that the White Paper from
the National Language Conference did not set goals. The White Paper
presents recommendations requiring long-term partnerships and
collaboration between public, private, and government sectors of
society to increase foreign language and cultural capabilities and
proficiency. The document highlights the need for strong, focused,
visionary national leadership to move the Nation forward in this
important arena. It reflects the thoughts of more than 300 leaders and
experts from Federal, state and local government, academia,
international institutions, language associations and business who
participated in the June 2004 Conference.
I am delighted to report that, in agreement with several Federal
departments and agencies, my office published the White Paper on April
26, 2005. DOD published the White Paper with the hope of creating
dialogue about the issues involved in expanding language capabilities
and cultural understanding throughout the United States. We have sent
the document to Congress, Governors, State school superintendents,
CEOs, language associations, and the conference participants
encouraging them to engage this national need.
The Federal sector is already taking on this issue. The Chief Human
Capital Officers of several Federal departments have started meeting to
fully scope the need for these skills within the workforce and to build
collaborative actions and recommendations. The group includes the
Departments of State, Labor, Justice, Commerce, Central Intelligence
Agency, Education, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, the
Office of Personnel and Management, and the Office of Management and
Budget. While I convened the first meeting, the State Department, in
the true sense of partnership, will host the second gathering. This is
the start of what we hope will be a strong partnership, as recommended
by the White Paper.
equal employment opportunity
15. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Public Law 106-398, included a
provision permitting the Department to implement pilot programs to
improve the process for the resolution of Equal Employment Opportunity
(EEO) complaints. What is the current status of implementing this
provision?
Dr. Chu. Pilots were approved in August 2004 for implementation in
three DOD components: (1) Department of the Air Force, (2) Defense
Commissary Agency (DeCA), and (3) Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). All
three pilots are currently operational and will run through August
2006. If, at the end of the pilot period the pilot cannot be properly
assessed because an insufficient number of complaints had been
processed under the pilot, an extension of 1 year can be granted.
16. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, how do the pilot programs differ from
the current EEO Federal sector process?
Dr. Chu. The Department of the Air Force has adopted the name
Compressed Orderly Rapid Equitable (CORE) for its pilot. CORE differs
from the existing Federal sector process in that increased emphasis is
placed upon the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR); an
independent factfinding session conducted by a CORE-trained
investigator will replace the current investigation phase; the CORE-
trained investigator will draft a proposed agency final decision upon
completion of the factfinding investigation; and the opportunity for a
hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
administrative judge has been eliminated. The Air Force pilot will be
limited to 31 test bases.
The Defense Commissary Agency Early Resolution Opportunity (ERO)
pilot replaces informal counseling with ADR; provides for expedited
investigations in cases where ADR is unsuccessful; provides electronic
case processing; and shortens time frames at both the informal and
formal stages of case processing. The DeCA pilot is limited to 3 zones
in the 2 DeCA regional offices covering the continental United States
and comprising 23 stores in 3 metropolitan areas.
The DLA Pilot for Expedited Complaint Processing (PCEP) replaces
informal counseling with an ADR process. PCEP is available only to
employees at the DLA headquarters at Fort Belvoir.
17. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, what provisions and safeguards are
included in the pilot programs that allow employees to opt out and
participate in the current EEO Federal sector process?
Dr. Chu. EEO professional staff and EEO counselors at the
installations participating in the Air Force, DeCA, and DLA pilot
programs have been trained regarding opt out procedures. When a
civilian employee at a pilot facility contacts an EEO counselor they
will be informed about the regular Federal sector complaint procedures
and the pilot procedures, including the opt out provisions. If the
employee selects the pilot process they will be given more detailed
information on the pilot process and opt out provisions emphasized.
Whenever an employee opts out of a pilot, he or she will be given an
opt out survey form to complete and submit to a DOD pilot program
evaluation coordinator located in California.
18. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, given the concern over the lack of an
independent adjudicator for labor-management disputes and employee
appeals under the NSPS, it is conceivable that more employees will file
EEO complaints in an effort to have their cases decided by what may be
perceived as a more neutral arbitrator. If so, how will the NSPS
interact with EEO pilot programs?
Dr. Chu. NSPS will not affect anti-discrimination laws or
regulations, including the EEO complaints process. Employees who are
converted to NSPS will have the same access to the EEO complaints
process as other employees. While the implementation of NSPS may impact
the number of EEO complaints in an organization, we are not planning on
conducting the pilots based on whether the organization will be under
NSPS. We would also point out that while there may be a perception that
NSPS will not have independent adjudicators, the proposed NSPS
regulations provide for independent third party resolution of both
labor disputes and adverse action appeals. The proposed National
Security Labor Relations Board will be structured to ensure the
independence of its Board members; and employees will be able to appeal
adverse actions to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
19. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, during congressional consideration of
the NSPS in 2003, the DOD testified that NSPS would aid the conversion
of military positions to civilian positions. It was estimated at that
time that there were approximately 320,000 positions that could be
converted. How many positions have been converted to date?
Dr. Chu. Military-to-civilian conversions often take a number of
months to complete. The Department has devised a four-step process for
crediting conversions. Based on this reporting construct, the Military
Services indicate a total of 7,640 military billets were converted
during fiscal year 2004. Of these, 4,281 were for the Army; 905 for the
Navy, 1,790 for the Air Force, and 664 for the Marine Corps. In
addition, 16,176 military-to-civilian conversions were included in the
fiscal year 2006 President's budget for fiscal year 2005 and should be
credited by the end of the fiscal year barring any schedule delays.
20. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, how many of the converted positions
have been subject to competitive sourcing and are now being performed
by the private sector?
Dr. Chu. Out of a total of 1,790 Air Force conversions in fiscal
year 2004, 595 were a result of competitive sourcing. All of these 595
billets were converted to private sector performance. None of the
Army's 4,281 or the Navy's 905 conversions for fiscal year 2004
resulted from competitive sourcing. However, the Army replaced 4,100
National Guardsmen with contract security guards in fiscal year 2004.
Out of a total of 664 Marine Corps conversions in fiscal year 2004, 241
were a result of competitive sourcing. However, only 108 of these 241
billets were converted to private sector performance. In total, 836 of
the 7,640 fiscal year 2004 military-to-civilian conversions were
accomplished through competitive sourcing. Of these, 703 were converted
to private sector performance.
21. Senator Akaka. Dr. Chu, what is the anticipated time line for
converting the remaining positions?
Dr. Chu. The fiscal year 2005 President's budget included 16,176
military-to-civilian conversions for fiscal year 2005; 6,434 for fiscal
year 2006; and 5,568 for fiscal year 2007. Additional conversions are
planned through fiscal year 2011. When aggregated, current estimates
for fiscal year 2004 through fiscal year 2011 range from 39,000 to
42,000. Although these numbers are significant, the Department is
continuing with its review of over 320,000 active duty military billets
in commercial activities that are exempted from conversion. These are
positions that can be considered for DOD civilian or private sector
performance and the minimum number the Department is committed to
reviewing. Also, as the Department completes its Quadrennial Defense
Review and progresses with other initiatives, such as Active/Reserve
Rebalancing, the number of military conversion could change
dramatically. However, it's important to recognize that there are
several reasons why not all of the military billets in commercial
activities can be converted to DOD civilian or private sector
performance. A sizable portion is needed for overseas and sea-to-shore
rotation, career progression, wartime assignments, and other similar
requirements. The ultimate size of the larger conversion will depend on
the merits of each situation within the 300,000-plus positions up for
review.
[Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2006
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Personnel,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
ACTIVE AND RESERVE MILITARY AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL PROGRAMS
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:34 p.m., in
room SR-232A, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Lindsey
O. Graham (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Committee members present: Senators Graham and E. Benjamin
Nelson.
Committee staff member present: Leah C. Brewer, nominations
and hearings clerk.
Majority staff members present: Diana G. Tabler,
professional staff member; and Richard F. Walsh, counsel.
Minority staff members present: Gabriella Eisen, research
assistant; Gerald J. Leeling, minority counsel; and Peter K.
Levine, minority counsel.
Staff assistants present: Nicholas W. West and Pendred K.
Wilson.
Committee members' assistants present: Meredith Moseley,
assistant to Senator Graham; and Eric Pierce, assistant to
Senator Ben Nelson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, CHAIRMAN
Senator Graham. Good afternoon. Thank you all for coming.
We are going to be having votes at 1:45, so we will handle
that the best we can. Senator Nelson, the ranking member, is on
the way, but I thought I would try to do something unusual for
the Federal Government: get started on time, and end in an
efficient manner here. [Laughter.]
But before we start, to show where our priorities are,
General Helmly, you have some soldiers here I understand.
Right?
General Helmly. Yes.
Senator Graham. Do you mind introducing them now?
General Helmly. I would love to. Thank you.
Sir, I would like to introduce 1st Lieutenant Matthew Brown
and Specialist Jeremy Church. Both are veterans of the 724th
Transportation Company that was ambushed outside Baghdad on
April 9, the 1-year anniversary of the fall of Baghdad. That
was the action in which we had several contractors killed, and
several contractors wounded. It was the action in which
Sergeant Matt Maupin was captured and remains captured to this
day.
Specialist Church was recently awarded the Silver Star, the
third highest award for heroism in our country. His platoon
leader was 1st Lieutenant Brown who was seriously wounded that
day.
I am privileged to introduce them to the distinguished
members of this committee. [Applause.]
Senator Graham. Thank you for your presence and that is a
good reminder of what we are all here to do, to win the fight
and take care of those people who are involved in the fight.
The subcommittee will come to order.
The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony on the
National Guard and Reserve and civilian personnel programs in
review of the defense authorization request for fiscal year
2006.
Last week we had our first subcommittee hearing of the year
with Secretary Chu, the Service Personnel Chiefs, and witnesses
from The Military Coalition and the National Military Alliance,
who testified about key issues relating to the fiscal year 2006
budget. We had a good discussion about legislative proposals,
several of which would affect the National Guard and Reserve,
proposals such as increased health care benefits under TRICARE,
which I am committed to achieving; improved retirement and
survivor benefits; and new incentive pays aimed at improving
recruiting and retention. I anticipate that we will touch on
some of these subjects at this hearing.
Today our focus is on the status of the National Guard and
Reserve. As we move into the third year of Operation Iraqi
Freedom (OIF), we recognize the continuing stress on the force.
We are concerned about the effects of wartime operations on
meeting recruiting, retention, and readiness goals. We would
like to hear your assessments about these challenges and about
the well-being of Reserve and Guard families and the levels of
support you are receiving from employers and communities across
the Nation.
I am sure our witnesses would agree that the threats our
Nation faces today have resulted in difficult but essential
reexamination of old ways of organizing, training, and
mobilizing our Reserve Forces. We have benefited greatly from
their leadership in overcoming many obstacles in wartime, while
transforming forces that have distinguished themselves by their
accomplishments at home and overseas.
We have two panels before our subcommittee this afternoon.
First we will hear from Thomas Hall, the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Reserve Affairs. Welcome, Mr. Hall. Thank you very
much. He is joined by Lieutenant General H. Steven Blum, Chief
of the National Guard Bureau; Lieutenant General Roger Schultz,
Director of the Army National Guard; and Lieutenant General
Daniel James, Director of the Air National Guard. Gentlemen,
welcome to you all.
General Schultz, I understand that this will be your last
appearance before the subcommittee in your capacity as Director
of the Army National Guard. Congratulations on your 42 years of
Active and Reserve service which began in 1963. Senator
Thurmond would have been proud of that. [Laughter.]
I note that you have served since June 1998, almost 7
years, as the Director of the Army National Guard, and that is
a record to be proud of. Thank you for your great contribution
to our Nation. [Applause.]
Our second panel will consist of the chiefs of the Army,
Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force Reserve, and we would like to
ask Secretary Hall to remain and participate on that panel, if
you would, sir.
At this time, my partner, a great Senator from Nebraska who
has been a joy to work with, Senator Nelson, the ranking
member.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR E. BENJAMIN NELSON
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
want to thank you for holding this important hearing today. I
join you in welcoming all of our witnesses, both civilian and
military, the leadership responsible for our Guard and Reserve
Forces, and to say personally thank you for your kind remarks.
Our Guard and Reserve Forces are facing some very
significant challenges this year. We need to understand these
challenges so we can authorize sufficient end strength to meet
mission requirements and to ensure that our military leaders
have the tools they need to recruit and retain the right
people.
It is also important that we understand where the
Department of Defense (DOD) is going with the end strengths of
Reserve components. Right now, I would say that the Department
seems to be sending a mixed message. For example, last year DOD
proposed, and we authorized, an increase of 300 airmen for the
Air Force Reserve. This year DOD proposes to cut that increased
end strength by 2,100 airmen. Last year, DOD proposed and we
authorized a cut to the Naval Reserve of 2,500 military
personnel. This year DOD proposes to cut an additional 10,300.
These seem like very significant cuts for a Service with a
current end strength of only 83,400.
What we really need to understand is what the Department
has in mind over the long haul, and we are not suggesting that
there may not be something in mind, but we have to know what it
is.
Our Guard and Reserve Forces are being called into Active
service at a far higher rate than any of us had ever
anticipated. Today 46 percent of the troops in theater for
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and OIF are National Guard and
Reserve personnel, and they are serving, I might add,
magnificently, and for that we are deeply appreciative and very
proud of that service.
But the question remains, how long can we keep this up? How
long can they keep this up?
Frequent and long deployments have a significant impact on
the service man or woman who is called away from home, family,
and employment. These mobilizations also significantly impact
the family and employers who have to figure out how they can
function up to 2 years without the father or mother or a key
employee who is off serving his or her Nation.
It is unlikely that the Army National Guard or the Army
Reserve will achieve their recruiting goals this year, even
though we hope that they will. Despite excellent retention
rates, that could put achieving authorized end strengths at
risk.
We need to look at recruiting and retention incentives to
help them out. Offering the TRICARE health benefit, as you have
proposed, Mr. Chairman, is certainly worthy of very serious
consideration.
I also believe that the Nation has yet to answer the
question about the future role of our Reserve components. What
is the role of our National Guard and Reserve Forces in today's
National Security Strategy? How should they be integrated into
homeland security and homeland defense? Do we need to limit
deployments, both in length and number? Just where should our
Guard and Reserve Forces fit in the array of military forces
available for deployment?
Last year, for example, we authorized a commission on the
National Guard and Reserves to help us understand and address
issues like these. The members of this commission have not yet
been appointed. We need this commission to get up and running
to help us understand the needs of our Guard and Reserve
Forces.
Our Guard and Reserve Forces must be trained and ready, but
obviously, the question is, ready for what? Until we know how
they will be used, we do not know what to train them for or
even how to equip them. Today it appears that our National
Guard and Reserve Forces are primarily forces available for
deployment. Would they be better used if they were more
integrated into our homeland security/homeland defense mission?
If so, they would still be available for deployments, but not
first in line. We need to know the vision for the use of our
National Guard and Reserves so that we can ensure that they are
prepared for that mission.
I must say that as a former Governor, I understand the
concerns of current Governors about whether their National
Guard personnel will be available to them to respond to State
emergencies. I had to use them on several occasions,
unfortunately, and they were available. I believe that some
States with a high risk of wildfires have a large portion of
their National Guard currently deployed overseas. Other States
are concerned that they will have to activate National Guard
personnel who have just returned from long overseas
deployments, but unfortunately, they may not have a choice.
Mr. Chairman, we are all fully aware that our Nation cannot
successfully conduct a significant military operation without
the participation of our National Guard and Reserve personnel,
and I know you know that personally.
So I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses
regarding these questions and how we can address the
significant problems that they are facing, and therefore, we
are facing. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
Both of us are very excited about this hearing because we
want to help. Please be as candid as possible. You will help us
immensely to help people like the lieutenant and the specialist
here, and that is the goal, to make sure the force has what it
needs.
Mr. Secretary, if you want to put your written statement in
the record, you may do so, and if you will kick it off and make
an opening statement please.
STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS F. HALL, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE FOR RESERVE AFFAIRS
Mr. Hall. Thank you. I hate, for many reasons, to see
Lieutenant General Schultz leave because I, like he, joined in
1963 when I joined the Navy, which is going to make me the
oldest guy around now that the General is gone, and I hate to
see that. [Laughter.]
Chairman Graham and Senator Nelson, I want to thank you for
the invitation to offer my perspective on the status and
ability of America's Reserve components to meet current and
future operational requirements.
I also have something a bit different, if it is all right
with you. I have talked to my colleagues, and they have agreed
it is okay for me to make one opening statement and enter all
of our statements in the record, and then get right on with the
dialogue that we need.
Senator Graham. That would be fine.
Mr. Hall. Having visited with the Reserve component members
all over the world, I would like to offer my perspective, which
may assist you in making the critical and difficult decisions
you face over the next several months. This committee has been
and continues to be very supportive of our Reserve components,
and we appreciate that. On behalf of those nearly 1.2 million
men and women, I want to publicly thank you for all the help
you are providing them. The Secretary and I are deeply
grateful. Our military personnel certainly appreciate it, and
we know the men and women who serve in the Guard and Reserve
can count on your continued support.
As the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs,
I consider it my personal responsibility to visit with our
Reserve component members in the field. I forged that view from
my 34 years of Active-Duty service and commanding the Naval
Reserve for 4 years.
During these visits to the field, I see America's finest
young men and women serving their Nation with pride and
professionalism, and I have taken to saying--and I believe it
in all honesty--that this is the next ``greatest generation''
we are seeing now. That wonderful World War II generation will
always be, but they are quickly forging themselves into the
next greatest generation.
I just returned from Central Command (CENTCOM) area of
responsibility (AOR) and have recently visited several States
and Governors, and I can report to you that our Guard and
Reserve men and women are performing vital national security
functions at home and around the world in superb fashion.
Throughout my travels, I have carefully listened to their
comments, their concerns, and suggestions of the young men and
women and their families. Many of my remarks will reflect what
I hear from them directly on the drill deck and in the field.
We are still in the midst of one of the longest periods of
mobilization in our history. This mobilization continues to
reveal many areas that need improvement. You have mentioned
them. Our Service components remain at a pivotal point, and how
we collectively navigate this turbulent period in our history
will affect all of our forces, both Active and Reserve for some
time to come. Our Reserve Forces are certainly stressed, as you
have said, and they always are when the Nation is at war.
Recruiting and retention are demanding tasks in today's
environment. We are trying to simultaneous rebalance and
transform to meet the challenges of the 21st century while
still maintaining a viable warfare footing. We are continuing
to closely monitor the impact of the ongoing mobilization of
our Guard and Reserve members, their families and their
employers. They are the key triad to the long-term viability of
our Guard and Reserve.
Some areas of our Reserve components are stressed, and some
of these are a result of many factors, which include imbalance
in the type of forces and skill sets, uncertainty about the
frequency and duration of mobilizations, resourcing of
equipment and materiel to reset the Reserve components. I am
confident that the modifications you made to the statute in
last year's authorization act, as well as management
initiatives and policies that we have put in place, will help
to mitigate some of the stress. We have more we need to do.
The Secretary of Defense has expressed the need to promote
careful use of the Reserve components through a series of force
rebalancing initiatives that will allow us to fully employ more
of our forces in the war effort. As part of this effort, he
directed the military departments to structure the Active and
Reserve Forces to reduce the need to always involuntarily
mobilize these forces during the initial stages of a conflict,
and he asked that all the Services develop planning factors to
limit the frequency of involuntary mobilization for our Guard
and Reserve Forces.
All of the Services are in the process of doing this. Our
efforts are being applied across the spectrum to guarantee we
are doing everything we can to achieve success. Examples
include aggressively implementing the bonus authorities, making
permanent the new TRICARE authorities, increasing our efforts
in recruiting and retention, aiding our military families, and
ensuring our employers are informed and aware of service
requirements. The legislative proposals we are submitting as
part of the fiscal year 2006 budget will help in these efforts.
Collectively my colleagues and I look forward to your
questions, and again, thank you for this opportunity, Mr.
Chairman.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Hall, General Blum, General
Schultz, and General James follow:]
Prepared Statement by Hon. Thomas F. Hall
introduction
Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, and members of the subcommittee:
thank you for the invitation to offer my perspective on the status and
ability of America's Reserve component forces to meet current and
future operational requirements. I would like to provide information to
assist you in making the critical and difficult decisions you face over
the next several months. This committee has always been very supportive
of our National Guard and Reserve Forces. On behalf of those men and
women, I want to publicly thank you for all your help in providing for
our Reserve components. The Secretary and I are deeply grateful, our
military personnel certainly appreciate it, and we know we can count on
your continued support.
the assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs' mission
The mission of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve
Affairs (ASD/RA), as stated in Title 10 of the United States Code
(U.S.C.), is the overall supervision of all Reserve components' affairs
in the Department of Defense (DOD). I make it a priority to visit with
our Reserve component members in the field, and during those visits I
see America's finest young men and women serving their Nation with
pride and professionalism. Our Guard and Reserve men and women perform,
in a superb fashion, vital national security functions at home and
around the world, and are closely interlocked with the States, cities,
towns, and communities in America. Throughout my travels, I have seen
and listened to the men and women in our Guard and Reserve at hundreds
of sites throughout the world. My staff and I have spent time with
members of the Guard and Reserve, and we have listened carefully to
their comments, concerns, and suggestions. As you already know, the
stress on the force has increased and we are continuing to closely
monitor the impact of that stress on our Guard and Reserve members, on
their families and their employers.
In the 3 years since September 11, 2001, our Reserve components
have performed extremely well in missions ranging from humanitarian
assistance to high intensity combat operations; and in the case of the
National Guard, State missions, too. At the same time, these operations
have presented a number of challenges, particularly for our ground
forces, which carry the weight of our security and stabilization
efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The continuing challenge is to sustain
our military forces for the current operations while meeting our other
worldwide commitments.
Currently, the deployment burden is not shared equally among all
the Reserve components, but focused on those specific capabilities and
skills required for stabilization and security operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan. For example, there are currently high demands in theater
for Military Police (MPs), Civil Affairs and military intelligence
personnel, and engineers. In the Army, large portions of these
communities are currently deployed, recently deployed, or scheduled to
deploy. Further, since certain of these skills reside predominantly in
our Reserve components, we have called upon many of our citizen
soldiers to serve, and they have done so admirably.
purpose of the reserve components
The purpose of the Reserve components has changed. They are no
longer a strategic reserve--a force to be held in reserve to be used
only in the event of a major war. They are an operational reserve that
supports day-to-day defense requirements. They have been an operational
reserve ever since we called them up for Operation Desert Shield.
I appreciate the committee's support last year, when you authorized
a change to the stated purpose of the Reserve components in title 10
U.S.C. This revision more accurately reflects the way we have employed
the Reserve and National Guard over the past decade and how we intend
to utilize them in the future.
reserve component missions today
The Reserve components have performed a variety of non-traditional
missions, as a result of the events of September 11, in support of the
global war on terrorism. One such mission is the training of the Iraqi
and Afghan national armies. The Reserve components are now providing
command and control and advisory support teams in support of the
training that will allow Iraqi and Afghan forces to assume a greater
role in securing their own countries.
In addition, the Reserve component supports missions in the
Balkans, at Guantanamo, in the Sinai, and are found integrated with our
Active Forces throughout the world.
By far the most demanding operations are Operation Enduring Freedom
(OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Reserve components currently
furnish 46 percent of the troops in theater, and will likely furnish 39
percent in the next rotation. The Reserve components will remain an
integral player in homeland defense, in Operation Noble Eagle, and the
National Guard will remain a dual-missioned force under both Titles 10
and 32.
policies
Recognizing that the global war on terrorism will last for a number
of years, the Department established a strategic approach to ensure the
judicious and prudent use of the Reserve components in support of the
war effort. The personnel policy guidance published in September 2001
established the guidelines for using the National Guard and Reserve to
support combatant commander requirements. This policy guidance
specified that:
Reservists should normally be given 30 days notice of
mobilization.
No member of a Reserve component called to involuntary
Active-Duty under the current partial mobilization authority
shall serve on Active-Duty in excess of 24 cumulative months.
(There are no plans to expand the mobilization period to a
policy of 24 consecutive months.)
Reserve members may serve voluntarily for longer
periods of time in accordance with Service policy.
Service Secretaries may release individuals prior to
the completion of the period of service for which ordered based
on operational requirements.
In July 2002, the personnel policy guidance was expanded to require
proactive management of Guard and Reserve members, particularly
focusing on husbanding Reserve component resources and being sensitive
to the quality-of-life of mobilized personnel and the impact on
civilian employers of reservists. This policy guidance contained four
key elements:
1. It reemphasized the maximum period of mobilization.
2. It reminded the Services of the requirement to achieve
equitable treatment, to the extent possible, among members in
the Ready Reserve who are being considered for mobilization--
considering the length and nature of previous service, family
responsibilities, and civilian employment.
3. It required management of individual expectations,
considering morale and retention, by ensuring:
Reserve component members are performing
essential and meaningful tasks.
Reservists are provided as much predictability
as possible.
Orders are issued in a timely manner, with a
goal of 30 days minimum prior to deployment. (Today,
early notifications are now the norm, not the
exception.)
Reservists are provided as much of a ``break''
as possible before involuntarily recalling the members
a second or subsequent time, with a goal of providing a
break of at least 24 months.
4. It required tailoring mobilization and demobilization
decisions by using both Selected Reserve units and individuals,
as well as volunteers, prior to involuntarily calling members
of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), unless precluded because
of critical mission requirements; and maximizing the use of
long-term volunteers when possible to meet individual
augmentation requirements.
It is within this framework that we have managed the Reserve
components. We will continue to assess the impact mobilization and
deployments have on Guard and Reserve members and adjust our policies
as needed to sustain the Reserve components.
In his July 9, 2003, Rebalancing Forces memo, the Secretary of
Defense reiterated the need to promote judicious and prudent use of the
Reserve components through a series of force rebalancing initiatives
that reduce strain on the force. As part of this effort, he directed
the military departments to structure the Active and Reserve Forces to
reduce the need for involuntary mobilizations during the first 15 days
of a rapid response operation, and to plan involuntary mobilizations,
when feasible, to not more than 1 year in every 6 years.
stress on the force
There has been considerable discussion about the stress that the
global war on terrorism is placing on the force--both Active and
Reserve. From my perspective, the dominant question is: what level of
utilization can the Guard and Reserve sustain while still maintaining a
viable Reserve Force?
Answering this question involves a number of issues. But first it
is necessary to quantify how much of the Reserve Force we have used as
of January 2005 to support the global war on terrorism. Then I will
describe the effect that our rate of utilization is having on the
Reserve Force.
The overwhelming majority of Guard and Reserve members want to
serve, and they want to be part of the victory in this war on
terrorism. That is why they joined the Guard or Reserve and that is why
they serve this Nation. But we must also be mindful of the Reserve
service commitment, which includes drills, annual training, and the
requirement to serve on Active-Duty when called. We must do everything
we can to provide reasonable service requirements within the context of
that commitment by using the Reserve Force wisely. We must also be
mindful of the additional responsibilities that National Guard members
bear to their respective State or territory.
Reserve Utilization to Date
There are two ways to look at rates of mobilization for the Guard
and Reserve. The first is to look at all Reserve component members who
have served since September 11, 2001--the cumulative approach.
Under the cumulative approach, a total of just under 430,000 Guard
and Reserve members have been mobilized between September 11, 2001 and
January 31, 2005. That represents just under 37 percent of the
1,160,768 members who have served in the Selected Reserve during this
period. Of the total number of Guard and Reserve members who have been
activated under the current partial mobilization authority, 67,666 (or
5.8 percent of all members who have served in the Selected Reserve
Force since September 11, 2001) have been mobilized more than once. Of
the 67,666, a total of 55,650 (4.8 percent) have been mobilized twice,
9,101 (less than 1 percent) have been mobilized three times and just
over 2,915 (three tenths of 1 percent) have been mobilized more than
three times. No reservist has been involuntarily mobilized for more
than 24 cumulative months.
The other way to look at mobilization is in terms of today's
force--those who are currently serving. Looking at today's force of
840,596 Reserve component members currently serving, as of January
2005, we have mobilized 364,360 Reserve component members, or 43
percent of the force.
Effects of Reserve Utilization
The Department has monitored the effects of Reserve utilization and
stress on the force since 1996. The key factors we track are: (1) end
strength attainment; (2) recruiting results; (3) retention; (4)
attrition; and (5) employer/reservist relations.
End Strength Attainment
From fiscal year 2000 (just before we entered the global war on
terrorism) through 2003, the Reserve components in the aggregate were
at or slightly above 100 percent of their authorized end strength. Last
year the Reserve components in the aggregate were slightly below their
authorized end strength: achieving 98.4 percent.
Recruiting Results
In a very challenging recruiting environment, the DOD Reserve
components achieved 96 percent of their fiscal year 2004 recruiting
objectives. Four of the six DOD Reserve components achieved their
recruiting objectives. The Army National Guard fell short by 7,200
(achieving 87 percent of its recruiting objective), and the Air
National Guard fell short by less than 600 (achieving 94 percent). End
strength results were stronger, because retention was up in the
majority of the components.
Fiscal year 2005 will continue to be a challenging year for Reserve
recruiting--particularly in the Reserve components of the Army. During
the first 4 months of fiscal year 2005, all of the Reserve components
were somewhat below their recruiting objectives, with the exception of
the Marine Corps Reserve, which exceeded its year-to-date recruiting
objective.
Retention
The requirements to support the global war on terrorism--
particularly our commitment in Iraq--have clearly placed a strain on
the Reserve Force. Nonetheless, measuring those who reenlist at the
completion of their current contract, we find that reenlistments were
slightly higher (by about 4,000) in fiscal year 2004 than they were in
fiscal year 2003 up from 94.5 percent of goal in fiscal year 2003 to
95.5 percent of goal in fiscal year 2004. This is a very positive trend
and appears to be holding for the first 4 months of fiscal year 2005.
We are closely monitoring retention, particularly for those members who
have been mobilized and deployed to support operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
Attrition
Measuring all losses, regardless of reason, from the Reserve
components, we find that enlisted attrition remained below established
ceilings throughout fiscal year 2004, also a very positive trend.
Through January 2005, enlisted attrition is on track to remain
below the ceiling established by each Reserve component, except for the
Army National Guard. At the current rate, it appears the Army National
Guard may end the year at 2 to 3 percent above its established ceiling
of 18 percent. The Navy Reserve is 2 percent above its historical
attrition rate thus far, but this is the direct result of programmed
end strength reduction.
Employer/Reservist Relations
We respond to all inquiries we receive from an employer, family
member, or individual guardsmen or reservist. The number of complaints
filed with the Department of Labor under the Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) declined each year from
1995 through 2000. Complaints filed during the first 3 years of the
global war on terrorism have increased, but the ratio (as seen below)
to the total number of duty days of operational support actually
declined. For example, over the last 3 years the duty days performed by
reservists have tripled in relation to the complaints received.
Mitigation Strategies
The Department has employed several strategies to help reduce the
stress on the force. One of the first and most important strategies is
to rebalance the force. The purpose of rebalancing is to fashion the
force to be responsive, producing the capabilities we need today. The
old force was designed to respond to Cold War threats. Rebalancing
improves responsiveness and eases stress on units and individuals by
building up capabilities in high demand units and skills. This is
accomplished by converting capabilities in both the Active and Reserve
components that are in lesser demand, changing lower priority structure
to higher priority structure, which will result in a new Active
component/Reserve component mix. As outlined in the report Rebalancing
Forces: Easing the Stress on the Guard and Reserve, which was published
January 15, 2004, the rebalancing effort also seeks to establish a
limit on involuntary mobilizations to achieve a reasonable and
sustainable rate. The force structure planning goal aims to limit the
involuntary mobilization of individual reservists to 1 year out of
every 6.
The Services are improving their posture with respect to Active
component/Reserve component mix by rebalancing about 50,000 spaces
between fiscal years 2003 and 2005. The Services have planned and
programmed additional rebalancing initiatives for fiscal year 2006
through 2011. The amount and type of rebalancing varies by Service. By
2011 we expect to have rebalanced about 100,000 spaces. The Army, as
the largest and the Service most stressed by the global war on
terrorism, will have the bulk of the additional rebalancing. Easing
stress on the force through rebalancing includes more than just
military-to-military conversions.
A second initiative is the conversion of military spaces to DOD
civilian positions or contractors. The purpose of this initiative is to
move military out of activities not ``military essential.'' The
military resources gained through this initiative are being converted
to high demand/low density units and stressed career fields, which
reduces stress on the force. All the services have an aggressive
program to convert military to civilian over the next few years. We
converted over 8,400 military spaces to civilian manning in fiscal year
2004 and plan to convert over 16,000 additional in fiscal year 2005.
The application of technology is also being used to offset
requirements for military force structure, making more military spaces
available to ease the stress in high demand areas. The U.S. Air Force
just completed a 2-year joint effort where-in Army Guard personnel
furnished security for Air Force installations. This was a very
successful interim step until the Air Force could field technology to
meet their demands for installation security throughout the world.
Third, to ease the burden on some high demand, low density units
and skills, we have employed innovative joint concepts to spread
mission requirements across the entire Reserve Force. For example, we
have Navy and Air Force personnel augmenting ground forces in Iraq.
A fourth area is innovative force management approaches under our
continuum of service construct. This approach maximizes the use of
volunteers, provides greater opportunities for reservists who are able
to contribute more to do so, and offers innovative accession and
affiliation programs to meet specialized skill requirements.
Under the old rules, constraints in end strength and grade
accounting hindered the use of Reserve volunteers. Because reservists
were counted as Active-Duty end strength and were required to compete
for promotion against Active-Duty personnel, reservists were reluctant
to volunteer for extended periods of Active-Duty. We are extremely
grateful to Congress for removing these barriers with a new strength
accounting category that was included in last year's defense
authorization act for reservists performing operational support.
I want to take this opportunity to personally thank the committee
for its support of our continuum of Service initiatives. These policies
and initiatives were developed to preserve the nature of the ``citizen
soldier'' while still allowing us to meet operational requirements.
Predictability and reasonable limits on frequency and duration of
mobilization are key elements of our policies, which are designed to
not only support reservists, but also sustain the support of employers
and families, and ultimately enable the components to meet recruitment
and retention objectives. Similarly, the emphasis on volunteerism is
designed to allow servicemembers who want to shoulder a greater burden
of mobilization to do so.
Adhering to these policy guidelines and program changes will allow
the Reserve components to sustain a utilization rate not to exceed 17
percent per year in the near future. Our policies limit the
mobilization period and limit the frequency with which Reserve
component members may be mobilized (e.g., to no more than 1 year in
every 6 years). The Department must also complete its rebalancing
effort. This will provide reservists with reasonable tour lengths and
give reservists, their families, and their employers a reasonable
expectation of the Reserve service requirements. We believe that with
these parameters, we can sustain a viable Reserve Force and preserve
the citizen-soldier.
Meeting Future Requirements
The Army's initiative to create provisional units--drawing upon
underutilized skills to meet current mission requirements--and the DOD
initiative to draw from skill sets in other components and Services--
the joint solution--are the near-term strategies being employed today.
We will continue to maximize the use of volunteers when possible.
Retiree and IRR members provide a source of volunteers. While
volunteers from members of the Selected Reserve are also an option,
consideration must be given to pending unit deployments and the need
for unit cohesion.
Compared to Operation Desert Storm when we mobilized 30,000 IRR
members, we have not used the IRR in as great a number to support the
global war on terrorism. In the past 3 years, we have mobilized 8,631
IRR members. The further utilization of the IRR remains a viable option
for meeting both near-term and long-term commitments. We must establish
the proper expectations for our Reserve component members, their
families, their employers, and the public in general. We are
undertaking a program to establish those expectations: reasonable
service requirements for the 21st century based on the frequency and
duration of military duty, and predictability to the greatest extent
possible.
For the long term, we will continue to pursue these transformation
strategies energetically. Rebalancing the force will continue, as will
the conversion of military to civilian positions. The Army's
transformation to a modularized structure will significantly help
relieve stress on the force.
Specific examples of rebalancing include:
Forming 18 provisional MP companies from artillery
units;
Converting underused force structure to Civil Affairs,
psychological operations, chemical, Special Operating Forces,
and intelligence; and
Transitioning Reserve Naval Coastal Warfare squadrons
to the Active component.
The overall objective is to have a flexible force capable of
meeting diverse mission requirements.
national guard utilization
As evidenced by the three devastating hurricanes that hit Florida
or the wildfires that blazed through our western states during 2004, or
more recently the flooding in California; the National Guard is a
crucial element in a Governor's response to natural disasters.
Similarly, the National Guard has a prominent role in supporting local
and state authorities in their efforts to manage the consequences of a
domestic terrorist attack.
An important part of this effort is the fielding of 55 Weapons of
Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD CSTs), one in each State,
Territory and the District of Columbia. These 55 teams are to support
our Nation's local first responders as the initial state response in
dealing with domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or
high yield explosives (CBRNE) by identifying the agents/substances,
assessing current and projected consequences, advising on response
measures and assisting with appropriate requests for additional state
support. Each team is comprised of 22 highly-skilled, full-time, well-
trained and equipped Army and Air National guardsmen. To date, the
Secretary of Defense has certified 32 of the 55 congressionally
authorized teams as being operationally ready.
The fight against terrorism and the protection of our homeland will
be protracted endeavors. To that end, many outside policy experts,
independent panels, and analytic studies have advocated expanded roles
for the National Guard in homeland security. Some have even suggested
that the National Guard should be reoriented, reequipped, and retrained
solely for the homeland security mission.
However, there has been no national strategy change to justify the
need to establish a separate role for the National Guard, under which
it only performs homeland security related missions under new statutes
or administrative guidelines. There are already sufficient legal
mechanisms in place that enable state and territorial governors to
employ their National Guard forces in support of local authorities to
meet a wide range of these existing missions. For example, in Section
512 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005, Congress authorized the Secretary of Defense to
provide funds to a Governor to employ National Guard units to conduct
homeland defense activities the Secretary determines to be necessary.
The National Guard is an integral part of the Air Force and Army
Total Force mission capability. Their roles are vital to the survival
of the Nation. Therefore, we believe the National Guard should remain a
dual-missioned military force.
effect on recruiting and retention
The high usage of the Reserve component force has been
characterized as having a negative effect on Reserve component
recruiting and retention. Empirical and anecdotal data do support the
conclusion that the extremely high usage rates will have some negative
effects. But, those same data also show that low levels of usage have
negative effects, too. Our Reserve component members are willing to
serve when called. Also, recent analysis indicates that retention is
high among Reserve component members whose service and mobilization
experiences match their expectations. Our job is to ensure that we use
them prudently and judiciously.
As we have seen in the first 4 months of this year, this will be a
very challenging year for recruiting in the Reserve components. As I
indicated earlier, the Reserve components, with the exception of the
Marine Corps Reserve, got off to a slow start. But we are seeing
improvements with overall attainment of recruiting objective for the
Reserve components increasing from 75 percent in October to 81 percent
at the end of January. The Marine Corps Reserve continues to lead all
components at 101 percent of its goal through January, even though of
the six DOD Reserve components, the Marine Corps Reserve has had the
greatest percent of its force utilized since September 11, 2001, to
support the global war on terrorism. All other Reserve components
except the Army Reserve and Army National Guard have shown great
improvement since the beginning of the fiscal year.
To address the recruiting challenges the Reserve components are
experiencing, they are expanding their recruiter force and using the
new incentive enhancements in last year's authorization act that best
meet their needs. The Army National Guard is working closely with the
various states and territories to rebalance structure as needed to
ensure the states are properly sized to meet their strength objectives.
The Air Reserve components are taking advantage of the downsizing of
the regular Air Force, and they are examining their incentive structure
to ensure that they can attract and retain sufficient manpower
resources. Both the Army Reserve and the Army National Guard are
reallocating significant manpower and other resources to support a
shift in recruiting emphasis on the non-prior Service market.
The Department is formulating legislative proposals to enhance
recruiting further. One area in particular where we need further
assistance is in providing a reasonable incentive to join the Reserves
for servicemembers who have separated but still have a military service
obligation. We have a proposal that will do that by making permanent
the temporary enhanced bonus authority provided in the fiscal year 2005
supplemental. Also, the Advisory Committee on Military Compensation
will be looking at incentive structures and may make suggestions for
improvements that they believe will assist us in meeting our recruiting
and retention objectives. We have a representative that is part of the
staff supporting the commission to ensure the Guard and Reserve
compensation issues are part of the commission's review. Finally, the
Commission on the National Guard and Reserves will review personnel pay
and other forms of compensation as well as other personnel benefits. We
plan to work closely with these entities as they assess the
compensation and benefits package needed to sustain a healthy National
Guard and Reserve.
effect on families
In a recent speech, President Bush stated, ``The time of war is a
time of sacrifice, especially for our military families.'' This
administration is sensitive to the hardships and challenges faced by
Reserve component families, especially when the Reserve component
member is called up and away from home for an extended period of time.
All families play a critical role in retention and reenlistment
decisions.
We have taken an aggressive, Total Force approach to supporting
military families. We recognize that many families of National Guard
and Reserve members do not live close to a military installation where
many of the traditional family support activities are located. To
address this problem, we have established over 700 family support
centers around the country. In fact, the National Guard alone has over
400 family support centers. These family support centers are not
component or Service specific, but they are available to the family of
any servicemember, regardless of component or Service.
For the first time ever, the Department has implemented a 24-hour/7
day a week toll-free family assistance service--Military OneSource. The
support provided through this service is particularly important for
young families or families of reservists who are not familiar with
military service. Military OneSource can assist with referrals for
every day problems such as child care and how to obtain health care.
We are also taking maximum advantage of technology--using the
worldwide web to provide information that will help families cope with
the mobilization and deployment of their spouse, son, daughter,
brother, sister, relative or friend. The website includes a ``Guide to
Reserve Family Member Benefits,'' which is designed to inform family
members about military benefits and entitlements, and a ``Family
Readiness Tool Kit,'' which provides information to assist commanders,
servicemembers, family members and family program managers in preparing
Guard and Reserve members and their families for mobilization,
deployment, redeployment/demobilization and family reunions.
reserve component health benefit enhancements
The Department is moving forward expeditiously to implement recent
benefit enhancements for Reserve component members and their families.
Recent legislative action dramatically improved health benefits. You
have made permanent an earlier TRICARE eligibility (up to 90 days prior
to activation) for certain Reserve component members and the extension
of post-mobilization coverage for 180 days.
In April 2005 the Department will implement the premium-based
``TRICARE Reserve Select'' program, offering medical coverage to
reservists and family members who have participated in contingency
operations since September 11 and who will commit to continued service
in the Selected Reserve. DOD will offer the same coverage available to
Active-Duty families under TRICARE Standard, the fee-for-service option
of TRICARE. This coverage was originally modeled on Blue Cross and Blue
Shield High Option coverage in the Federal Employee Health Benefits
Program (FEHBP), and is comparable to many high-quality commercial
plans. The statute requires that premiums be set at 28 percent of an
amount determined to be reasonable for the coverage. DOD will use the
premiums for Blue Cross and Blue Shield Standard option under the FEHBP
and adjust them to reflect our population.
Taking care of our servicemembers who have been wounded in combat
or may experience adverse psychological effects of armed conflict is
one of our highest priorities. To complement and augment service
programs such as the Army's Disabled Soldiers Support System (DS3), and
the Marine Corps' Marine for Life (M4L), the Office of the Secretary of
Defense has opened the Military Severely Injured Joint Support Center.
This center is a 24/7 operation to serve as a safety net for any
servicemember or family member who has a question or is experiencing a
problem.
effect on employers
The mission of the National Committee for Employer Support of the
Guard and Reserve (ESGR) is directly related to retention of the Guard
and Reserve Force. ESGR's mission is to ``gain and maintain active
support from all public and private employers for the men and women of
the National Guard and Reserve as defined by demonstrated employer
commitment to employee military service.'' Employer support for
employee service in the National Guard and Reserve is an area of
emphasis given the continuing demand the global war on terrorism has
placed on the Nation's Reserve component and the employers who share
this precious manpower resource. We should state up front that the
broad-based, nationwide support for our troops by employers has been
and continues to be superb. We owe all of our employers a debt of
gratitude.
One can grasp a sense of the enormous challenge facing ESGR by
considering the following aggregate numbers, which help us understand a
dynamic and complex human resource environment. There are 7.4 million
employers identified by the U.S. Census Bureau. These employers, from
the senior leadership, to the human resource managers, and down to the
supervisors, must understand, observe, and apply the tenants of the
USERRA. Towards that end, ESGR has established a Customer Service
Center hotline (800-336-4590) to provide information, assistance, and
gather data on issues related to Reserve component employment. We
established the Civilian Employment Information (CEI) database
requiring Reserve component members to register their employers in the
Defense Manpower Data Center. The synergy derived from linking these
databases enables ESGR to measure and manage employment issues.
Misunderstandings between employers and Reserve component members
do arise. ESGR Ombudsmen provide ``third party assistance'' and
informal mediation services to employers and Reserve component members.
Ombudsmen provide assistance in the resolution of employment conflicts
that can result from military service. ESGR has an initiative to train
volunteers in mediation techniques to provide more effective service.
Mediation training will be expanded when additional resources are
available.
Other major initiatives by the ESGR National Staff include:
Establishing a Defense Advisory Board (DAB) for
Employer Support (comprised of senior leadership from the
entire spectrum of the employer community) to provide advice on
issues critical to shared human capital.
Transitioning non-warfighting military billets on ESGR
staff into DOD civilian positions or contractors in accordance
with Secretary of Defense's military transformation initiative.
Employing information technology systems to create
ESGR volunteer manpower efficiencies.
Initiating a scientific survey of employer attitudes
in cooperation with the Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences.
Enhancing strategic relationships with employer
organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National
Federation of Independent Business, Society for Human Resource
Management, and professional associations.
Implementing a follow-up process to promote the
mission of ``gain and maintain'' employer support by
encouraging employers to sign a statement of support, review
their human resource policies, train managers and supervisors,
adopt ``over and above'' policies, and to become advocates.
Building on marketing successes achieved in the Civic
National Employer Outreach program, involved 9 governors, 2
Senators, 19 mayors, 17 Adjutants General, and exposed ESGR to
well over 250,000 employers.
Gaining significant national exposure in traditional
and new media with the singular focus of defining the American
employers' role in national security.
equipment and facility readiness
Equipment Readiness
We're very proud of how the Reserve components are managing the
resources they are given to support the war effort. Great strides have
been made in the procurement of high-mobility multipurpose wheeled
vehicle (HMMWVs), radios, Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTVs),
construction and maintenance equipment, field medical equipment, M4
Carbines, M240B machine guns, and night vision goggles, to name a few.
The Services are looking at the combined effects of high war-time
usage rates of equipment along with the harsh operating environment.
These factors are causing higher operations and sustainment costs. The
Army Depots are working to develop comprehensive repair and rebuild
programs to extend the service life of this equipment, both in theater
and stateside. Maintenance of aging equipment is a priority of the
Department. Over the last 7 years, Depot level funding has averaged 84
percent of the requirement.
We are excited about the future. The Department is focused on the
Reserve component efforts to integrate into a cohesive Total Force with
the Active component. This will result in a Total Force capable of
meeting all requirements through a combination of equipment
redistribution from the Active component, new procurements, and
sustained maintenance.
Military Construction
The Reserve components' military construction programs will provide
new Readiness Centers, Armed Forces Reserve Centers, vehicle
maintenance facilities, organizational maintenance shops, and aircraft
maintenance facilities for Reserve component missions. These new
facilities will continue to address both the new mission and current
mission requirements of the Reserve components in support of military
transformation programs. Future budget requests will also continue the
Department's efforts to improve the quality of life for the Guard and
Reserve, which for the non-mobilized reservist, is not normally housing
and barracks, but rather where they work and train.
Sustainment/Restoration and Modernization
There is a concerted effort by the Department to increase the
sustainment and restoration and modernization funding levels in order
to ensure that facilities achieve their full potential, and deliver
acceptable performance over their expected service lives. Sustainment
provides resources for maintenance and repair activities necessary to
keep the facility inventory in proper working order. Restoration and
modernization provides resources for improving facilities that have
been damaged, need replacement due to excessive age, or need alteration
to replace building components or accommodate new building functions.
The Reserve component facility readiness ratings will continue to
improve as sustainment and restoration and modernization funding is
allocated to the most pressing requirements.
Environmental Program
The installation environmental programs managed by each Reserve
component continue to be a good news story of professionalism and
outstanding efforts to protect, preserve, and enhance the properties
entrusted to the Reserve Forces. All Reserve components are positively
progressing on implementation of a new environmental management system.
Joint Construction Initiatives
The Reserve components are at the forefront of creating innovative
ways to manage scarce military construction (MILCON) dollars. Joint
construction is the practice of building one consolidated facility that
fills the needs of two or more components. We have a Joint Construction
Working Group to assist the Reserve components in identifying,
planning, programming, and budgeting joint construction projects for
future President's budgets. The goal is to secure a commitment by two
or more components to pursue joint construction, identify a lead
component, and prepare a Memorandum of Agreement to begin the process.
Intuitively, most would agree one building costs less than two of
similar size and function, but the benefits extend to reductions in
force protection, sustainment dollars, contracting costs, and the
additional benefits of cross-service cultural understanding. I thank
Congress for their support of this effort, and we will continue to
pursue more joint construction opportunities in the future.
fiscal year 2005 legislative action
Last year's legislative efforts are extremely helpful in managing
the Reserve components. Most notable was the ability to allow members
to be on Active-Duty without the 179-day rule detracting from mission
completion.
Also, the increased bonus and incentive programs will make a
difference for the Reserve components in meeting recruiting and
retention goals in a very challenging environment. The Services are
implementing the enhancements to the Reserve enlistment and
reenlistment bonuses, which doubled and in some cases tripled the
authorized bonus amount and the new Reserve officer accession/
affiliation bonus. These changes will have far-reaching effects on our
ability to recruit and retain members.
The improved involuntary access to Reserve component members for
enhanced training will enable us to train, mobilize, and deploy. This
change provides commanders added flexibility to train for non-
traditional emergent missions. It should also decrease the duration of
operational mobilizations.
We now have a very supportive set of medical benefits. To ease the
transition to the military health care system, reservists and their
eligible dependents are now eligible for early access to TRICARE before
the member actually reporting for Active-Duty. Eligibility begins upon
the member's receipt of orders to Active-Duty in support of a
contingency operation or 90 days, whichever is later. Also, the period
of transitional health care at the completion of the Active-Duty period
is now 180 days--rather than the previous 60 or 120 days, depending on
how many years of service the member had completed. Finally, Congress
has codified the Reserve health care demonstration program the
Department established shortly after September 11, 2001, by waiving the
TRICARE deductible payments and allowing for payment of charges above
the TRICARE authorized billing ceiling (up to 115 percent) for Reserve
component members on Active-Duty (and their family members) for more
than 30 days in support of a contingency operation.
In addition to the above, reservists who serve 90 consecutive days
in support of a contingency operation and their eligible dependents may
now use TRICARE Standard on a cost sharing basis following release from
Active-Duty. One year of eligibility is authorized for each 90
consecutive days of service in support of a contingency operation. This
program may help improve retention since it requires the member to
agree to serve in the Selected Reserve in order to receive the benefit.
conclusion
A mission-ready National Guard and Reserve is a critical element of
our National Security Strategy. The requirement for our Reserve
components has not, and will not lessen. Our Reserve components will
continue with their expanded roles in all facets of the Total Force.
We cannot lose sight of the need to balance their commitment to
country with their commitment to family and civilian employers. That is
why relieving stress on the force is absolutely essential, rebalancing
is so crucial, and ensuring utilization not turn into over-utilization
so critical.
Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify on behalf of
the greatest Guard and Reserve Force this Nation, and the world, has
ever known.
______
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, ARNG
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting
me to update you on our continuing efforts to meet the challenges of
the 21st century national security environment. The National Guard is a
fully integrated member of the Joint Force team, firmly resolved to
play its role in defending freedom here at home and abroad. As the
members of the subcommittee are well aware, the national security
environment has changed dramatically in a very short period of time.
Working in concert with the Army and the Air Force, we are determined
to make the changes necessary in order to meet this rapidly evolving
environment head on.
The state level Joint Force Headquarters represent a comprehensive
structural command and control response to the evolving requirements of
the post-September 11 security environment. Joint Force Headquarters--
State represents the centerpiece of the National Guard effort to
transform in response to a changing security environment. These
headquarters allow for a coordinated response that cuts across local,
State, Federal, and joint military lines in ways that were simply not
possible before. For example, these organizations provide Northern
Command with state-based organizations capable of acting as an
essential interface with local governments; a key capability in meeting
national homeland defense needs.
Though the Joint Force Headquarters concept is still new, it has
already achieved notable successes. These headquarters, acting in their
new role, successfully managed operations supporting both the
Democratic and Republican National Conventions. Joint Force
Headquarters have proven highly successful in facilitating the
interagency, State, and local communication and coordination
requirements associated with Operation Vigilant Guard. They provide the
capability to enhance the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civilian Support
Teams (WMD CSTs) with consequence management capabilities (CERFP). They
provide a ready made headquarters for the coordination of existing
joint National Guard activities including counterdrug operations and
other types of military support to civil authorities. In a very real
sense, the Joint Force Headquarters represent a revolution in the
ability to exercise effective command and control from the national to
the local level.
The Joint Force Headquarters represents the structural
transformation of the Guard at the State and local level. Recent
reforms in the title 32 language represent the statutory changes
essential to allow the Joint Force Headquarters construct to reach its
full potential.
The changes enacted in the statutory language by the 108th Congress
provide a host of improvements that facilitate the use of State
National Guard personnel in meeting the needs of the Homeland Defense
mission. The new authority allows the States to react to a Federal
emergency within hours, rather than days or even weeks. Missions of
interest to national security can be accomplished at the State and
local levels, where flexibility, rapid decision making, and
decentralized execution are the keys to successful mission
accomplishment. Full implementation of the new Title 32 authority will
also represent a significant economy of force, as states can make more
effective use of their own Guard personnel and assets, thus raising the
bar for commitment of Federal troops. Taken together with the Joint
Force Headquarters concept, the reformed Title 32 language represents a
real transformation in Guard capabilities at the State and local
levels, and we are anxiously awaiting implementation guidance.
While emerging missions, changing force structure and equipment
requirements are all pressing, our primary focus remains on the men and
women who make up our organization. The National Guard is working
aggressively to address the growing end strength issues associated with
the continuing stress on the force. We have deployed over 1,400
additional recruiters across the Nation, with an additional 500 to be
deployed by September 30. This will significantly enhance our ability
to attract and process new accessions. At the same time, Congress has
supported the development of greatly enhanced enlistment bonuses, which
will positively affect our strength numbers. Of particular note is the
authority included in the fiscal year 2005 supplemental, which provided
for a variety of enhanced bonuses, including bonus increases for prior
service soldiers contracting for 6 year enlistments. Other bonus
enhancements, including increased bonuses for non-prior service
enlistments and similar incentives for re-enlistments and extensions
will have significant beneficial effects on the Guard's ability to meet
our end strength goals.
We are already beginning to see some signs of a turn-around in our
recruiting and retention numbers, though we have a long way to go in
achieving our year-end strength goals. With the initiatives currently
in place and the continuing support of Congress, the National Guard
will continue to recruit and retain high quality men and women in the
months and years ahead.
Even as we take the necessary steps to meet our strength goals, we
also recognize that soldiers are only as good as the training and
equipment they receive to accomplish their missions. We are working
closely with the Army and Air Force leadership to ensure that our
individual and collective training needs are known and that our
equipment requirements are clearly understood.
Equipping needs for the National Guard fall into three broad
categories, including general equipment modernization requirements for
the Army and Air National Guard, the Army National Guard requirement
for equipment reset, and implementation of the Army Modular Force. Army
National Guard equipment modernization shortfalls for the period fiscal
year 2006-fiscal year 2011 total approximately $14.589 billion and
include high-mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles, small arms, night
vision devices and tactical radios. Air National Guard equipment
shortfalls over the same period total approximately $4.934 billion over
the same period, including F-16 Pods, A-10 Pods, C-130H2 APN Radars,
and the F-15 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System.
Army National Guard participation in the Army Modular Force
initiative represents a critical component in the seamless integration
of the Active and Reserve component force structure. The Army has
included Army National Guard Brigade Combat Team costs in their funding
strategy. This plan outlines $3.0 billion in resourcing requirements
for the Army Modular Force from fiscal year 2005 through fiscal year
2007.
Reset costs associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operations
Enduring Freedom represent another critical resource requirement for
the Army National Guard. At present, $855 million in reset costs were
included in the fiscal year 2005 supplemental request. Reset costs of
approximately $850 million annually will result in a total reset
resourcing requirement of approximately $2.55 billion from fiscal year
2005 through fiscal year 2007.
I am tremendously proud of the men and women of the National Guard
and the superlative job they are doing for this Nation. I am optimistic
that with your help, our organization will emerge from the global war
on terrorism stronger and more vital to the defense of freedom than at
any time on our Nation's history.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Roger C. Schultz, ARNG
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting
me to update you on our continuing efforts to meet the challenges of
the 21st century national security environment. The Army National Guard
is a fully integrated member of the Army, firmly resolved to play its
role in defending freedom here at home and abroad. As the members of
the subcommittee are well aware, the national security environment has
changed dramatically in a very short period of time. Working in concert
with the Army Reserve, the Army, and the other Services, we are
determined to make the changes necessary in order to meet this rapidly
evolving environment head on.
While the requirements of the global war on terrorism are
challenging the Guard in many ways, our primary focus remains on the
men and women who make up our organization. The Army National Guard is
working aggressively to address the growing end strength issues
associated with the continuing stress on the force. We have deployed
over 1,400 additional recruiters across the Nation already this year,
with 500 more to be deployed by the end of the year, which will
significantly enhance our ability to attract and process new
accessions. At the same time, Congress has supported the development of
greatly enhanced enlistment bonuses, which will positively affect our
strength numbers. Of particular note is the authority included in the
fiscal year 2005 supplemental, which provided for a variety of enhanced
bonuses, including bonus increases for prior service soldiers
contracting to serve in the Selected Reserve. Other bonus enhancements,
including increased bonuses for non-prior service enlistments and
similar incentives for re-enlistments and extensions will have
significant beneficial effects on the Guard's ability to meet our end
strength goals.
We are already beginning to see some signs of a turn-around in our
recruiting and retention numbers, though we have a long way to go in
achieving our year-end strength goals. With the initiatives currently
in place and the continuing support of Congress, the Army National
Guard will continue to recruit and retain high quality men and women in
the months and years ahead.
In addition to the numerous recruiting and retention initiatives
for Guard members, we continue to pursue other means of reducing the
financial burdens imposed by the lengthy deployment on some mobilized
Guard personnel. We are in favor of tax credits for small businesses
owned by or hiring Guard soldiers. We are examining a number of other
potential tax incentives for mobilized Guard soldiers, all of which
would serve to alleviate the financial stresses experienced by some
personnel.
While recruiting and retention bonuses and tax incentives address
many of our soldiers' needs, we are also focused on ensuring their
quality-of-life in other ways. We continue to work with the Army to
streamline the pre-deployment mobilization processes. We also want to
ensure that deployments are limited to a total of 24 months of
cumulative service during the course of any mobilization authority. We
are constantly working to reduce stress on families through the use of
family support groups and other initiatives.
Even as we take the necessary steps to meet our strength goals, we
also recognize that soldiers are only as good as the training and
equipment they receive to accomplish their missions. We are working
closely with the Army leadership to ensure that our individual and
collective training needs are known and that our equipment requirements
are clearly understood.
Equipping needs for the Army National Guard fall into three broad
categories, including general equipment modernization needs, equipment
reset requirements, and implementation of the Army Modular Force. The
Army National Guard is working closely with the Army to identify
equipment modernization requirements and setting the priority for
procuring such items as high-mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles,
small arms, night vision devices, tactical radios, and other equipment.
Army National Guard participation in the Army Modular Force
initiative represents a critical component in the seamless integration
of the Active and Reserve component force structure. Implementation of
the Army Modular Force will significantly reduce the stress on our
soldiers and their families by making deployments more predictable. The
Army has included Army National Guard Brigade Combat Team costs in its
funding strategy. This plan outlines $3.0 billion in resourcing
requirements for the Army Modular Force from fiscal year 2005 through
fiscal year 2007.
Reset costs associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operations
Enduring Freedom represent another critical resource requirement for
the Army National Guard. Obtaining this equipment is fundamental to
ensuring our continuing capability to meet our state mission
requirements. At present, $855 million in reset costs were included in
the fiscal year 2005 supplemental request. Reset costs of approximately
$850 million annually will result in a total reset resourcing
requirement of approximately $2.55 billion from fiscal year 2005
through fiscal year 2007.
I am tremendously proud of the men and women of the National Guard
and the superlative job they are doing for this Nation. I am optimistic
that with your help, our organization will emerge from the global war
on terrorism stronger and more vital to the defense of freedom than at
any time in our Nation's history.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Daniel James III, ANG
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee. As we sit here today,
the experienced, dedicated, and well-trained men and women of the Air
National Guard are protecting the skies over our Nation as they have
since 1953 when the Air National Guard began Air Sovereignty Alert. The
citizen-airmen of the Air National Guard are serving at home and around
the globe in both flying and support missions. The Air National Guard
provided almost one-third of the fighter sorties for Operation Enduring
Freedom, and one-third of the fighter and aerial refueling tanker
sorties in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Since fiscal year 2004, Air
National Guard aircrews have supported 75 percent of the tanker sorties
and 60 percent of the airlift sorties worldwide. The Air National Guard
is not providing just aircraft and aircrews. Air National Guard
Expeditionary Combat Support units and individuals are supporting
operations and exercises around the world. Since September 11, more
than two-thirds of our citizen-airmen have participated in operations
worldwide, most as volunteers. Today, Air Guard men and women,
including chaplains, medical personnel, lawyers, finance specialists,
security forces, weather forecasters, communications experts, and
intelligence analysts are in 27 countries from Colombia to Iceland to
Kyrgyzstan to Japan.
It is not just the citizen-airmen that deserve our praise and
thanks. The men and women on the frontline of our Nation's defense
require support from the home-front--their families, employers, and
communities. As the airmen of the Air National Guard answer their
Nation's call, their families are fighting the many small ``battles''
at home so their fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, brothers, and
sisters can focus on their jobs defending the United States. We must
also thank the employers and communities for stepping up to the plate
by providing emotional, spiritual, financial, and employment security
that often exceeds our expectations. My thanks to Congress for
providing the support and the resources to take care of our citizen-
airmen and their families. In the end, it is the families, employers,
communities, and Congress that have made it possible for our Air
National Guard members to concentrate on their number one job,
defending the homeland in-depth.
The Air National Guard is determined to remain ready, reliable,
relevant . . . now and in the future. Air National Guard F-15 and F-16
pilots who are protecting the skies over U.S. do not do it alone. They
require a team of dedicated professionals. Likewise, they need your
help preparing for their future.
The transformation of our force and transition to different
missions will provide the Air Guard with many opportunities to excel;
we will be asking our members to move to new locations, cross-train
into different Air Force specialties, and in some cases, work side-by-
side with their Total Force counterparts. This transformation is
essential for the Air National Guard as we capitalize on the strengths
of the Total Force to relieve some of the stresses that have recently
begun to affect our force. Many of those stresses are the result of a
high operational tempo and a capabilities mix designed to meet the
challenges of the Cold War era. These factors will challenge the key to
the Air National Guard's success--its people.
As the Air National Guard transforms, we will be looking for
personnel transitional benefits to help shape our force and ensure our
people are treated fairly.
Like all the military services, we depend upon well-trained,
dedicated professionals, but the core competency of the Air National
Guard is its experienced people. In 2003, 52 percent of the men and
women entering the Air National Guard had prior military service and
approximately 62 percent of the enlisted members were rated as skill
level 7 or higher. Our ability to recruit and retain this technically
competent, stable work force is essential. While recruiting has trended
downward, specifically in non-prior service airmen, I'm proud to say
that the retention of our members remains the best of all the Services
and components. How well we assume new missions and continue to support
both the Air and Space Expeditionary Force and Homeland Defense is
directly related to our achieving recruiting and retention goals
through fiscal year 2006.
Heading into fiscal year 2006, the Air Guard needs to continue to
keep stride with all Services in the very competitive recruiting
market. As we begin to transform our force, we will be competing for
people from the same demographic pool. There are several programs that
I feel would greatly improve the Air National Guard's ability to
recruit and retain quality people. First, the 2005 National Defense
Authorization Act increased the reenlistment and prior service bonus
amounts. We would like to continue to utilize these incentives but
currently have a $27 million shortfall for fiscal year 2006. Fully
funding this program would definitely pay dividends in the long term.
Second, increased funding for marketing and advertising is
considered imperative for recruiting of non-prior service personnel and
would include establishing a visible presence in our communities
through storefront recruiting offices and targeted advertising. We have
a $40.7 million in marketing and advertising that we consider
imperative in the recruiting of non-prior service personal. This figure
includes $3 million to establish a visible presence in our communities
through storefront recruiting offices and $37 million in targeted
advertising.
Our people are and will remain our most valuable asset, but the
future requires that we also transform our organizations and modernize
our equipment. As we begin to transform ourselves through the addition
of different missions and participation in the Total Force, we will
continue to maintain a majority of the missions that we have today.
The men and women of the Air National Guard understand these 21st
century security challenges require a 21st century Air National Guard.
We will continue to be an integral part of the Air Force's Air & Space
Expeditionary Force and Homeland Defense teams. Our partnership with
our Active and Reserve counterparts, and their partnership with us,
aligns our forces to participate in some of the leading edge missions.
Several initiatives are underway, and we have already seen positive
results and increased capability from previous Total Force initiatives.
Our men and women understand the need for new transformational
organizational structures such as the association of the 192nd Fighter
Wing of the Virginia National Guard with the Active component's 1st
Fighter Wing at Langley Air Force Base forming the first operational F/
A-22 wing. The door also swings the other way as we embark on a test of
``Community Basing'' with the Vermont Air National Guard hosting
Active-Duty maintenance personnel thus capitalizing upon the Air
National Guard's core competency of experience. Additionally, the Air
National Guard is transforming by embracing new missions such as Global
Hawk, space, intelligence operations, and Predator.
We realize major changes are in store for our Air National Guard
forces. We feel, however, the key to our support to the warfighter is
to maintain proportionality within many of the current and emerging
mission areas. We will continue to seek a capabilities mix mirroring
the Active Air Force to ensure the Air Guard maintains a proportional
presence across the full spectrum of Air Force missions.
Proportionality also allows us to capture highly-technical skills from
the Active Force that are still desperately needed by the combatant
commanders and continuing to provide a surge capability across all
mission areas.
Finally, I wish to address the Air National Guard's role in our
Nation's top priority mission--homeland defense. Our approach is ``One
System--Two Missions.'' Be it aircraft, expeditionary medical support,
hazardous material response, disaster preparedness, chemical and
biological detection equipment, or a myriad of other capabilities
resident in the Air and Space Expeditionary Forces of the Air National
Guard.
To quote President Lincoln, ``The occasion is piled high with
difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so
we must think anew and act anew.'' How well we address today the
challenges of recruiting, retention, transformation, and modernization
will affect our capability to defend our homeland tomorrow.
Thank you.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you very
much.
We have just started the first of three votes, and Senator
Nelson, how would you like to do this? Do you just want to
press on and do this in a staggered way, you stay, I stay, or
go together?
Senator Ben Nelson. I do not know how it will work when you
have three.
Senator Graham. It is going to be tough, is it not? Well,
why do we not just go ahead and start, and we will come back
when the votes are over, but we will try to do as much as we
can now. Would you like to go first?
Senator Ben Nelson. No, thank you.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I appreciate all
of you coming today.
It seems to me there are three things that every military
worries about: recruiting, retention, and readiness. To define
the problem for the Nation, as Senator Nelson indicated, it is
my understanding that the utilization rates for the Guard and
Reserve are at an all-time high since World War II. The nature
of the war on terrorism has tapped into the Guard and Reserve
Force in a way that the Cold War did not. The C-130 has always
been an important platform, but in the war on terrorism, it is
the air taxi for Afghanistan and Iraq, and it has been used
abundantly. Every time I have been there, I have been on about
15 or 16 flights, and all the crews involved have been Guard or
Reserve, except one.
The skill sets of the Guard and Reserve, as I understand
it, are very much in demand when it comes to civil affairs,
some medical specialists. Military police (MPs) are worth their
weight in gold, because they have unique abilities.
So given that understanding, that 40 percent of the people
in the theater today are Guard and reservists and that their
skills and their experience is needed to fight to win this war
on terrorism, let us look at the recruiting picture, if we may.
The numbers that have been provided to the subcommittee
show a fairly significant shortfall here in the last couple of
months about meeting our recruiting goals. If you would, as a
panel, starting with General Blum, give us your assessment of
the recruiting problem, whether it is chronic or acute, and
what strategies we have to confront it.
General Blum. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for the
opportunity to answer that question. I will frame it, and then
General Schultz wants to provide a little more detail on the
Army side. Then General James, if you would pick it up on the
Air Guard side.
Overall, the National Guard recruiting is a function of two
things: input of new people and the ability to retain your
experienced people. Let me start with retention first.
The ability to retain our experienced people is
extraordinary and remarkable and counter-intuitive to what is
going on in the world today. We are using the Guard at an
unprecedented rate for unprecedented operations both overseas
and here at home. The length and frequency that we are calling
on our Guard is unmatched in anything in our Nation's history,
particularly since the All-Volunteer Force about 32 years ago
was instituted.
So the All-Volunteer Force appears to be withstanding the
acid test in the crucible of war in a sustained conflict for
the first time in our Nation's history with an All-Volunteer
Force. We are keeping our experienced people at a higher rate
today than we did prior to September 11, which is, as I say,
remarkable and counter-intuitive. You would probably guess it
would be the other way around.
The other side of the personnel picture is how are we doing
in attracting people into our formations in the Army and Air
Guard that have never served before. With new authorities and
with the new resources that Congress and the Senate have
provided to the National Guard as recently as January, we are
starting to see some significant improvement in our ability to
recruit and attract non-prior service people to a better degree
than we have seen in the immediate past.
For instance, it is true we are 15,000 below where I would
like to be in the Army National Guard, but we are right on
target in the Air National Guard, or so close that it is
statistically insignificant. On any given day, we are slightly
above goal or slightly below goal, but it is only by several
hundred, which in a big organization like that is
insignificant.
The Army National Guard is about 96 percent of where we
need our end strength. It is roughly 332,000 and change as of
this morning. Last month, the month of March, we had our best
recruiting month that we have had in the last 14 months, and
that is significant because of the change in policy, the change
of statute, that the United States Congress allowed, and the
resources you gave us for the bonuses and increasing the
numbers of recruiters. While all of those recruiters are not
trained and the effects of all of those recruiters have not yet
been felt, we recruited 3,800 people in February, and that was
higher than the month before that, and in March, we did 5,200,
so we are on the road to recovery.
If we continue at this rate, we can reestablish our end
strength. I do not think it will happen between now and the end
of this fiscal year. It could, but it is not likely. It would
probably take a little bit longer than that because we were a
little slow, frankly, in recognizing the problem and taking the
corrective action, getting the authorities and resources to
address the problem. I think we are substantially there now.
There are 10 authorities and resourcing packages that I
have asked Congress for, on behalf of the Army and the Air
National Guard of the United States, that was a bottom-up feed
from all of the adjutants general out in the field, and this is
the top 10 list that they think they need to achieve the end
strength the Nation expects us to have. That will be submitted
for your consideration and hopefully, your support.
I hope that gets to the core of your question, and General
Schultz and General James will provide you any detail you might
want beyond that.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
General Schultz. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your
opening comments about my service. I want you to know I serve
with a soldier from South Carolina, Command Sergeant Major
Frank Lever. He is with us today, and is a first-rate soldier,
to be sure.
Senator Graham. I am very proud of it.
General Schultz. The team back home grows first-rate
soldiers.
Mr. Chairman, General Blum has outlined the condition we
find ourselves in today. I want you to know I am not proud to
tell you we are missing our recruiting objectives, as he has
outlined. For us, the challenge is the non-prior service
category. We are at 68 percent of our recruiting objectives to
date. That is in this fiscal year for our non-prior service
soldiers.
We need a little more flexibility. We have moved our
bonuses this year from $8,000 to $10,000 as a way of increasing
the opportunities for young soldiers to join. So the non-prior
service population is in need of some consideration for an
additional bonus.
Senator Graham. Did you say 68 percent?
General Schultz. 68 percent is our current performance
against a goal that we have established so far this year.
I do need to reinforce a point General Blum made, and that
is that the incentives are working. We are almost 3 to 1,
comparing this year's retention against last year's
reenlistment rate. That is a significant change in the
population. Frankly, Mr. Chairman, it is that ability to
influence soldiers who are considering staying or not staying
that is pacing us, at least with the end strength that we have
today.
Now, I must also say that turnover is going to be higher
before we close out this fiscal year. There is a population of
soldiers that are now coming home from Afghanistan and Iraq and
duty around the world that is going to leave in higher
percentages than we have experienced. Today we are just short
of 20 percent turnover rate. Of course, that is not alarming,
but if figures go much higher than that, 25 percent or even
higher, then that will put additional pressure on the
recruiting.
Senator Graham. What is it in a non-wartime environment?
General Schultz. 18 percent is our objective in a typical
year.
Senator Graham. So you are at 20 now?
General Schultz. It is 20. It is not alarming yet, but we
are watching this pretty carefully.
Senator Graham. We have to watch it.
General Schultz. Unfortunately, it is going in the
direction that we would not necessarily hope for.
So overall retention, Mr. Chairman, is right at 100
percent. Non-prior service soldiers, just short of our
objective, and the prior servicemembers are being retained at
higher than 100 percent of our population goal.
So for us the task, Mr. Chairman, is recruiting. We just
need to access more soldiers.
You know the reality. Soldiers join the Guard today. They
are anticipating being called to Active-Duty, and so we are
enlisting a different volunteer, clearly.
That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham. Well, thank you. We have 7 minutes left. If
you could give us a couple minutes, General James, and
Secretary Hall, when we come back, you can weigh in here on the
recruiting problems that we face.
I think the best thing for Senator Nelson and I to do is to
go vote. We have three votes. We will come back as quickly as
we can. We will vote early on the third vote. Is that okay with
you, sir?
Senator Ben Nelson. Yes.
General James. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
for the opportunity to speak before the committee.
As General Blum outlined, our challenge also is in
recruiting, but it is not as severe as some of the other
Reserve components. However, we take it very seriously, and
because of that, we have committed some $17 million in
resources to the bonuses that you and the members of the Senate
committee authorized and also appropriated some funds for. I
would encourage your colleagues in the House to do the same
thing; i.e., appropriate funds to go with the authorization for
bonuses. We have taken that out of hide, retroactive to
October, so that we can capture some of those people who did
not join us then and encourage them to come and join us.
Right now, the deficit is a little higher than what General
Blum said. We are about 400 people short of where we were the
same time last year.
One of the things we have done, in addition to the bonuses,
is we have asked our recruiters--and 15 of the 88 flying units
have moved the recruiting locations from on the installations
to what we call storefront locations, and we have committed
some $3 million to what we call storefronts. You have seen them
probably in some of the malls and some of the commercial sites
throughout the community, because we want more visibility with
it.
The good news is in fact that our retention is higher than
goal. We are almost a percentage point higher than goal. It
will not offset the recruiting challenges, but we think that we
are going to be very close, as General Blum mentioned.
Senator Graham. Well, thank you.
With that in mind, I think we will now recess and come back
after the last vote. Thank you for your testimony thus far.
[Recess from 2:00 p.m. to 2:35 p.m.]
Thank you all for your indulgence. I think we got this
series of votes out of the way. The hearing will come to order.
Secretary Hall, if you would give us your thoughts about
our recruiting situation and what we can do to help.
Mr. Hall. I will be very short in my remarks. I would echo
what the chiefs have told you.
Bonuses make a difference, and I thank you, the committee,
and Congress for the $15,000 bonus last year. Just to give you
an example, I recently was in the AOR and I met with the
retention team for the evening. They have been put there by the
Services on site. Last year at the 4-month mark, they had
reenlisted 600 people for the entire year. At that point this
year, they had doubled it to 1,200 people and almost all of
them took the lump sum, tax-free bonus, and it makes a big
difference.
I think there are a number of initiatives that we have
which we need to continue to expand. In general, I do not like
the idea of restricting bonuses to a certain period of time. I
would like to expand that window of opportunity, because we
need those mid-grade people from 14 to 16 years. We need to
expand the time in which you can take advantage of the bonuses.
The critical skills bonus, which is available for the
Active-Duty, is not available for the Guard and Reserve. We
have an initiative to look at that.
The affiliation bonus. Frankly, I think everyone would
agree that $50 a month for affiliation over a period of time
for $2,400 total is a bit archaic. We need to expand that.
Perhaps whether it is $10,000 or $15,000 to match with the
other bonus, we just need to look at those opportunities.
People will always be grateful for the Montgomery GI Bill
(MGIB) (Sonny Montgomery's name), but I think we need to look
at the parts of that which have atrophied somewhat and fix
them.
In the basic housing allowance (BAH) and in others, I think
we need to make sure that our Guard and Reserve are consistent
with our Active-Duty bonuses. I think last year we had over 50
provisions changed in the law for the Guard and Reserve, and
those are making a difference.
You did ask one question I'd like to respond to.
Historically, the attrition rate overall for all components
averages about 18 percent. So the General was talking about
around 20 percent, but the average is 18. We are averaging
slightly below that for all the components now at about 17.5 to
18 percent. So it is hanging in there.
Senator Graham. General Schultz, is the 20 percent
primarily people coming back from the theater?
General Schultz. That is our overall attrition rate for the
Guard. Some have not deployed, and some have returned from
Active-Duty.
Senator Graham. Well, thank you. These are all very good
ideas. I am sold on the idea that flexibility and money matter,
and you are better able to determine what incentives should be
offered in terms of dollars, than any of us up here. I think
the subcommittee will be very open-minded to making it
flexible.
I want to share a couple of thoughts with you and see what
you think. I think we have a chronic problem more than an acute
problem. If you join the Guard or Reserves today, as our
lieutenant and our specialist will attest to, this is dangerous
duty. The likelihood of you being in a war environment is real,
and so our retention numbers are heartening. I think it shows
you that Americans who sign up to serve their country feel a
sense of reward for doing so and want to stay in.
But there is another dynamic with certain specialties where
there is over-utilization. The first time is a noble thing. The
second time, the third time, and the fourth time is what I
worry about.
What I look at is a scenario of the worst case. What if we
are in Iraq 2 years from now with 100,000-plus troops? What if
35, 30, or 40 percent of the troop level is Guard and Reserve?
In that kind of scenario, what can we do to get ahead of the
problem?
What I would encourage you to do is to understand that the
benefit packages have to be beyond money, because you do
recruit soldiers and airmen, but you retain families. I think
that is very true of the Guard and Reserves.
The reason I have offered the TRICARE amendment that would
allow people to sign up for TRICARE in the Guard and Reserve
and pay a premium like other Federal employees is it is very
hard for me to justify a program to a group of Americans who
are really going in harm's way and making sacrifices. They are
the only group I know of that serve the Federal Government in a
part-time capacity that is ineligible for any form of
Government health care. One, I think that is just wrong on its
face.
Two, if we made health care available where you would pay a
premium, I do believe it would help the employer community. It
would also really help recruiting and retention because I hear
enough anecdotal stories about money matters, but health care
and security in health care matters a lot to Americans.
What percentage of the Guard or Reserve is unable to be
deployed in a timely fashion or in a normal fashion because of
health care problems? Does anyone know?
General Schultz. I will start with the Army Guard, Mr.
Chairman. We have about 10 percent of our soldiers from the
time of initial notification until deployment. It ranges in the
10 percent range, 8 to 10 percent of our members. Some are
injured during the training process, and so it is not all
necessarily a medical condition. There is a percentage of our
soldiers who do not have health care coverage, and that is
about 30 percent on estimate now across our formations.
I will tell you this, based on talking with family members
very recently. I said just give me one thing that I can work on
that would help you more than anything else, and they all
answered health care in a second.
Senator Graham. I think that is true of the population as a
whole. I appreciate those candid comments.
Secretary Hall or General Blum, would you like to comment?
General Blum. Mr. Chairman, there are two things I would
like to underscore before you move beyond where you are,
because I think you are at a very critical point.
Intentions are great. Programs are even better. Benefits
are absolutely, I think, welcomed and being asked for by the
rank and file. But what I think we need some assistance with,
even with the existing TRICARE program we have, is the
acceptance of TRICARE and elimination of the inconsistencies.
We are giving a benefit to soldiers that is well earned and
well deserved today, but they cannot utilize it because
providers will not accept TRICARE. To me, to not accept a
Government-sponsored health care system in a time of war for a
family member or a servicemember is a shame. There should be
some statutory rigor put into that. Otherwise, you are giving
them a check with no money behind it, or you are giving them an
empty box as a gift.
Senator Graham. Well said, and I assure you the committee
will try to follow your counsel and advice there.
Do you agree with General Schultz that a more robust health
care benefit for Guard and Reserve personnel would be helpful
in your endeavors?
General Blum. In every town hall meeting that I have in the
United States, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Kosovo, Guantanamo or the
Sinai, I hear one thing time after time after time from the
rank and file, and you have the issue.
Senator Graham. That is exactly what I hear.
Now, I want to congratulate the Department, Secretary Hall.
You all have done a good job. Last year we passed a compromise,
if you recall that. For Active-Duty for 90 days, from September
11 forward, in any capacity, you and your family were eligible
for a year of TRICARE. You had to pay a premium. This is
reflected in the brochure that I have been handed that you are
passing out among the troops. I think it is an excellent
brochure about what benefits are available, and I want to
compliment the Department on getting the word out to our Guard
and reservists, who have been deployed on Active-Duty.
Well, that was very helpful. Secretary Hall, would you like
to add anything?
Mr. Hall. May I make one comment on it? I echo what General
Blum says. I talked to about 2,000 troops in theater when I was
there, and continuity of health care is most important. When
you transition from that civilian policy to TRICARE, if you
take Medicare as a doctor, you ought to also take TRICARE. We
have to move on that. That is their first gripe.
The second is they do view this as a good bridge. I think
we need to use the word ``bridge'' because up to 8 years of
coverage if you serve for 2 full years is a bridge. Having 90
days prior to deployment and, 6 months after, it is up to 8
years. We are implementing that.
I do not disagree with you. We just have a different
perspective on how we are implementing this right now. I think
we need to see how it works, see how it is received by the
Guard and Reserve, and I think for right now it is enough.
Maybe we have a different perspective on that, but that is what
I hear from the troops that I talk to.
Senator Graham. I understand where the Department is, and I
do appreciate your willingness to work with us. We are trying
to get a compromise within the committee here.
Let me end this part of the discussion with my view of
where this helps.
If 30 or 25 percent of your potential fighting force is
uninsured without health care and every other Federal employee
who does a part-time job is eligible, I think that is
unacceptable. I do not think it is good military practice,
because when you call people from this pool, I have heard as
high as 20 percent cannot go to the fight. I guess numbers are
the way we want them to be sometimes, but let us say it is 8 or
10 percent. The enemy has not fired a shot, and 10 percent of
our force is unable to go to the fight. So in terms of costs, I
think we are being penny wise and pound foolish.
We will continue that debate. I promise you, Secretary
Hall, that we will robustly pursue the bonus programs that you
would like and that we will continue to have this healthy
discussion about expanding TRICARE to all guardsmen and
reservists.
General Schultz. Mr. Chairman, if I could make one comment
on the dental benefit?
Senator Graham. Please.
General Schultz. We need your okay to spend Federal money
earlier than we currently do, and I am talking now about units
on alert status and then later mobilized. We have money
available but cannot spend it because we do not have the
authority to spend it. So a slight clause I think in the rules
would allow us to appropriately spend Federal money earlier,
and that would reduce the number of those non-deployable
soldiers in the mobilization process.
Senator Graham. Outstanding. One of the big problems for
people is dental care because a lot of civilian plans do not
have dental care. So we are going to try to have a fit force.
We are going to try to have a force that has what they need
because they have earned everything. We are asking people to
pay a premium, but if we gave them TRICARE, that would not be
inappropriate. I am not going to go down that road. We are
going to have a premium requirement like other Federal
employees.
Now, when it comes to the recruiting problem, what
anecdotal stories, if any, do you hear about non-prior service
people? What is causing this drop?
General Blum. Well, sir, it is not anecdotal. It is
systemic. We are blessed with a strong economy in this country
right now. That is good, particularly since our enemies are
making that their number one target. So we are winning the war
in that we have a strong economy while our adversaries are
trying to weaken our economy. But that also exacerbates our
problem competing for the talent pool that is out there in our
young men and women. It gives them some other options, more
options than when we have a weak economy. I am not advocating
that we should have a weak economy.
I think what we need to do is exactly what we have done. We
have made the incentives and the bonuses and the authorities
and the flexibility in policies such that we can compete more
favorably with the non-prior service market than we were able
to do in the past. Non-prior servicemembers are people that we
do not know are going to make soldiers, sailors, airmen, and
marines. We know they made good students. We know they got
through high school or college or junior college, and we know
they are drug-free and they are physically fit and they want to
join. That is the other part of it, but we do not know whether
they will get through service, and when you recruit young
people in that category, you not only have to recruit them,
just like you said earlier, you retain the family. You reenlist
the family. When you are now bringing in a non-prior service
person, they are significantly influenced by what the country
thinks of the value of the service that they are about to
enter, what they think of the organization they are about to
enter, what the views of the adult influencers, teachers,
preachers, parents are.
As long as the American people are behind the American
soldier--and I say soldier meaning citizen-soldier and airman,
and I also mean it about the same people who are sitting behind
me, the Marine Corps, the Coast Guard, the Navy, and the Air
Force Reserve. As long as they look at service to the Nation
with the high regard they do now, I am very optimistic that we
will be able to sustain the All-Volunteer Force at the level it
needs to be defend this Nation both here at home and abroad
indefinitely. This is so even if we find ourselves in the worst
case scenario that you described where I have 100,000 national
guardsmen deployed 2 years from now somewhere for a long period
of time.
If we shorten the tours--and the Armed Forces are looking
at that--and if they give us some flexibility in the tour
length and the separation from employers and families, and we
have a more predictable model on dwell time or recovery time
between deployments, it would really help. I think all of these
things are very favorable initiatives to ensure that the young
men and women will continue to answer the call to the colors.
I might add that the successes we have had happened while
two other things happened. Our nonparticipation rate is at an
all-time historical low, less than 2 percent nationally. When
you talk about the National Guard, there is a paradigm shift of
great magnitude. It means that the numbers out there are
reliable, and that the numbers represent deployable, real
people. That is the first thing, and it is a very important
thing.
The other thing is that the young men and women that are
joining our ranks today know clearly why they are coming in and
that there is a high probability that they will be deployed. So
there is truth-in-lending and no false advertising. Our
recruiting plans have been adjusted to focus on service to the
Nation and that is what these young men and women are coming in
to do.
That to me speaks volumes about the youth of America that
you do not often hear about. Anecdotally, we hear it the other
way. I think we have a lot to be very proud of because the
young men and women of this Nation seem to be responding for
the right reasons and the right incentives.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
What your Active-Duty counterparts told us was that the big
problem they see, in terms of the recruiting shortfall for the
Active ranks, is selling family members, selling parents, and
selling grandparents. The economy is also a factor, but the
view that this war has lasted longer than people expected and
is deadlier than people thought has definitely penetrated the
recruiting pool family structure. Do you see or hear any of
that feedback?
Mr. Hall. A critical element to the prior service people
enlisting, which you already discussed, for those with critical
skills is that they feel they are going to go right back into
theater and be used. It is essential that the Department
proceed with its rebalancing of about 120,000 billets added to
these critical skills.
We are halfway there, and we are going to get to that
120,000. At the same time, we need to civilianize a number of
billets in which we have troopers, so we can build a larger
pool to draw from in those critical skills.
The other element, they tell me, is predictability, and
that is predictability for the employer, for the family, and
for the individual. We have to develop a model that says we are
going to need you here once every 5 years or every 6 years and
try to develop a predictability model as best as we can. We
have erased the word ``weekend warrior.'' There is no such
thing as a weekend warrior any longer.
Senator Graham. I think that has been mentally erased by
the country.
Mr. Hall. What I get out there is you are now recruiting
the families. You are not recruiting individuals. Every
recruiter needs to understand how we are proceeding. All of
those things, outside of bonuses, are going to affect the
attitude of that young man or woman coming into the Service.
Senator Graham. We have waived the high school requirement
for Army Guard. Is that correct?
General Blum. No, sir. We have not lowered our quality
standards at all.
Senator Graham. Have the Active Forces?
General Blum. No, sir. The Chief of Staff of the Army,
General Schultz, General Helmly, and I are pretty solid in that
we want to keep the quality of the force. The type of
soldiering that is being done right now is Ph.D level work.
That young man or woman has to be a combat soldier in a
moment's notice, and in the next minute, he or she may be a
goodwill ambassador or a social worker. There has to be some
thinking going on inside that helmet.
Senator Graham. So that has not been waived.
Mr. Hall. There is a current proposal to look at people who
are not high school graduates but have the mental wherewithal
to be good soldiers, to bring in a certain amount of them.
Senator Graham. Are we thinking about waiving it?
Mr. Hall. We are.
Senator Graham. Do you think we should waive it, General
Blum?
General Blum. If they have a GED, sir, to me that is a
completion of high school education, as far as I am concerned.
I do not think we want to lower the quality standards.
Senator Graham. What about you, General Schultz?
General Schultz. I agree with General Blum.
Senator Graham. General James?
General James. We have not given any consideration to
lowering the standards.
Senator Graham. Okay. The 24-month cap, which is very
popular, goes into what you are talking about, predictability.
But let us talk about it in terms of the fight. How does
putting a 24-month cap on service in theater affect your
readiness?
Mr. Hall. Are you talking about the cumulative versus
consecutive? The current policy is when you have been mobilized
under this current contingency for 24 cumulative months, then
your clock is through. You do not serve again. What I can tell
you is that it very important to people. If we had a 24-month
consecutive policy in which you could go off duty and then
bring you for 24 more months, and go off duty again, it would
be, a death knell for our employers and our people. The
cumulative rule now that we are under in this contingency,
under which Reserves will not be remobilized is something I
strongly support, although the law says consecutive.
Senator Graham. That is very important to know, but how
does that affect the pool? How does that affect readiness if
you take them out of the fight, if they are nondeployable after
24 months? Do we have people to go to?
Mr. Hall. Well, one consideration is we normally have a
turnover of 17 to 20 percent. So theoretically in 5 or 6 years,
you have a new force. They are not the same people out there.
If you have a model which you use at that time, you are
refreshing your force by new recruits.
General Blum. Mr. Chairman, if you change what exists now
with the 24 months cumulative service, I withdraw everything I
said about being able to maintain an All-Volunteer Force.
Senator Graham. That is important.
General Blum. That is how significant I think it is.
Number two, I think it is a very positive factor in
pressuring the Services, that are otherwise reluctant to do the
rebalancing they need to do, to make sure that they can make
that force generation model work. Without that kind of positive
pressure, I do not think we will see the kind of change that
the Secretary advocates, and I totally support what needs to be
done.
General Schultz. I am with General Blum on that topic, Mr.
Chairman. If we change the policy now--and it has been in place
now for years--we are breaking faith with the soldiers in the
ranks.
Senator Graham. I do not think anybody wants to. I just
wanted to know. See, you have a recruiting problem. You are
having at least a sign of a turnover problem beyond 18 percent,
and if you have this policy locked down at 24 months you are
out of the fight. I wonder how all this plays over time. I
understand how important it is to you now, and I would never
suggest we would change it.
Mr. Hall. Interestingly enough, there is no prohibition
beyond 24 months if you want to volunteer. We have a number of
young men and women who want to volunteer and ask to stay
beyond 24 months. So we do not prohibit that at all.
Senator Graham. At this time, I would turn it over to
Senator Nelson.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
gentlemen, for being here today.
First I must introduce Lieutenant Colonel Russell Ponder
and embarrass him. He was a military fellow in our office, and
I know he is an aide to General James. I am sure he is doing
the same great work for you that he did for us. It is good to
have you here.
General James. I have not seen him since he left your
office. [Laughter.]
Senator Ben Nelson. General Blum and General Shultz, the
Armed Forces, but particularly the Army, have demonstrated new
ideas in command and control of forces involved with homeland
security missions. The Florida hurricanes and political
conventions are examples where National Guard senior officers
directed title 32 and title 10 forces to provide recovery and
security operations. From everything that I have heard from all
sources, these operations were unqualified successes. They
demonstrated the ability of both Active and Reserve component
forces under the National Guard commander with knowledge of the
area to operate with unity of purpose.
Do you see any continued or expanded use of the title 32
forces in the support of homeland security missions? General
Blum, let's start with you.
General Blum. Yes, sir. Senator Nelson, as a former
Governor, you know how important that really is. People say,
who is in charge? If it is happening in a State or territory,
the Governor is in charge. When? Always. Under what
circumstances? Every circumstance. That is not well understood
in the Pentagon, but it is starting to be understood.
The National Defense Authorization Act put into statute, at
the request of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and
because of the House and the Senate's good cooperative work
together, a law that allows National Guard Forces to be
operationally employed when vetted, when it is a legitimate
defense need, and when decided by the Secretary of Defense or
the President, that it is in the interest of the Nation, to be
left in operational status in title 32 under the command and
control of the Governors.
Prior to this job, I was the Chief of Staff of the United
States Northern Command. That is exactly the right way and the
tool that Admiral Keating now needs as the combatant commander
of Northern Command to defend this Nation when we have to use
military forces or capabilities to either do homeland defense
operations or to support the homeland security operations where
we are supporting a lead State or Federal agency. It gives
great flexibility to the President and the Secretary of
Defense. It allows us to defend the Nation without tearing up
the Constitution.
I think you can tell that I strongly support this. So does
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense,
Secretary McHale, and frankly, so does Secretary Rumsfeld,
because he is the one who actually said, please, let us get
this into law so it is not so ambiguous each and every time we
need to do it.
Senator Ben Nelson. Well, I assume that since the Secretary
of Defense supports it, Secretary Hall supports it, General
Schultz supports it, as does everybody else.
Mr. Hall. For the record, I strongly support it, Senator.
[Laughter.]
Senator Ben Nelson. That is duly noted.
Are there other areas where we might be able to find
similar uses that might occur to you?
General Blum. Yes, sir, I think so. I think it is starting
to have traction or acceptance by some senior leaders in the
Air Force, the Army, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. General
Myers and General Pace, in particular, see some great utility
in this. The Chief of Staffs of both the Air Force and the Army
actually see some very flexible utility in this, but it only
would be used when we are talking about operations within the
United States of America, its States or its territories or the
District of Columbia. It does not apply overseas nor should it.
Senator Ben Nelson. Yes, that is a different situation.
Thank you.
Secretary Hall, at the current time of increased
deployment, U.S. National Guard and Reserve troops being
deployed at the rate they are around the world, I would imagine
that small to mid-sized businesses are beginning to be impacted
by the unpredictable nature of our mobilization models. Of
course, to that end, I think we are trying to find a way to
deal with that.
But up until now, how has the military reached out to the
business community and explained the evolving mission of the
Guard and Reserve and the potential impact on business down the
road? Has the Department of Defense, for example, developed
strategies that may enhance the predictability of mobilizations
and demobilizations, and has that strategy been communicated to
the employer community to get their input? In many respects
they are the customers, and we want to know whether what we are
doing will really serve their purpose, as well as what we think
will serve our purpose.
Mr. Hall. I spend most of my time doing exactly that,
meeting with groups throughout the country. I was just in
Florida and met with a large economic group, the Economic
Council of Florida, and I met with Governor Bush. Anytime I go
into a State, I ask the following. I would like to meet with
the Adjutant General (TAG), the Governor, the Chamber of
Commerce, and the Rotary Club, and to try to tell them about
our predictability model, and try to take ideas from them.
Also, Secretary Rumsfeld has tasked me with assembling
groups of businessmen in the Pentagon for periodic meetings. To
date, we have had about 50 of the top companies' Chief
Executive Officers (CEOs) and chairmen of the board in to
listen and to talk with them to see what their view is.
We are cooperating with the Small Business Administration.
We are getting ready to do a study of over 1,800 employers to
ask what small businessmen do.
We have met with the Governors Association that you are
familiar with, and as I say, I meet with each and every State.
My goal is to meet with those groups to communicate, but also
to receive from them ideas of what more we might do.
We have been very aggressive. I consider that one of my
charters to get out throughout the country to spend time
helping them and getting feedback.
Senator Ben Nelson. You might want to also check, if you
have not, with the National Federation of Independent Business
(NFIB). They are small businesses in particular. I suspect, if
you have not, they would be very helpful.
Mr. Hall. We had one of their officials at the last group
that met with Secretary Rumsfeld who said you have to meet with
us because we are an important organization. He was included in
the day-long event that we had in the Pentagon, in which both
the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary met with them.
Senator Ben Nelson. Good. I knew it was a good idea. Thank
you. [Laughter.]
Secretary Hall, the employer community has come to rely on
the National Committee for Employer Support to not only mediate
between employers and their Reserve component employees, but
also to educate businesses and show the good work the employer
community is doing in support of the National Guard and Reserve
employees. Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR).
Everything has to come down to some initials or some alphabet
description. [Laughter.]
It provides this valuable service and should be commended
for its hard work. But in the context of an overworked system,
will we be able to continue to rely on an organization that
provides the majority of its outreach through this voluntary
operation, or should we be looking at ways to make ESGR more
relevant and provide for a more full-time and coherent staff? I
do not want to suggest, however, that the staff members are not
coherent. [Laughter.]
But for more continuity in the situation. I do not want to
take away from what they are currently doing, but because of
the nature of this and the ongoing challenges. I wonder if you
have any thoughts about that?
Mr. Hall. I do. Mr. Hollingsworth is the director and Mr.
Janes is the national chairman. They are very aggressive in
what they are doing. The 5,100 volunteers are very patriotic,
but we have to work beyond that. There are three important
things.
The gentleman to my right was one of the first ones that
said, ``I will stand up, and I will provide a uniformed officer
in every State that can work with that committee.'' They will
be the continuity, and he has established those, and they are
in every State.
The second thing is the staff itself did not have the
continuity that it needed. We had military officers that turned
over. So what we are doing--and it has been approved--is to
civilianize and get professionals on the staff that will
provide the continuity that we need.
Third, we are going to expand, and probably add at least
one more person per State, and increase their funding.
We have spent a lot of time on this. They have five
regional conferences throughout the country. My office attends
each one of those. I will be speaking in 2 weeks to a State
convention. I am going out with each and every one of them and
seeking ideas, but we need to add more people, more funds, and
probably make it more permanent. The volunteers are great, but
we need something a bit more permanent, and we are moving on
those three fronts.
I want to thank General Blum for ponying up those people
out of hide to put in each State to support the committee. I
think the State chairs are working well with him, and I thank
him for that.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you. I know that the people in
Nebraska, having met with them myself, are doing an outstanding
job. You have pointed to the challenge that you have with
volunteer efforts. So I thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
We have another vote, probably less than 10 minutes from
now. It could be a long day. I thank the panel. I just have a
couple of very quick questions, and we will go to the next
panel.
Tax credits. 51 percent of the people coming into the Guard
and Reserve community--they tell me about 50 percent--suffer a
pay loss in terms of the civilian pay being greater than the
military pay. Employers routinely voluntarily make up the
difference. We are looking at tax credits of a certain amount
for employers who will continue that practice.
General James, what do you think about that? Would that
help in the employer community?
General James. Anything that would help the employer and
make it easier for them, either financially or structurally, to
actually retain that employee when they come back from service
would be of great help. Right now they are doing it out of
patriotism, out of their sense of having someone who is a good
employee who is willing to serve the Nation. Right now, there
is really nothing in it for the employer. Anything that you
could do to have some compensation and make it easier, not just
morally and supportively, but also financially, for the
employer to employ Guard and Reserve personnel and to
compensate Guard and Reserve personnel would be appreciated.
Mr. Hall. We would have to defer to the Department of the
Treasury on its financial impact, but in general, we need to
rejoice in what these employers are doing. We need to help
incentivize them, and that is one way in which we could thank
them for their patriotism.
Senator Graham. Very well.
One last question. When the troops come home, one of the
things we discovered from the first Gulf War was the Gulf War
Syndrome. We had a lot of people who came home who decided not
to stay around because of health care problems, or perceived
health care problems, pay problems, or just an experience that
was not up to par. How do you feel about what we are doing for
the soldier coming home who may have experienced health care
problems? Do we have a network in place to take care of these
people?
Mr. Hall. I have a couple of quick things. Then I will
defer to my uniformed colleagues.
I was there for Gulf War I and II and saw how we screened
people out. There has been a tremendous effort by Dr.
Winkenwerder and Health Affairs to make sure that this time the
health screening is done for everyone. No one is allowed to
leave without a formal health care screening, which is
transmitted electronically and goes with them to identify any
of the problems. Because of what we learned in Operations
Desert Storm and Desert Shield, we are doing a much better job
in ensuring that we are able to track that carefully. I am very
encouraged, and I have not heard anyone say that they are not
getting proper screening.
The second thing is that there is closer cooperation
between the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) and the DOD,
and the American Association of Disabled Veterans. When I go
out to Walter Reed, I see those offices side by side, because
we take great care of them. That hand-off of the disabled
servicemember to the VA is very important.
Finally, the center that we have for the severely injured
and disabled, which has been established in town, I hope you
have an opportunity to visit, is not just for anyone disabled
or severely injured. Any person who has a health care problem
may call that center, whether they are Active, Guard, or
Reserve, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and get advice from
them on health care matters. It is a tremendous center, which
is funded by DOD. It is operating now. I think that will all
help a lot.
Senator Graham. We are going to have to go vote. I have 2
minutes.
General Blum. Sir, in about 30 seconds I can tell you that
the National Guard has a full-time funded position for ESGR. As
Secretary Hall said, we also are fielding VA representatives,
and we hope to hire a VA representative for each State
headquarters, and at joint force headquarters. The first
priority is a war-wounded soldier who can come in and work in
each State and territory to assist in the transition from the
military care to VA care and to help educate both that soldier
and their family through the family readiness groups that we
have in each State. This is not just for the National Guard.
This is for any uniformed member who wants to avail himself of
that. So we see this as a very real need, and we are investing
in that.
Senator Graham. If we can help, we will.
We will go break for a vote. General James, I will write
you about transformation and blending Guard units. You know how
I feel about that. [Laughter.]
We will not belabor that point, but I do appreciate you
coming to my office and talking about it. I want to make sure
we retain every guardsman who wants to serve, and whatever we
do with the Active Forces makes sense in terms of retaining
people.
General Schultz, thank you very much for 40-plus years of
service. When is your retirement?
General Schultz. 24 May, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to say, Mr. Chairman, Ron Helmly introduced a
couple of soldiers here earlier. For me, it is easy to serve
with soldiers like that, and we have them around the world
today in the Guard and Reserve and on Active-Duty. It is a real
honor, sir.
Senator Graham. Hear, hear. Thank you for your service.
We will be back just in a moment. We will stand in recess.
[Recess from 3:15 p.m. to 3:25 p.m.]
Thank you very much.
Will our second panel please come forward?
For the record, Senator Nelson is a very fast walker. To
keep up with him, you have to run. [Laughter.]
Secretary Hall, I think you will stay. Is that correct?
Mr. Hall. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, if your questions are
similar to the ones from the last panel, I will restrict my
speaking to what I said before, unless you want me to
reiterate, to allow the uniformed witnesses to answer.
Senator Graham. Thank you. Would you like to make a
statement at all?
Mr. Hall. No, sir. I would just like to enter the same
statement for this panel as I did before, and ask that it be
entered into the record.
[The prepared statements of General Helmly, Admiral Cotton,
General McCarthy, and General Bradley follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
------
Prepared Statement by VADM John G. Cotton, USN
opening
Mr. Chairman and members of this subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to speak with you today about some of the important changes
that are happening in the Navy and its Reserve Force, and to give you a
report on our accomplishments and current state of readiness.
Last year, Admiral Vern Clark challenged us with the statement,
``Change to make us better is completely necessary . . . to make our
Navy even better and to build the 21st century Navy, and the Reserve is
a key part of our growth and our future.'' We have met this challenge
and have attained dramatic improvements, changing our culture and the
shape of the force, moving away from an obsolete Cold War construct to
one that provides the flexible capabilities needed to fight the
unconventional threats of the 21st century.
You can't change culture with money; it takes leadership. I want to
thank this subcommittee for the leadership you demonstrated in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, providing
authority for the Secretary of the Navy to facilitate changing our name
from the United States Naval Reserve to the United States Navy Reserve.
We soon hope to have Presidential approval, and are in the process of
complying with the provisions of the act, including future submission
of the required conforming legislation to Congress. Once we have become
the U.S. Navy Reserve, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) intends to
promulgate guidance to ``drop the R,'' like the marines did in 1997.
Our great sailors have always been in the Navy . . . they are the
Reserve component of the greatest Navy ever. The initials U.S. Navy
Reserve (USNR), USNR-R, USNR TAR will no longer be used--we are all in
the Navy. We will still have Reserve component commissions and
designators that put us in the right personnel categories, but we're in
the Navy, ready and fully integrated. We might work just 2 or more days
a month, but you cannot turn off the honor, courage, and commitment
that comes with being in the Navy 24/7/365, ready to serve.
Today's busy Navy reservists have three missions. Their primary job
revolves around increasing our Navy's warfighting capability. Periodic
and predictable service provided by our Reserve component sailors, in
the right place, at the right time, with the right skill sets enhances
the operational effectiveness of the supported command--affordably.
Second, reservists will be key players in homeland security and
defense. By aligning our capabilities and shaping our force to support
the missions of Northern Command (NORTHCOM), reservists have the skills
that will not only improve security at home, but will enable Active
Forces to take the fight to the enemy and win the ``away'' game.
Lastly, every sailor acts as a Service ambassador and recruiter in
every town in America. The broad distribution of these sailors provides
a constant and visible reminder to citizens in every state, and
especially in the Nation's heartland, that the Navy is on watch,
providing them with unmatched capability in the maritime domain, as
well as educating and calling our young people to serve our Nation.
This affiliation with ``Main Street USA'' and the fabric of our Nation
is something else that money can't buy, and is a mission that the Navy
Reserve embraces.
manpower
Our most important asset is, always has been, and forever will
remain, our sailors--our ``Sea Warriors.'' Admiral Clark stresses the
importance of continuously enabling and developing every sailor, and
has challenged the Navy to deliver a Human Capital Strategy (HCS) in
2005. This HCS theme will repeat throughout my statement.
The Navy's Total Force HCS will build upon last year's successes:
Continue development of Active-Reserve Integration.
Execute elimination of Naval Reserve ``titles'' and
foster Active component ownership of the Reserve component
elements in one Navy.
Continue analysis of the functions and roles of the
Reserve component in the future Total Force.
Complete the consolidation of Active-Reserve
recruiting.
Continue to identify and develop Reserve component
skills training and professional military education
requirements for incorporation into Sea Warrior.
The Navy will deliver a HCS that is both mission and cost
effective, while remaining ``capability focused.'' Typically, when a
24/7/365 presence is required, the Active component would provide the
preponderance of the capability. When the requirement is periodic and
predictable, the capability should be provided by a Reserve component
sailor at about one-fifth the cost of their Active component
counterpart. When the requirement is best supported by specialized
skills and long-term continuity, our civilian workforce provides the
best fill. Finally, when time critical requirements are identified that
fall beyond the scope of Navy skill sets, then contractors should be
utilized to fill the need pending development of the capability or for
the duration of a short-term requirement. Presence, predictability,
periodicity and skill sets determine work division, not arbitrary lines
drawn between components.
The Navy HCS is already demonstrating ``value added'' in that Navy
requirements are met with Reserve component capabilities, no longer
simply a matter of ``mobilization numbers.'' Historically,
effectiveness of the Reserve component has been measured by the number
of personnel mobilized and on Active-Duty. More than 28,000 Navy
reservists have been mobilized since September 11, and nearly 12,000
served on Active-Duty during the peak of OIF in May 2003. However, the
mobilization metric falls far short of measuring the work being done by
reservists each and every day. On any given day, over 20,000 reservists
are on some type of orders, providing fully integrated operational
support to their Active component and joint commands, both at home and
overseas. This contribution is extremely valuable and represents a
significant return on ``sunk'' training costs, enabling mature,
seasoned and capable veterans to surge to fleet requirements. The
judicious use of operational support enables the Navy Reserve component
to meet surge requirements short of mobilization, while providing
enhanced ``volunteerism'' options for our sailors. Thus, operational
support provides full spectrum access to Reserve component
capabilities, which are more relevant than ever.
The greater readiness provided by full spectrum access is evident
by the effective and judicious use of our ``high demand, low density''
units and individual augmentee skill sets. A prime example is
demonstrated daily by the Navy Reserve Intelligence Program, which is
fully integrated into all fleet operations. These highly-skilled
professionals face increased global war on terrorism demands not only
from the Navy but also from every combatant commander (COCOM). Navy
leadership is utilizing Intelligence reservists daily with inActive-
Duty drills and annual training, Active-Duty for training, and Active-
Duty for special work, and mobilization to provide consistent, high
quality support to Joint Operating Forces. More than 1,700 sailors have
been mobilized since September 11, representing over 40 percent of the
Intelligence program's nearly 4,000 reservists, in support of 117 Navy
and Joint Commands in 150 different locations worldwide, providing
real-time operational support to senior decisionmakers and commanders
in the field.
The roles and missions of these professionals have been wide
ranging. Reserve component targeting officers have augmented every
Carrier Air Wing deployed for Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi
Freedom (OEF/OIF) since September 11. Interrogators at Guantanamo Bay
and elsewhere have obtained information leading to the breakup of
global terror cells. They have deployed with Navy SEAL teams, augmented
combat staffs aboard ships, stood counterterrorism watches, supported
Joint Task Forces, and captured foreign materiel. Also, the effective
use of Joint Reserve Intelligence Centers (JRICs) since September 11
has added a new tool for deployed warfighters in all COCOMs.
While most mobilized Reserve Intelligence professionals have
reported to their supported Joint and Navy Commands, over 13 percent
have been mobilized to 27 JRICs located throughout the country. They
are an example of an evolving reach-back capability that directly
supports forward operations and represents one more step in the Navy's
progress toward a net-centric future. Intelligence reservists averaged
over 80 days of Active-Duty per person each year since September 11.
This high Reserve component personnel tempo is an excellent example of
the immense value added by these sailors, largely through
``volunteerism.''
current readiness
Global War on Terrorism
Navy reservists are performing superbly in many important global
war on terrorism roles. To date, 19 of our Reserve component sailors
have made the ultimate sacrifice while deployed in support of current
operations, with many more suffering serious injuries. On July 11,
2004, I had the distinct privilege of presenting the Purple Heart Medal
to 16 Seabees from Naval Mobile Construction Battalion (NMCB) 14, in
Jacksonville, FL. A total of 7 sailors were killed and 19 were wounded
in attacks on April 30 and May 2, 2004 while mobilized in support of
OIF. The loss of these brave Americans underscores the honor, courage
and commitment that drive our Nation's reservists, and the willingness
of citizen sailors to make tremendous sacrifices for not only our
freedom, but also for our coalition partners.
Perhaps the biggest challenge involves the anticipated global war
on terrorism demand for Navy reservists to support land-based missions
in central command (CENTCOM). The Secretary of Defense has directed
Navy to take a close look at the combat service support missions, and
we are leaning forward to aggressively plan our engagement strategies.
The global war on terrorism presents new and dynamic challenges to our
Navy and our Nation, and will require a flexible Navy Reserve capable
of supporting nontraditional missions.
One way we are meeting this challenge is to develop a customs
inspection capability to support deployed forces. Over 450 Selective
Reserve and volunteers from the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) were
screened and selected for this new mission. Mobilized sailors reported
to the Naval Expeditionary Logistics Support Force headquarters in
Williamsburg, VA, in early December 2004 for outfitting and training,
which included Customs Inspector certification and expeditionary
warfighting skills. Subsequently, they deployed to Kuwait in late
January 2005 for turnover with Air Force personnel.
Additionally, Navy has assumed the responsibility for managing the
detainee program at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Active component and Reserve
component have blended qualified personnel as needed to enhance the
security force.
Mobilized Navy ``Seabees'' have continuously deployed in support of
CENTCOM operations. Over 40 percent of the Seabee force has been
mobilized since September 11, providing critical combat construction
support to forces in Iraq and Kuwait. Navy construction forces rely
heavily upon Reserve component sailors, bringing critical civilian
skill sets, maturity and experience to the mission.
In January 2004, Navy Expeditionary Logistics Support Force
mobilized more than 525 sailors from 4 of its Cargo Handling and Supply
Support Battalions, who relieved and augmented a variety of Army and
Marine Corps logistics units. These Navy Reserve cargo handlers
(stevedores, fuels, and mail) are working with the Army to provide
critical combat support to soldiers and marines in Iraq and Kuwait in
support of OIF. Subsequently, additional sailors have been mobilized
and have relieved these forces in theater.
In March 2003, the Navy deployed Helicopter Combat Support Special
Squadron Five (HCS 5) to Iraq to provide a key capability in support of
Active ground forces in OIF. Maintaining a high operational tempo, HCS
5 supported the Joint Special Operations Aviation Command, flying
combat missions against the enemy. One year later, HCS 5 was relieved
by her sister squadron, HCS 4, who remains in theater to date. These
two RE-serve squadrons represent 50 percent of Navy's helicopter combat
support capability.
The Navy Reserve will expand its role in combat service support.
Our dedicated reservists will be placed into training pipelines for up
to 4 months to develop and hone special skill sets and combat
capabilities needed to support the global war on terrorism. These
sailors will then go forward, ``boots on ground'' with the Army. When
they return, we will establish Joint Provisional Units to house these
unique skill sets, where reservists will remain on ``hot standby'' for
consequence management in support of NORTHCOM Homeland Defense
requirements.
Homeland Defense
``We the People'' are all joined in a common interest, Homeland
Defense. Only a few times in our history has the enemy brought the
fight to our country. Declaring independence in 1776, we defeated the
British twice in a span of nearly 40 years. No one can forget the ``Day
of Infamy'' at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, nor will anyone soon
forget the events of September 11, 3 short years ago, in New York City,
at the Pentagon, and in a field in Pennsylvania. We are now engaged in
the global war on terrorism, another long war to preserve our way of
life. We must win this ``away'' game to ensure that it never again
becomes another ``home'' game.
While most Reserve sailors are compensated for only a few days each
month, they are in the Navy 24/7/365, selflessly serving their Nation
with honor, courage, and commitment. As the President instructed them 3
years ago, they stand fully ready . . . they are the new minutemen in
the same tradition as those who stood on the Commons in Lexington and
at the North Bridge in Concord, Massachusetts. As veterans, they
provide military experience and capabilities as well as a myriad of
civilian skill sets critical to the support of Sea Power 21, ready to
quickly surge to any global crisis and respond to disasters at home.
Reserve sailors live in every State and will become more regionally
aligned with NORTHCOM as the Nation develops its homeland defense
strategy. We are ready to answer the call, as Americans have done for
229 years. The CNO recently stated, ``I am convinced that
responsibility for Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) should rest first
and foremost with the United States Coast Guard. I am also convinced
that there is a role for the United States Navy to play in response and
in support of the Coast Guard, bringing our resources to bear wherever
they are required.''
The Navy is partnering with the Coast Guard because we share a
common interest in defending our Nation's maritime approaches. When a
ship comes near our coastlines, we need to know where it is going and
what cargo it is carrying. MDA is the effective understanding of all
elements of the global maritime environment that could impact the
security, safety, economy or environment of the United States.
Significant roles will be played by several combatant commanders,
NORTHCOM, Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), Strategic Command (STRATCOM),
and many other Federal and State Departments. Pacific Command (PACOM),
European Command (EUCOM) and CENTCOM will also contribute to MDA if we
are to be successful in countering threats far from our shores. Efforts
by the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) to make MDA truly an interagency effort are just beginning, and
the Navy Reserve has tremendous potential to join other major
stakeholders in providing workable solutions to ensure a more cost
effective MDA strategy.
In November 2004, Admiral Tim Keating assumed command of NORTHCOM.
In developing MDA, his staff will be utilizing lessons learned from
many years of successful North American Air Defense operations that
have monitored all air traffic in U.S. airspace. Navy reservists stand
ready to augment the MDA staff with personnel from the Space Warfare
Command, intelligence, naval control and guidance of shipping, Tactical
Support Center, Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare (MIUW), Military
Sealift Command, Naval Air Force Reserve, and Distributed Common Ground
System-Navy (DCGS-N) units.
NORTHCOM is planning to stand up a Joint Reserve Unit with
Intelligence Community watch standers and analysts that will conduct
port security surveys while working with the Coast Guard's Joint Harbor
Operation/Maritime Operations Centers. The Navy Reserve will fully
support this new capability.
One capability central to homeland defense is provided by Navy
Coastal Warfare (NCW), whose mission is to provide surface and
subsurface surveillance in littoral areas throughout the world.
Secondary missions include command, control and communications
functions. Navy Reserve MIUW units and Inshore Boat Units have, until
recently, provided the sole capability for this mission within the
Navy. Due to the ``high-demand/low-density'' mission and structure, the
Navy has established eight Active component NCW units, under the
operational control of the newly established Maritime Force Protection
Command to aid in force protection missions. This vital capability will
now be provided by a mixture of Active component and Reserve component
forces, once again aptly demonstrating the ability of the Navy Reserve
Force to serve as a test bed for new capabilities and as an enabler for
transitioning validated capabilities to the Active component when
required.
The Navy has, in fact, already begun joint experimentation with the
Coast Guard, exploring new situational awareness systems, and plans are
being formulated to provide demonstrations later this year. One such
system, a littoral version of DCGS-N, was provided to the Navy by
Congress over the past few years. DCGS-N merges intelligence,
surveillance, reconnaissance, targeting, mission planning, and
situational-awareness functions into a Web-enabled, net-centric, joint-
interoperable architecture. This invaluable capability, long the
province of Strike Groups and major ground combat units, will soon
demonstrate its potential value in supporting MDA.
Another potential homeland defense capability is being demonstrated
by Operation Vigilant Mariner. Embarked Security Teams (EST) will
provide security augmentation to Military Sealift Command/Ready Reserve
Fleet/Contract Carrier ships to detect, deter and defend against
waterborne and land-based terrorist attacks. The initial teams will be
composed of Active component sailors, with Reserve component ESTs
providing ready surge capability for global operations. These Reserve
component ESTs will also be able to perform continental United States
(CONUS)-based force protection missions either in civilian ports or as
an augmentation force to Navy installations and shore facilities
requiring extra protection.
To effectively support homeland defense initiatives, every State
should have a joint headquarters, manned by personnel from each of the
seven Reserve components. While the National Guard will focus on
States, the Navy will focus on regions as part of Commander, Navy
Installations' ongoing alignment initiative. When we respond to a
crisis, we will do so under a regional construct, surging both Active
component and Reserve component sailors to assist with threats. As we
continue to develop this concept, we will work closely with the
National Guard Bureau and other agencies. This structure further aligns
our organizations to provide enhanced support and coordination by
having citizen sailors protect their home regions.
future readiness
The Navy is taking ownership of its Reserve component. Some
specialized communities, such as public affairs, now direct the entire
personnel selection and processing system, and are detailing reservists
to supported commands. This is exactly how all Reserve component
assignments will be done in the future, leveraging experience,
demographics, special skill sets and desire to serve in operational
units and perform operational mission support.
The future detailing of our reservists will incorporate a Sea
Warrior initiative known as the Career Management System. This self-
service, Web-based tool will provide every sailor visibility into all
available Navy billets. It will also provide the necessary details,
including job description, required competencies, unit location and
special requirements, so that our sailors can apply for jobs that best
fit their career plans while meeting the needs of the Navy.
In 2003, we began another very productive initiative to enable Navy
leadership to view Reserve component readiness information through the
Type Commander Readiness Management System (TRMS). We created an
innovative module called the Navy Reserve Readiness Module that links
numerous databases, including the Medical Readiness Reporting System
(MRRS), the Navy Reserve Order Writing System (NROWS), the Reserve
Headquarters System (RHS), and the Navy Marine Corps Mobilization
Processing System (NMCMPS).
Decisionmakers and force providers can use this system on any
desktop computer to drill down through every region, every Reserve
activity, every unit, down to the individual sailor. This easy-to-use
system has greatly improved readiness and will allow the Active
component to better match resources to requirements, identify gaps, and
provide focused training to close those gaps. Active component
ownership of, and responsibility for, the readiness of its assigned
reservists is the objective. This is a significant shift in culture
that will greatly improve the readiness and effectiveness of the Total
Force.
A major thrust over the past year has been the improvement of the
Navy Reserve's enterprise efficiency while enhancing operational
effectiveness. Knowledge Management (KM) methodology has been the
driver of this effort, and the Navy Reserve is leading the way. KM has
been applied across the enterprise, resulting in better organizational
alignment with the Active component, better understanding of Navy
requirements for its Reserve component, and development of quicker
response mechanisms that will better support the joint force. KM
focuses our efforts on readiness, and helps us get the most ``bang for
the buck'' in terms of operational availability and speed of response.
quality of service
The Secretary of Defense instituted a force structure planning goal
of limiting the involuntary mobilization of reservists to 1 year out of
every 6. When reservists deploy to support the war, they want to know
three things: ``when, where, and for how long?'' They are ready to
serve, and while deployed deserve the same pay and benefits earned by
Active component personnel. The DOD is working toward a common pay and
benefits system for personnel from all components, Active, Guard and
Reserve, which will support the Navy's efforts to properly support
sailors, whether mobilized or performing operational support.
Additionally, the Navy's HCS is validating the requirement for
different levels of Reserve component participation. Today, about one-
third of our force participates at the traditional level of 38 days per
year of Inactive-Duty drills and annual training. Another one-third
operates at an increased level of participation between 38 and 100 days
per year. The remaining one-third is able to serve in excess of 100
days per year, with some being able to recall for years. Given a
continued demand signal for all of these levels of participation,
innovative methods to predict and budget for requirements will have to
be developed by resource sponsors. The result will be a much more
integrated Total Force and greatly enhanced full spectrum Reserve
component operational support.
One of our efforts to improve the delivery of support across the
``capability spectrum'' is the consolidation of the Reserve component
military personnel (MILPERS) appropriation budget activity structure.
The current two budget activity structure of Reserve component MILPERS
appropriations, as set up over 20 years ago, is outmoded, cumbersome
and not adequately responsive for 21st century budget execution. It
leads to inefficiencies in the Department's administration of funds,
creates unnecessary budget execution uncertainties, and can result in
the receipt of unexpended funds so late in the year that their
effective use is minimized.
Combining the two Reserve component MILPERS budget activities, BA1
and BA2, into a single budget activity within the Reserve component
appropriation is a sensible adjustment which enables more efficient use
of resources, permits sufficient continued oversight of budget
execution, and supports the Secretary's desire to transform and improve
financial processes.
The Navy Reserve's fiscal year 2006 budget submission accounts for
this consolidation and has been fully approved and supported by the
Department of Defense. This initiative will have a dramatic impact on
our ability to provide full spectrum operational support, as well as
improve our sailors' quality of service through the ability to tailor
their orders to actual requirements. This also furthers our ability to
leverage the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
authority to have up to 6,200 sailors performing full time operational
support for up to 3 out of 4 years, a very welcome change in policy
that enhances our ability to surge to global war on terrorism
requirements.
The timeliness and way that information flows to the Reserve Force
is one of our biggest challenges in ensuring quality-of-service. The
degree to which we effectively communicate significantly impacts our
level of success. We have created several forums for communicating Navy
priorities, key leadership messages, relevant news, and opportunities
to and from the field, and they have proven to be very effective. We
host a biweekly briefing by video teleconference to inform the force
and solicit input from every echelon. We established an e-mail
communication protocol through the Public Affairs Office to
electronically distribute information to more than 5,000 key Navy
reservists and DOD personnel. Our award-winning magazine, The Navy
reservist, is mailed monthly to every Navy reservist's home (over
80,000 individuals and their families). The flow of information enables
us to quickly identify issues and opportunities and to target the
proper audiences for action. The speed of actionable information has
greatly increased as we build the Navy of the future.
Most critical to our success remains the important roles of our
families and employers in supporting our sailors. Our families enable
us to go forward with love and support, and our employers guarantee our
jobs when we return, often with additional benefits as their much
appreciated contributions to the cause. We all serve together and
cannot win the global war on terrorism without the many tremendous
sacrifices Americans make for national defense.
In the past year, we have worked to strengthen the already very
effective Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) program. For
the first time since the 1994 Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) was passed, the Department of Labor
has published regulations to enhance understanding and assist in the
enforcement of this landmark legislation. Never before have our
Nation's employers played such a critical role in our national defense,
with many providing benefits far beyond the USERRA requirements. We
should continue to look for opportunities to further incentivize and
partner with employers who do so much to care for our reservists.
alignment
Through ongoing transformation, the Navy is accelerating the
Nation's warfighting advantage. Admiral Clark has detailed the state of
the Navy more fully in his testimony, but several initiatives will have
a direct and positive impact on the Navy Reserve, the most significant
being Active-Reserve Integration (ARI). ARI is more than a ``bumper
sticker.'' It is a key component of the evolving HCS. The key step in
achieving ARI is to determine what the Active component requires its
Reserve component to do, as well as how and when to surge reservists.
Accordingly, Admiral Clark tasked Fleet Forces Command to conduct a
review of all Reserve component capabilities, and in August 2004
approved the results. This Zero-Based Review (ZBR) laid the groundwork
for a more integrated and aligned Total Force in which Reserve
component capabilities directly support Seapower 21.
The ZBR systematically studied gaps in Active component
capabilities that could or should be filled by the Reserve component.
Cost and risk values were assigned to each validated Reserve component
capability relative to the Active component mission to enable
leadership to make informed decisions regarding appropriate levels of
investment. The result was a blend of existing and new capabilities,
while others were recommended for realignment or divestment. The review
acknowledged two essential types of support the Active component will
receive from the Reserve component: (1) units that stand up when
required to provide a specific capability, and (2) individuals or
portions of units that can augment existing active commands. Validated
capabilities are designed to increase the warfighting wholeness of the
Navy, and represent ``what the Active component needs to have,'' not
just what is ``nice to have.''
We have changed the way we assess ourselves, as well as the way we
train in support of the Fleet Response Plan (FRP). We are transitioning
to a capabilities-based force driven by Navy requirements. The ZBR
inventoried the Reserve component against 61 capabilities and
``mapped'' them to Navy mission areas. Every billet and every unit was
examined for both surge and operational support value. We are
synchronizing data to enable us to plan and act as One Navy. The
results of the assessment are included in the OPNAV programming,
budgeting and execution system, partnering resources to provide better
support to the warfighters.
One of the most significant outcomes of the initial ZBR is that in
fiscal year 2006, the Navy Reserve will reduce end strength by 10,300
sailors. To execute the FRP, Navy Active and Reserve components have
accelerated their alignment, synchronizing their efforts to become a
more effective and efficient warfighting team. This is a ``win-win''
scenario for the Navy and the taxpayer, reflecting not a reduction in
capabilities, but rather capabilities more effectively and much more
efficiently delivered!
We are expending significant effort to ensure effective Reserve
component management as well. Active component and Reserve component
manpower experts are partnering to conduct a full-time support program
Flag Pole Study to determine the most effective and efficient manner to
structure and allocate our Reserve component management personnel
across Navy Reserve activities and in fleet commands.
Another key element of our full-time support program is our
civilian employees. Over 100 civilian employees assigned to Commander,
Navy Reserve Forces Command and the Office of the Chief of Navy Reserve
will be among the first Navy employees to be administered under the new
National Security Personnel System (NSPS). July 2005 transition
activities will be preceded by on-line and class room training for all
affected civilian employees and their supervisors (both civilian and
military). This initial group represents approximately one-quarter of
the Navy Reserve's civilian employee population.
Another component of ARI is the alignment of Reserve component
infrastructure. Commander, Naval Installations (CNI), the Navy's
landlord, now includes every Navy Reserve activity in its regions for
better processing of service and support requests. There are no longer
any Navy Reserve bases, only Navy bases with different human capital
strategies, and we're all working together to support the fleet.
We can no longer think of ourselves as separate Reserve activities
in every State. We must integrate as part of Navy regions. We hope to
never build another Navy-Marine Corps Reserve Center, but will instead
build only modern Armed Forces Reserve Centers or Joint Operational
Support Centers that will promote joint operations, enhance
interoperability and significantly reduce overhead costs. We will train
jointly at home to deploy and fight jointly overseas.
One significant alignment success story that has resulted in
achievement of major efficiencies is the Navy Recruiting mission. The
former Navy Reserve Recruiting Command has merged with Navy Recruiting
Command to provide a seamless recruiting organization capable of
providing all service options to potential Navy sailors. Not a mere
name change, Reserve component recruiters and staff are serving
alongside their Active component counterparts. Some of our Navy
Recruiting Districts are commanded by full-time support officers (FTS).
We also have senior enlisted (NRD) FTS Career Recruiter Force personnel
serving as NRD Chief Recruiters. Total Force recruiting epitomizes a
truly customer-oriented focus, where a potential sailor is exposed to
every option for service in the Navy. Every career consideration and
every possible enlistment incentive is now tailored to the needs of the
individual. Our ultimate goal is to recruit 100 percent of the
qualified applicants that ``cross the brow'' and retain 100 percent of
the sailors with viable career options in the Navy, whether Active
component or Reserve component.
Our vision continues to be support to the fleet, ready and fully
integrated. The Reserve component provides predictable and periodic
surge support in the FRP, and has been very effectively integrated into
all capabilities in the Navy's operating forces. The Navy is getting
slightly smaller, but much more effective, providing increased
warfighting wholeness and a much better return on investment.
summary
Navy RE-servists provide worldwide operational support and we are
proud of our many accomplishments since September 11. We continue to
push for further integration and alignment within the Navy, while
surging with greater speed, flexibility, and responsiveness than ever
before. Our dedicated sailors provide the key to future success. During
OEF, a deployed combatant ship commanding officer said, ``People ask me
if I'm worried about the youth of America today. I tell them not at
all, because I see the very best of them every day.''
Navy Reserve leadership agrees. Our sailors have never been so
capable and committed. Their honor, courage and commitment make our
profession the most highly respected profession in the United States
today and our Navy the most admired around the world. We could not be
more proud of the effort they put forth and the results they have
achieved over the past year. We are looking forward to even greater
success as our alignment efforts progress and many new initiatives
mature and become adopted by the Fleet.
In closing, I would like to thank this committee for the support
you have provided the Navy Reserve and all of the Guard and Reserve
components. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
provided several significant, positive benefits that will help us
recruit and retain our talented sailors to better support the Navy and
joint commands. As you can see, this is a very exciting period for the
Navy and the Navy Reserve. The CNO has challenged every sailor to
review current ways of doing business and suggest solutions that will
improve effectiveness and find efficiencies. The Navy Reserve has
accepted that challenge and promises the members of this committee that
we will continue to do just that--examine every facet of our operation,
to support the fleet, and to accelerate our Navy's advantages while
providing the best value to the American taxpayer.
______
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Dennis M. McCarthy, USMCR
introduction
Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee, it is my honor to report to you on the state of your U.S.
Marine Corps Reserve (USMCR) as a partner in the Navy-Marine Corps
team. Your Marine Corps Reserve continues to be ``ready, willing, and
able.'' We remain firmly committed to warfighting excellence. The
support of Congress and the American people has been indispensable to
our success in the global war on terrorism. Your sustained commitment
to care for and improve our Nation's Armed Forces in order to meet
today's challenges, as well as those of tomorrow, is vital to our
battlefield success. On behalf of all marines and their families, I
would like to take this opportunity to thank Congress and this
subcommittee for your continued support.
your marine corps reserve today
The last 4 years have demonstrated the Marine Corps Reserve is
truly a full partner of the Total Force Marine Corps. I have been the
Commander of Marine Forces Reserve since June 2, 2001, and as I prepare
for retirement this summer, I can assure you the Marine Corps Reserve
still remains totally committed to continuing the rapid and efficient
activation of combat-ready ground, air, and logistics units to augment
and reinforce the active component in the global war on terrorism.
Marine Corps Reserve units, Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) marines,
Individual Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs), and retired marines fill
critical requirements in our Nation's defense and are deployed
worldwide in Iraq, Afghanistan, Georgian Republic, Djibouti, Kuwait,
and the U.S., supporting all aspects of the global war on terrorism.
``Train, activate, and deploy'' has always been a foundation of the
Marine Corps Reserve. Following that foundation, your Reserve is
maintained as a pre-trained, balanced and sustainable force capable of
rapid deployment into a combat environment.
Reserve marines continuously train to maintain high levels of
combat readiness. Because we currently have the luxury of scheduled
rotations, we utilize a 48-day activate to deploy schedule. A demanding
mobilization and operational readiness deployment test program
eliminates the need for post activation certification upon activation.
The 48-day schedule includes a 9-day Security and Stability Operations
(SASO) training package and completes the preparations for the Marine
Reserve unit to deploy. The impact of the train, activate, and deploy
foundation is the seamless integration with the Gaining Force Commander
(GFC) of a combat capable Active-Duty Marine unit.
Your Marine Corps Reserve is pre-trained--able to activate, spin-
up, deploy, redeploy, take leave and deactivate all within 12 months.
Twelve-month activations with a 7-month deployment have helped sustain
the Reserve Force and contributed to the regeneration of our units. In
so doing, the Reserves follow the same 7-month deployment policy as our
Active Forces. This activation/deployment construct has allowed the
U.S. Marine Corps to maximize management of the Reserve Force, maintain
unit integrity, and lessen the burden on Marine Corps families by
maintaining predictable deployments while allowing adequate dwell time
between unit deployments.
As of early March 2005, over 13,000 Reserve marines were activated
in support of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), Operation Iraqi Freedom
(OIF), and Horn of Africa operations. Of these marines, approximately
11,500 were serving in combat-proven ground, aviation and service
support units led by Reserve marine officers and noncommissioned
officers. The remaining 1,600 Reserve marines were serving as
individual augments in support of combatant commanders, the Joint
Staff, and the Marine Corps. Since 11 September 2001, the Marine Corps
has activated over 36,000 Reserve marines, and more than 95 percent of
all Marine Forces Reserve units.
The global war on terrorism highlights our need to remain flexible
and adaptive as a force. During the aftermath of September 11 and the
commencement of the global war on terrorism, the Marine Corps Reserve
was the force the Marine Corps needed. As new warfighting requirements
have emerged, we have adapted our units and personnel to meet them,
such as with the rapid formation of security forces from existing
units, or the creation of provisional civil affairs groups. We reviewed
our Total Force Structure during 2004, and laid the blueprint for
refining the force from 2005 to 2006. In the coming years, the Marine
Corps Reserve will be increasing intelligence, security, civil affairs,
mortuary affairs, and light-armored reconnaissance capabilities, while
we pare down some of our heavier, less required capabilities, such as
tanks and artillery. However, we are adjusting less than 8 percent of
Reserve end strength to support these new capabilities required for the
war on terrorism. By reassessing and fine-tuning our Reserve Force, we
are enhancing our ability to provide required warfighting capabilities.
Although adjusted, the Reserve Force will continue to provide a strong
Marine Corps presence in our communities.
Your Marine Corps Reserve continues to prove we are ready, willing,
and able to accomplish our primary mission of augmenting and
reinforcing the Active component with fully trained, combat capable
marines.
return on investment
The Marine Corps is committed to and confident in the Total Force
concept as evidenced by the overwhelming success of Marine Reserve
units serving in support of the global war on terrorism. Activated
Marine Reserve units and individuals are seamlessly integrating into
forward deployed Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEFs) and regularly
demonstrate their combat effectiveness. The recent efforts of your
Reserve marines are best illustrated in the following examples of a few
of the many Reserve units supporting the war effort:
Force Units
Fourth Civil Affairs Group (4th CAG), commanded by Col. John R.
Ballard USMCR, a professor at the Naval War College, and assisted by
his senior enlisted advisor, Sgt. Maj. Joseph A. Staudt, a construction
appraiser and project manager, was instrumental in rebuilding
communities from the ground up in the Al Anbar Province of Iraq. They
assisted in everything from recreating the infrastructure for a city or
town, to clearing unexploded ordnance and equipment left by the Iraqi
army from school buildings. Fourth CAG was instrumental in projects
such as supporting local elections in Fallujah and assisting the Iraqis
in reopening schools in Al Anbar province. Just last month, 4th CAG
ended its tour of duty in Iraq and were replaced by 5th Civil Affairs
Group (5th CAG), commanded by Col. Steve McKinley USMCR, a retired
bonds salesman from Wachovia, with the assistance of Sgt. Maj. John A.
Ellis, a Baltimore fireman.
Fourth Marine Division
First Battalion, 23d Marines (1/23), under the command of Lt. Col.
Gregory D. Stevens USMCR, a building contractor in southern California,
supported by his senior enlisted advisor, SgtMaj David A. Miller, a
military academy instructor, were the first to enter and assess the
threat in Hit, Iraq last year and won decisive battles with insurgents
in that city. Sgt. Herbert B. Hancock, a sniper from 1/23 was credited
with the longest confirmed kill in Iraq during the battle for Fallujah,
taking out insurgent mortarmen from a distance of over 1,000 yards.
From October 2004 to January 2005, the Mobile Assault Platoons of 1/23
patrolled the supply routes around the Haditha Dam area in Iraq. With
the aid of long-range optics, night vision and thermal imaging scopes,
they vigilantly watched day and night for insurgent activity, while
remaining unobserved. During their last month in Iraq, the efforts of
the Mobile Assault Platoons caused an 85 percent decrease in the total
number of mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) utilized in the
Haditha Dam area.
Second Battalion, 24th Marines, commanded by Lt. Col. Mark A. Smith
USMCR, an Indiana state policeman, with Sgt. Maj. Garry L. Payne, a
business owner, as his senior enlisted advisor, supported the 24th
Marine Expeditionary Unit (24th MEU) by bringing a measure of security
to northern Babil Province. Marines with law-enforcement background
were so common in the battalion that even the smallest units boasted of
having a few police officers. Many law-enforcement strategies and
tactics employed in the Chicago area were mimicked in Iraq such as
executing raids, handling heavy traffic jams and conducting crime scene
analysis. The battalion even used police procedures in its intelligence
battle, comparing anti-Iraqi forces to criminals back home. As Chief
Warrant Officer-5 Jim M. Roussell, an intelligence officer and 28-year
veteran of the Chicago Police Department stated, ``There are a lot of
similarities between street gangs and the guys we're fighting out
here.'' Working alongside Iraqi security forces, the marines rounded up
nearly 900 criminals, thugs and terrorists and seized more than 75,000
munitions to make the local area safer for the Iraqi residents.
Fourth Force Service Support Group
Throughout my tenure as Commander, Marine Forces Reserve, I have
made repeated visits to marines serving abroad. During a recent trip to
Iraq with my senior enlisted advisor, Sgt. Maj. Robin W. Dixon, I
visited our marines from Fourth Force Service Support Group (4th FSSG)
who were serving with 1st FSSG. I can confidently state that the
Reserve marines were fully integrated with 1st FSSG and were meeting
all the challenges to ensure marines throughout Iraq had everything
from food and medicine to mail and ammunition. They willingly braved
dangerous roads filled with IEDs to ensure supplies arrive at their
destination. Our marines who are on the front lines can do their tasks
superbly because their needs back at the base camp are all being met by
the marines of FSSG. From refueling to performing major overhauls on
vehicles, to moving the fuel and materials of war from the rear to the
front, to distributing ``beans, bullets, and bandages''--the FSSG takes
care of all the needs of their fellow marines.
The most sobering task that the Reserve marines from 4th FSSG
perform in Iraq is Mortuary Affairs, which is predominately a Reserve
mission. Chief Warrant Officer-2 Anthony L. High, the Officer in Charge
of Mortuary Affairs, ensures that the remains of the fallen in Iraq
return home with the proper dignity and respect they deserve for the
price they have paid for our country. Even enemies killed in Fallujah
were given burials commensurate with the customs and procedures of
their native country and religious beliefs, winning approval of Iraqi
religious leaders.
Fourth Marine Aircraft Wing
The accomplishments of Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron
452 (VMGR-452), of Marine Aircraft Group 49, 4th Marine Aircraft Wing,
under the command of Lt. Col. Bradley S. James, USMCR, a United
Airlines pilot, supported by his senior enlisted advisor, Sgt. Maj.
Leland H. Hilt, Jr., an auditor for the IRS, show the overwhelming
commitment we impose on our Reserve marines. VMGR-452 has been
activated twice since September 11. A detachment from VMGR-452 was
activated in January 2002 to support OEF. The remainder of the squadron
was activated later in support of OIF I. Upon deactivation, the
squadron reverted back into their normal high operational tempo,
supporting Reserve missions worldwide. The squadron supported the full
spectrum of KC-130 missions that included aerial delivery in support of
Special Operations Command (SOCOM), performing multiple aerial
refueling missions in support of the Fleet Marine Force and the U.S.
Army, logistics runs in support of Marine Forces Europe and deployed
units in Djibouti, and support of a Hawaii Combined Arms Exercise
(CAX). The entire squadron was reactivated in June 2004 and deployed in
August to Al Asad Air Base, Al Anbar Province, Iraq. They quickly began
combat operations in support of First MEF. The squadron conducted
numerous types of tactical missions, to include logistics support,
fixed-wing aerial refueling (FWAR) and radio relay throughout several
countries to include Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Turkey and Italy. On
7 November, when Operation Phantom Fury commenced in Fallujah, VMGR-452
found its versatile KC-130 platforms greatly needed for a variety of
missions. The squadron flew 341 sorties, logged 864.9 flight hours,
transported 1,273,150 pounds of cargo and 1,980 personnel, and
offloaded 4,324,300 pounds of fuel to 502 receivers during the
operation. After Operation Phantom Fury, the squadron conducted its
most important mission of the deployment--the movement of Iraqi
election officials during Operation Citadel II. During this operation,
the squadron transported over 1,200 Iraqi election officials from An
Najaf to Al Taqaddum and Mosul so that they would be in place before
the election on 30 January. Following the elections, the squadron
transported the election officials back to An Najaf in less than 6
hours by running three fully loaded KC-130s continuously. February saw
the squadron surpass 3,000 mishap-free flight hours for the deployment.
activation philosophy
Sustaining the force has been consistent with Total Force Marine
Corps planning guidance. This guidance was based on a 12-month
involuntary activation with a 7-month deployment, followed by a period
of dwell time and, if required, a second 12-month involuntary
reactivation and subsequent 7-month deployment. This force management
practice was designed to enhance the warfighting and sustainment
capability of the Marine Forces Reserve by providing trained, well-
balanced and cohesive units ready for combat. We view this both an
efficient and effective use of our Reserve Marines' 24-month cumulative
activation as it serves to preserve Reserve units to sustain the long-
term nature of the global war on terrorism that will require future
Reserve Force commitments.
activation impact
As of January 2005, the Marine Corps Reserve began activating
approximately 3,000 Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR) unit marines
in support of the next OIF rotation and 500 SMCR unit marines in
support of OEF. Even with judicious use of our assets and coordinated
planning, the personnel tempo has increased. As the members of this
committee know, Reserve marines are students or have civilian
occupations that are also very demanding, and are their primary means
of livelihood. In the past 2 years, 933 Reserve marines exceeded 400
days deployed time. In total, approximately 3,900 Reserve marines have
been activated more than once; about 2,500 of whom are currently
activated. Information from March 2005 indicates that approximately 65
percent of the current unit population and 47 percent of the current
IMA population have been activated at least once. About 1 percent of
our current IRR population deployed in support of OIF/OEF. If you
include the number of marines who deployed as an active component and
have since transferred to the IRR, the number reaches 31 percent. This
is worth particular note as the IRR provides us needed depth--an added
dimension to our capability. Volunteers from the IRR and from other
Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), such as artillery, have been
cross-trained to reinforce identifiable critical specialties.
Although supporting the global war on terrorism is the primary
focus of the Marine Corps Reserve, other functions, such as pre-
deployment preparation and maintenance, recruiting, training,
facilities management and long term planning continue. The wise use of
the Active-Duty Special Work (ADSW) program allows the Marine Corps to
fill these short-term, full-time requirements with Reserve marines. In
fiscal year 2004, the Marine Corps executed 947 work-years of ADSW at a
cost of $49.1 million. Continued support and funding for this critical
program will enhance flexibility thereby ensuring our Total Force
requirements are met.
recruiting and retention
Like the Active component, Marine Corps Reserve units primarily
rely upon a first term force. Each year approximately 6,000 new marines
join Marine Corps Reserve units, while a similar number move into the
IRR, IMAs, Active Reserve or Retired Reserve communities. Currently,
the Marine Corps Reserve continues to recruit and retain quality men
and women willing to manage commitments to their families, their
communities, their civilian careers and the Corps. Recruiting and
retention goals were met in fiscal year 2004, but the long-term impact
of recent activations is not yet known. While current attrition is
below the averages of previous years, the Marine Corps Reserve is
monitoring post-mobilization retention very closely to assess the
impact of deployment on marines, their families, and their civilian
careers. As always, the training, leadership and quality of life of our
marines remain significant Marine Corps priorities. Despite the high
operational tempo, the morale and patriotic spirit of Reserve marines,
their families, and employers remains extraordinarily high.
At the end of fiscal year 2004, the SMCR was over 39,600 strong.
Part of this population is comprised of Active Reserve marines, IMAs,
and Reserve marines in the training pipeline, but the preponderance,
about 32,500, belong to the units of Marine Forces Reserve. An
additional 60,000 marines serve as part of the IRR, representing a
significant pool of trained and experienced prior service manpower,
which, as stated, the Marine Corps has frequently drawn upon for
volunteers. Reserve marines bring to the table not only their Marine
Corps skills but also their civilian training and experience as well.
The presence of police officers, engineers, lawyers, skilled craftsmen,
business executives, and the college students who fill our Reserve
ranks serves to enrich the Total Force. We are very mindful of the
sacrifices that they and their employers make so that they may serve
this country. The Marine Corps appreciates the recognition given by
Congress to employer relations, insurance benefits and family support.
Such programs should not be seen as ``rewards'' or ``bonuses,'' but as
tools that will sustain the force in the years ahead.
Support to the global war on terrorism has reached the point where
80 percent of the current Marine Corps Reserve leadership has deployed
at least once. Nevertheless, the Marine Corps Reserve is currently
achieving higher retention rates than the benchmark average from the
last 3 fiscal years. As of January, fiscal year 2005, the Office of the
Secretary of Defense (OSD) attrition statistics for Marine Corps
Reserve unit officers is 10.9 percent compared to the current benchmark
average of 15.8 percent. For the same time period, Reserve unit
enlisted attrition is 6.4 percent compared to 8.5 percent average.
Good retention goes hand-in-hand with the successes of our
recruiters. In fiscal year 2004, the Marine Corps Reserve achieved 100
percent of its recruiting goal for non-prior service recruiting (6,165)
and exceeded its goal for prior service recruiting (2,083). For our
Reserve component, junior officer recruiting remains the most
challenging area. This is due mainly to the low attrition rate for
company grade officers leaving the Active Force and that the Marine
Corps recruits Reserve officers almost exclusively from the ranks of
those who have first served an Active-Duty tour as a Marine Corps
officer. We are successfully expanding Reserve commissioning
opportunities for our prior-enlisted marines in order to grow some of
our own officers from Marine Forces Reserve units and are exploring
other methods to increase the participation of company grade officers
in the SMCR through increased recruiting efforts and increased Active-
Duty command emphasis on Reserve opportunities and participation. We
thank Congress for the continued support of legislation to allow
bonuses for officers in the SMCR who fill a critical skill or shortage.
We are aggressively implementing the Selected Reserve Officer
Affiliation Bonus program and expect it to fill 50 vacant billets this
year, with plans to expand the program in the coming years. We
appreciate your continued support and funding of incentives such as
this, which offset the cost that officers must often incur in traveling
to billets at Marine Corps Reserve locations nationwide.
quality-of-life
Our future success will rely on the Marine Corps' most valuable
asset--our marines and their families. We, Marine Forces Reserve,
believe it is our obligation to arm our marines and their families with
as much information as possible on the programs and resources available
to them. Arming our marines and their families with information on
their education benefits, available childcare programs, family
readiness resources, and the health care benefits available to them,
provides them with unlimited potential for their quality-of-life.
Education
Last year, I testified that there were no laws offering academic
and financial protections for Reserve military members who are college
students. I was glad to see that there is movement in Congress to
protect our college students and offer greater incentives for all
servicemembers to attend colleges. I appreciate recent 2005 legislation
protecting a military member's college education investments and status
when called to duty.
More than 1,000 Reserve marines chose to use tuition assistance in
fiscal year 2004 in order to help finance their education. This tuition
assistance came to more than $1.9 million in fiscal year 2004 for more
than 3,700 courses. Many of these marines were deployed to Afghanistan
and Iraq, and took their courses via distance learning courses. In this
way tuition assistance helped to mitigate the financial burden of
education and maintained progress in the marine's planned education
schedule. We support continued funding of tuition assistance as
currently authorized for activated Reserves. I fully support
initiatives that will increase Montgomery G.I. Bill (MGIB) benefits for
Reserve and National Guard servicemembers, as it is a key retention and
recruiting tool and an important part of our commandant's guidance to
enhance the education of all marines. House Resolution 4200, passed by
both the House and Senate in October 2004 authorized MGIB benefits for
certain Reserve and National Guard servicemembers and increased the
benefits for others. I heartily thank you for this initiative and look
forward to it's anticipated implementation by the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) in September 2005.
Child Care Programs
Marines and their families are often forced to make difficult
choices in selecting childcare, before, during and after a marine's
deployment in support of the global war on terror. We are deeply
grateful for the joint initiative funded by the Department of Defense
(DOD) and announced on March 3, 2005, by the Boys and Girls Clubs of
America and the National Association of Child Care Resource and
Referral Agencies. Without the fiscal authorization provided by the
Senate and House, these programs could not have been initiated or
funded. These combined resources have immeasurably contributed to the
quality-of-life of our marines' and their families. I thank you all for
your support in the past and the future in providing sufficient funds
for these key initiatives.
Family Readiness
Everyone in Marine Forces Reserve recognizes the strategic role our
families have in our mission readiness, particularly in our
mobilization preparedness. We help our families to prepare for day-to-
day military life and the deployment cycle (pre-deployment, deployment,
post-deployment, and follow-on) by providing educational opportunities
at unit family days, pre-deployment briefs, return and reunion, post-
deployment briefs and through programs such as the Key Volunteer
Network (KVN) and Lifestyle Insights, Networking, Knowledge and Skills
(L.I.N.K.S.). We also envision the creation of regional quality-of-life
coordinators, similar to the Marine Corps Recruiting Command program,
for our Reserve marines and their families.
At each of our Reserve Training Centers, the KVN program serves as
the link between the command and the family members, providing them
with official communication, information and referrals. The key
volunteers, many of whom are parents of young, unmarried marines,
provide a means of proactively educating families on the military
lifestyle and benefits, provide answers for individual questions and
areas of concerns and, perhaps most importantly, enhance the sense of
community within the unit. The L.I.N.K.S. program is a spouse-to-spouse
orientation service offered to family members to acquaint them with the
military lifestyle and the Marine Corps, including the challenges
brought about by deployments. Online and CD-ROM versions of L.I.N.K.S
makes this valuable tool more readily accessible to families of Reserve
marines not located near Marine Corps installations.
Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS) OneSource is another
important tool that provides marines and their families with around-
the-clock information and referral service for subjects such as
parenting, childcare, education, finances, legal issues, elder care,
health, wellness, deployment, crisis support, and relocation via toll-
free telephone and Internet access.
The peacetime/wartime support team and the support structure within
the inspector and instructor staff uses all these tools to provide
families of activated or deployed marines with assistance in developing
proactive, prevention-oriented steps such as family care plans, powers
of attorney, family financial planning, and enrollment in the Dependent
Eligibility and Enrollment Reporting System.
All of these programs depend on adequate funding of our manpower
and operations and maintenance (O&M) accounts.
Managed Health Network
Managed Health Network, through a contract with the DOD, is
providing specialized mental health support services to military
personnel and their families. This unique program is designed to bring
counselors on-site at Reserve Training Centers to support all phases of
the deployment cycle. Marine Forces Reserve is incorporating this
resource into family days, pre-deployment briefs, and return and
reunion briefs to ensure a team approach. Follow-up services are then
scheduled after marines return from combat at various intervals to
facilitate on-site individual and group counseling.
TRICARE
Since September 11, Congress has gone to great lengths to improve
TRICARE benefits available to the Guard and Reserve and we are very
appreciative to Congress for all the recent changes to the program.
Beginning April 2005, TRICARE Reserve Select will be implemented,
providing eligible Guard and Reserve members with comprehensive health
care. This new option, similar to TRICARE Standard, is designed
specifically for Reserve members activated on or after September 11,
2001, who enter into an agreement to serve continuously in the Selected
Reserve for a period of 1 or more years. Other key provisions include
coverage for Selected Reserves after an activation, which provides a
year of coverage while in non-Active-Duty status for every 90 days of
consecutive Active-Duty. The member must agree to remain in the
Selected Reserve for one or more whole years. Also, a permanent earlier
eligibility date for coverage due to activation has been established at
up to 90 days before an Active-Duty reporting date for members and
their families.
The new legislation also waives certain deductibles for activated
members' families. This reduces the potential double payment of health
care deductibles by members' civilian coverage. Another provision
allows DOD to protect the beneficiary by paying the providers for
charges above the maximum allowable charge. Transitional health care
benefits have been established, regulating the requirements and
benefits for members separating. We are thankful for these permanent
changes that extend health care benefits to family members and extend
benefits up to 90 days prior to their activation date and up to 180
days after de-activation.
Reserve members are also eligible for dental care under the Tri-
Service Dental Plan for a modest monthly fee. In an effort to increase
awareness of the new benefits, Reserve members are now receiving more
information regarding the changes through an aggressive education and
marketing plan. I would like to also ask Congress and this committee
for their support of the new fiscal year 2005 legislation that includes
improvements. These initiatives will further improve the health care
benefits for our Reserves and National Guard members and families.
Casualty Assistance
One of the most significant responsibilities of the site support
staff is that of casualty assistance. It is at the darkest hour for our
marine families that our support is most invaluable. By virtue of our
dispersed posture, Marine Forces Reserve site support staffs are
uniquely qualified to accomplish the majority of all Marine Corps
casualty notifications and provide the associated family assistance.
Currently, Marine Forces Reserve conducts approximately 92 percent of
all notifications and follow-on assistance for the families of our
fallen Marine Corps brethren. In recognition of this greatest of
sacrifices, there is no duty to our families that we treat with more
importance. However, the duties of our casualty assistance officers
(CAOs) go well beyond notification. We ensure that they are adequately
trained, equipped and supported by all levels of command. Once an
officer or staff noncommissioned officer (NCO) is designated as a CAO,
he or she assists the family members in every possible way, from
planning the return and final rest of their marine, counseling them on
benefits and entitlements, to providing a strong shoulder when needed.
The casualty officer is the family's central point of contact, serving
as a representative or liaison with the media, funeral home, government
agencies, or any other agency that may be involved. Every available
asset is directed to our marine families to ensure they receive the
utmost support. The Marine Corps Reserve also provides support for
military funerals for our veterans. The marines at our Reserve sites
performed 7,621 funerals in calendar year 2004.
The Marine Corps is also committed to supporting the wishes of
seriously injured marines, allowing them to remain on Active-Duty if
they desire or making their transition home as smooth as possible.
Leveraging the organizational network and strengths of the Marine for
Life (M4L) Program, we are currently implementing an injured support
program to assist injured marines, sailors serving with marines, and
their families. The goal is to bridge the gap between military medical
care and the VA--providing continuity of support through transition and
assistance for several years afterwards. Planned features of the
program include: advocacy for marines, sailors, and their families
within the Marine Corps and with external agencies; pre- and post-
service separation case management; assistance in working with physical
evaluation boards; an interactive Web site for disability/benefit
information; an enhanced MCCS OneSource capability for 24/7/365
information; facilitation assistance with Federal hiring preferences;
coordination via an assigned marine liaison with veterans, public, and
private organizations providing support to our seriously injured;
improved VA handling of marine cases; and development of any required
proposals for legislative changes to better support our marines and
sailors. This program began limited operations in early January 2005.
We are able to support these vitally important programs because of the
wide geographic dispersion of our units.
Marine for Life
Our commitment to take care of our own includes a marine's
transition from honorable military service back to civilian life.
Initiated in fiscal year 2002, the M4L program continues to provide
support for 27,000 marines transitioning from Active service back to
civilian life each year. Built on the philosophy, Once a Marine, Always
a Marine, Reserve marines in over 80 cities help transitioning marines
and their families to get settled in their new communities. Sponsorship
includes assistance with employment, education, housing, childcare,
veterans' benefits, and other support services needed to make a smooth
transition. To provide this support, the M4L program taps into a
network of former marines and marine-friendly businesses, organizations
and individuals willing to lend a hand to a marine who has served
honorably. Approximately 2,000 marines are logging onto the Web-based
electronic network for assistance each month. Assistance from career
retention specialists and transitional recruiters helps transitioning
marines tremendously by getting the word out about the program.
Employer Support
Members of the Guard and Reserve who choose to make a career must
expect to be subject to multiple activations. Employer support of this
fact is essential to a successful activation and directly effects
retention and recruiting. With continuous rotation of Reserve marines,
we recognize that a rapid deactivation process is a high priority to
reintegrate marines back into their civilian lives quickly and properly
in order to preserve the Reserve Force for the future. We support
incentives for employers who support their activated Guard and Reserve
employees such as the Small Business Military reservist Tax Credit Act,
which allows small business employers a credit against income tax for
employees who participate in the military Reserve component and are
called to Active-Duty.
equipment
Currently, the Marine Corps has approximately 30 percent of its
ground equipment forward deployed. In certain critical, low-density
items, this percentage is closer to 50 percent. This equipment has been
sourced from the Active component, Marine Forces Reserve, the maritime
prepositioned force as well as equipment from Marine Corps Logistics
Command stores and war reserves. Primarily, our contributed major items
of equipment remain in theater and rotating Marine Forces fall in on
the in-theater assets. In some cases where extraordinary use has
resulted in the inordinate deterioration of equipment (such as the
Corps' Light Armored Vehicles), equipment rotations have been performed
as directed and managed by Marine Corps headquarters.
Maintaining current readiness levels will require continued support
as our equipment continues to age at a pace exceeding replacement peace
time rates. The global war on terrorism equipment usage rates average
eight to one over normal peacetime usage due to continuous combat
operations. This high usage rate in a harsh operating environment,
coupled with the added weight of added armor and unavoidable delays of
scheduled maintenance due to combat, is degrading our equipment at an
accelerated rate. If this equipment returns to the Continental United
States, costly, extensive service life extension and overhaul/rebuild
programs will be required in order to bring this equipment back into
satisfactory condition. My recommendation would be to leave the worn
out equipment behind and procure new equipment.
Even with these wartime demands, equipment readiness rates for
Marine Forces Reserve deployed ground equipment in the Central Command
(CENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR) is averaging 93 percent. At
home, as we continue to aggressively train and prepare our marines, we
have maintained ground equipment readiness rates of 91 percent. The
types of equipment held by home training centers are the same as those
held within the Active component. However, the ``set'' of ground
equipment presently in garrison is not the full equipment combat
allowance for Marine Forces Reserve. To reach the level of full
equipment combat allowance for Marine Forces Reserve would require us
to draw ground equipment from other allowances and inventory options
across the Marine Corps. Additionally, due to the Marine Corps' cross-
leveling efforts of equipment inventories to support home station
shortfalls resulting from equipment deployed in support of the global
war on terrorism, Marine Forces Reserve will experience significant
equipment shortfalls of communication and electronic equipment. This
specific equipment type shortfall will approximate 10 percent across
the force in most areas, and somewhat greater for certain low density
black box type equipment sets. Also, an infantry battalion of equipment
originating from Marine Forces Reserve remains in support of deployed
forces in the CENTCOM AOR. Although the equipment shortfalls will not
preclude sustainment training within the force, the equipment
availability is not optimal.
Strategic Ground Equipment Working Group
For the past year, headquarters, Marine Corps installations and
logistics have chaired the Strategic Ground Equipment Working Group
(SGEWG). The mission of this organization is to best position the
Corps' equipment to support the needs of the deployed global war on
terrorism forces, the Corps' strategic programs, and training of non-
deployed forces. My staff has been fully engaged in this process and
the results have been encouraging for Marine Forces Reserve, leading to
an increase in overall supply readiness of approximately 5 percent. The
efforts of the SGEWG, combined with the efforts of my staff to
redistribute equipment to support non-deployed units, have resulted in
continued training capability for the Reserve Forces back home.
Individual Combat Clothing and Equipment, Individual Protective
Equipment
In order to continue seamless integration into the Active
component, my ground component priorities are the sustained improvement
of individual combat clothing and equipment, individual protective
equipment, and overall equipment readiness. I am pleased to report that
every Reserve marine deployed over the past year in support of OIF and
OEF, along with those currently deployed into harm's way, were fully
equipped with the most current individual clothing/combat equipment
(ICCE) and individual protective equipment (IPE). Continued funding
support in this area is most appreciated.
National Guard and Reserve Equipment Appropriation
National Guard and Reserve Equipment Appropriation (NGREA)
continues to provide extraordinary leverage in fielding critical
equipment to your Guard and Reserves. In fiscal year 2005, NGREA
provided $50 million ($10 million for OIF/OEF requirements, and $40
million for title III procurement requirements), enabling us to
robustly respond to the pressing needs of the individual marine, Total
Force, and combatant commanders in both ground and aviation programs.
This funding also enhanced our ability to sustain the readiness of our
units in support of OEF and OIF. NGREA enabled the procurement of
important systems such as the virtual combat convoy trainer-marine
(VCCT-M), a cognitive skills simulator that provides realistic convoy
crew training and incidental driver training to your marines. The first
of these systems will be deployed to Naval Station Seal Beach, home
site to 5th Battalion, 14th Marine Regiment, to assist in their
preparation for deployment to Iraq. Another device procured through
NGREA is the medium tactical vehicle replacement training simulator, a
combined operator and maintenance training system that supports our new
medium tactical vehicle. We have also been able to phase out our legacy
simulator systems with the purchase of 50 indoor simulated marksmanship
trainer-enhanced (ISMT-E) systems. Fourth Marine aircraft wing has
procured critically needed warfighting requirements such as another 4
HNVS FLIR systems for the CH-53Es, 10 sets of aircraft survivability
equipment for the AH-1Ws, and 26 sets of lightweight armor/cockpit
seats for the CH-46s. I am also proud to report that we have a combat
capable F/A-18A+ squadron currently deployed as a direct result of
previous years' NGREA funding for F/A-18A ECP-583 upgrades. Marine
Fighter/Attack Squadron-142 has already seen action in Iraq.
Critical Asset Rapid Distribution Facility
In order to ensure that this equipment is available to the
deploying forces, I created the Marine Forces Reserve Materiel
Prepositioning Program and designated my special training allowance
pool (which traditionally held such items as cold weather gear) as the
Critical Asset Rapid Distribution Facility (CARDF). The CARDF has been
designated as the primary location for all newly fielded items of
individual clothing and combat equipment for issue to Marine Forces
Reserve. Equipment such as the improved load bearing equipment,
lightweight helmet, and improved first aid kit has been sent to the
CARDF for secondary distribution to deploying units.
Training Allowance
For principle end items (PEIs), Marine Forces Reserve units have
established training allowances (on average approximately 80 percent of
their established table of equipment). This equipment represents the
minimum needed by the unit to maintain the training readiness necessary
to deploy, while at the same time is within their ability to maintain
under routine conditions. Establishment of training allowances allows
Marine Forces Reserve to better cross level equipment to support the
continental U.S. training requirements of all units of the force with a
minimal overall equipment requirement. Of course, this concept requires
the support of the service to ensure that the ``delta'' between a
unit's training allowance and table of equipment (that gear necessary
to fully conduct a combat mission) is available in the event of
deployment. Current Headquarters Marine Corps policy of retaining
needed equipment in theater for use by deploying forces ensures that
mobilized Marine Forces Reserve units will have the PEIs necessary to
conduct their mission. Continued congressional funding for Marine Corps
equipment procurement/replacement will remain vital in order for the
service to continue to do what the Nation asks, and I am confident that
you will continue to respond to the needs of your Marine Corps.
infrastructure
Marine Forces Reserve is and will continue to be a community-based
force. This is a fundamental strength of Marine Forces Reserve. Our
long-range strategy is to retain that strength by maintaining our
connection with communities in the most cost effective way. We are not,
nor do we want to be, limited exclusively to large metropolitan areas
nor consolidated into a few isolated enclaves, but rather we intend to
divest Marine Corps-owned infrastructure and locate our units in Joint
Reserve Training Centers throughout the country. Marine Forces Reserve
units are currently located at 185 sites in 48 States, the District of
Columbia, and Puerto Rico; 35 sites are owned or leased by the Marine
Corps Reserve, 150 are either tenant or joint sites. Fifty-four percent
of the Reserve centers we occupy are more than 30 years old, and of
these, 41 are over 50 years old.
The age of our infrastructure means that much of it was built
before Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP) was a major
consideration in design and construction. These facilities require AT/
FP resolution through structural improvements, relocation, replacement
or the acquisition of additional stand-off distance. With the changes
in force structure mentioned earlier, extensive facilities upgrades are
required at a few locations. Maintaining adequate facilities is
critical to training that supports our readiness and sends a strong
message to our marines and sailors about the importance of their
service.
BRAC 2005
We look at Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 as an
opportunity to realize our long-range strategic infrastructure goals
through efficient joint ventures and increased training center
utilization without jeopardizing our community presence. In cooperation
with other Reserve components, notably the Army Reserve and the Army
National Guard, we are working toward Reserve basing solutions that
reduce restoration and modernization backlogs and AT/FP vulnerability.
conclusion
As I have stated in the beginning of my testimony, your consistent
and steadfast support of our marines and their families has directly
contributed to our successes, both past and present, and I thank you
for that support. As we push on into the future, your continued concern
and efforts will play a vital role in the success of Marine Forces
Reserve. Due to the dynamics of the era we live in, there is still much
to be done.
The Marine Corps Reserve continues to be a very young force and is
always looking for outstanding citizens who strive to give their best
for their country. Recruiting initiatives, especially within the
education realm, are always an added incentive for our prospective
marines.
I would also ask for your continued support for initiatives that
provide assistance to the Reserve and Guard members, their families and
employers who are sacrificing so much in support of our Nation. Despite
strong morale and good planning, activations, and deployments place
great stress on these Americans. Employer incentives, educational
benefits, medical care and family care are just some of the issues that
would contribute to the sustainment of Reserve marines.
Equipment and facilities are the last two areas of concern that I
have. The continuous support from congress for upgrades to our
warfighting equipment has directly impacted the saving of American
lives on the battlefield. However, as I stated earlier, our current
operational tempo has led to the rapid deterioration of much of the
same fighting equipment throughout the force. In this regard, I fully
support the fiscal year 2005 supplemental request and, in particular,
actions taken by the House to provide funding for our top priorities:
Light Armored Vehicles (LAV) and LAV Product Improvement Program. I ask
the Senate to do the same.
Although we currently maintain a high level of readiness, we will
need significant financial assistance to help maintain and/or replace
our warfighting equipment in the very near future. Also, as the Marine
Forces Reserve makes adjustments in warfighting capabilities over the
next 2 years, several facilities will need to be converted to provide a
proper training environment for the new units. Funding for these
conversions would greatly assist our warfighting capabilities.
My time as Commander, Marine Forces Reserve has been tremendously
rewarding. Testifying before congressional committees and subcommittees
has always been a great pleasure, as it has afforded me the opportunity
to let the American people know what an outstanding patriotic group of
citizens we have in the Marine Corps Reserve. Thank you for your
continued support.
______
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. John A. Bradley, USAF
Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of the committee, I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. I want to thank
you for your continued support, which has helped your Air Force Reserve
(AFR) address vital recruiting, retention, modernization, and
infrastructural infrastructure needs. Your passage of last year's pay
and quality of life initiatives sent a clear message to our citizen
Airmen that their efforts are appreciated and supported by the American
people, and also by those of you in the highest positions of
government. Wherever you find the United States Air Force (USAF), at
home or abroad, you will find the Active and Reserve members working
side-by-side, trained to one tier of readiness, seamlessly integrated
into a military force that is READY NOW!
total force
The AFR continues to address new challenges in 2005. Although
partial mobilization persists, demobilizations have increased
significantly. In spite of the strains that mobilization has placed on
the personal and professional lives of our Reserve members,
volunteerism continues to be a significant means of contribution.
Volunteerism is the preferred method of fulfilling requirements for
future global war on terror actions. While dedicated members of the AFR
continue to meet validated operational requirements, the AFR, in
cooperation with the Air Force personnel requirements division is
exploring ways to enhance volunteerism, including use of volunteer IRR
members. Recruiting and retention of quality servicemembers are top
priority for the AFR and competition for these members among other
services, as well as within the civilian community has reached an all-
time high.
Recruiting
In fiscal year 2004, and for the last 4 consecutive years, Air
Force Reserve Command (AFRC) exceeded its recruiting goal. This
remarkable feat is achieved through the outstanding efforts of our
recruiters and with the superb assistance of our Reserve members who
help tell our story of public service to the American people. Despite
the long-term effects of high operations tempo (OPTEMPO) and personnel
tempo (PERSTEMPO), AFRC only fell short of its fiscal year 2004 end-
strength by .7 percent, reaching 99.37 percent, or merely 578 assigned
short of congressionally funded requirements.
Recruiting continues to face significant challenges. The pool of
Active-Duty separatees continues to shrink from itsdue height prior to
force reductions over the last decade ago, and the competition for
these members has become even keener. The Active-Duty is intensifying
its efforts in retention and the National Guard is competing for these
assets as well. Additionally, the current high OPTEMPO/PERSTEMPO and a
perceived likelihood of activation and deployment are being routinely
cited as significant reasons why separating members are declining to
choose continuing military service in the Reserve. These issues further
contribute to the civilian sector's ability to attract these members
away from military service. One consequence of the reduced success in
attracting separating members from Active-Duty is the need to make up
this difference through attracting non-prior service (NPS) members.
Historically, Reserve recruiting accesses close to 25 percent of
eligible separating Active-Duty Air Force members (i.e. no break in
service), which accounts for a significant portion of annual
accessions. While having enough Basic Military Training (BMT) and
Technical Training School quotas has long been an issue, the increased
dependence on NPS accessions strains these requirements even further.
To meet training requirements, 4,000 training slots per year are now
allocated and funded for the AFR.
A new forecasting tool developed by our training division allows
everyone, from unit level to wing training managers, to Numbered Air
Force (NAF) and AFRC Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) functional
managers, to participate in the forecasting with the Chief of
Recruiting Services providing final approval.
Finally, with overall end strength of the AFR dipping below 100
percent, some career-fields are undermanned. In order to avoid possible
readiness concerns, recruiters will continue to meet the challenge of
guiding applicants to critical job specialties.
The Reserve is taking advantage of an Active-Duty Force shaping
initiative. Beginning in fiscal year 2004 and ending in fiscal year
2005, the Air Force will offer Active-Duty members the opportunity to
use the Palace Chase program to change components. The AFR is using
this opportunity to access prior servicemembers with critical career
skills. In fiscal year 2004, 1,200 Active-Duty members utilized Palace
Chase to join the Air Reserve component, with over half selecting the
Air Force Reserve. This number may grow in fiscal year 2005.
For recruits who have not served in a military component, the
development of the Split Training Option which began in October 2003,
provides a flexible tool for recruiters to use in scheduling BMT
classes and technical school classes at non-consecutive times.
Retention
Though retention was improved through ``Stop-Loss'' in recent
years, the eventual effects of this program were realized in fiscal
year 2004. Retention in both officer and enlisted categories has
remained strong. Fiscal year 2004 ended with officer retention at 92.3
percent and overall enlisted retention at 88.4 percent. These retention
rates are in line with averages over the last 5 years.
As the Reserve component continues to surge to meet operational
requirements necessary for the successful prosecution of the global war
on terrorism, we continue to examine existing laws and policies that
govern enlisted incentives and related compensation issues. The Reserve
enlisted bonus program is a major contributor to attract and retain
both unit and individual mobilization augmentee members in those
critical unit type code tasked career fields. To enhance retention of
our reservists, we work to ensure relevant compensation statutes
reflect the growing reliance on the Reserve component to accomplish
Active-Duty missions and provide compensatory equity between members of
both components. The reenlistment bonus authority of the Active and
Reserve components is one area we are working to change. We continue to
explore the feasibility of expanding the bonus program to our Active
Guard Reserve (AGR) and Air Reserve Technician (ART) members; however,
no decision has yet been made to implement this. In addition, the
Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP), the Career Enlisted Flyers Incentive
Pay (CEFIP) and Aircrew Incentive Pay (ACIP) continue to be offered to
retain our rated assets, both officer and enlisted.
The Reserve has made many strides in increasing education benefits
for our members, offering 100 percent tuition assistance for those
individuals pursuing an undergraduate degree and continuing to pay 75
percent for graduate degrees. We also employ the services of the
Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES) for
College Level Examination Program (CLEP) testing for all reservists and
their spouses.
We will continue to seek innovative ways to enhance retention.
Quality-of-Life Initiatives
We expanded the AFR Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP) program by
including an additional six Air Force specialty codes to enhance
recruitment and retention, improve program alignment, and provide
parity to Reserve members. Where there is Reserve strength, the
expansion authorizes the payment of SDAP to a reservist qualifying in
the same skill and location as their Active-Duty counterpart. The AFR
SDAP program has continued to evolve and improve since Secretarial
authority removed the tour length requirement for the Air Reserve
component in July 2000.
We appreciate the support provided in the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2005 that expanded the Reserve
health benefits. At your direction, the Department is implementing the
new TRICARE Reserve benefits that will ensure the individual medical
readiness of members of the Guard and Reserve, and contribute to the
maintenance of an effective AFR force. The Department has made
permanent their early access to TRICARE upon notification of call-up
and their continued access to TRICARE for 6 months following Active-
Duty service for both individuals and their families. We are
implementing the TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) coverage for AFR
personnel and their families who meet the requirements established in
law. TRS is a premium-based healthcare plan available for purchase by
certain eligible members of the National Guard and Reserves who have
been activated for a contingency operation since September 11, 2001.
This program will serve as an important bridge for all Reserve and
Guard members as they move back to other employment and the utilization
of the private health care market. We believe that the design of TRS in
a manner that supports retention and expands health benefits is
creative and should be studied before any futher adjustments are
contemplated.
The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004 included some temporary authorities,
providing enhanced Health Care/TRICARE benefits for RC members. Under
Section 702, Selected Reserve members with proof of unemployment became
eligible to purchase TRICARE benefits. Policy guidance is required
prior to implementation. Under Section 703, members activated in
support of a contingency operation for more than 30 days are also
eligible for this program. Members and their families became eligible
for benefits upon receipt of a delayed-effective-order to Active-Duty
for more than 30 days in support of a contingency operation, or up to
60 days before the date on which the 30-day period of Active-Duty is to
commence, whichever is later. Policy guidance has been implemented.
Additionally, the NDAA extended the Transitional Assistance Management
Program benefit period from 60 and 120 days to 180 days for eligible
members and their families. Benefits under these temporary authorities
were effective from 6 November 2003 to 31 December 2004.
A change in the Joint Federal Regulation Travel policy authorized
expenses for retained lodging for a member who takes leave during a TDY
contingency deployment to be paid as a reimbursable expense. This
change became effective 24 February 2004, and has since alleviated the
personal and financial hardship deployed reservists experience with
regard to retaining lodging and losing per diem while taking leave.
fleet modernization
F-16 Fighting Falcon
Air combat command and AFRC are upgrading the F-16 Block 25/30/32
in all core combat areas by installing global positioning system (GPS)
navigation system, night vision imaging system (NVIS) and NVIS
compatible aircraft lighting, situational awareness data link (SADL),
target pod integration, GPS steered ``smart weapons,'' an integrated
electronics suite, pylon integrated dispenser system (PIDS), digital
terrain system (DTS), and the ALE-50 (towed decoy system). The
acquisition of the Litening advanced targeting pod (ATP) marked the
greatest jump in combat capability for AFRC F-16s in years. At the
conclusion of the Persian Gulf War, it became apparent that the ability
to employ precision-guided munitions, specifically laser-guided bombs,
would be a requirement for involvement in future conflicts. Litening
affords the capability to employ precisely targeted laser-guided bombs
(LGBs) effectively in both day and night operations, any time at any
place. This capability allows AFRC F-16s to fulfill any mission tasking
requiring a self-designating, targeting-pod platform, providing needed
relief for heavily tasked Active-Duty units. These improvements, and
recent funding to upgrade all Litening pods to the latest version
(Litening AT), have put AFRC F-16s at the leading edge of combat
capability. The combination of these upgrades are unavailable in any
other combat aircraft and make the Block 25/30/32 F-16 the most
versatile combat asset available to a theater commander.
Tremendous work has been done to keep the Block 25/30/32 F-16
employable in today's complex and demanding combat environment. This
success has been the result of farsighted planning that has capitalized
on emerging commercial and military technology to provide specific
capabilities that were projected to be critical. That planning and
vision must continue if the F-16 is to remain useable as the largest
single community of aircraft in America's fighter force. Older model
Block 25/30/32 F-16 aircraft require structural improvements to
guarantee that they will last as long as they are needed. They also
require data processor and wiring system upgrades in order to support
employment of more sophisticated precision attack weapons. These models
must have improved pilot displays to integrate and present the large
volumes of data now provided to the cockpit. Additional capabilities
are needed to eliminate fratricide and allow weapons employment at
increased range, day or night and in all weather conditions. They must
also be equipped with significantly improved threat detection, threat
identification, and threat engagement systems in order to meet the
challenges of combat survival and employment for the next 20 years.
A/OA-10 Thunderbolt
There are five major programs over the next 5 years to ensure the
A/OA-10 remains a viable part of the total Air Force. The first is
increasing its precision engagement capabilities. The A-10 was designed
for the Cold War and is the most effective Close Air Support (CAS)
anti-armor platform in the USAF, as demonstrated during the Persian
Gulf War. Unfortunately, its systems have not kept pace with modern
tactics as was proven during Operation Allied Force. Until the Litening
II ATP was integrated, the AGM-65 (Maverick) was the only precision-
guided weapon carried on the A-10. The integration method used to
employ the targeting, however, was an interim measure and the A-10
still lacks a permanent, sustainable means of integrating the Litening
pod into its avionics. Additionally, there has been a critical need for
a datalink to help identify friendly troops and vehicles, which will
reduce fratricide. There has been a datalink solution available for the
A-10 since 1996 and is currently employed on the F-16. Newer weapons
are being added to the Air Force inventory regularly, but the current
avionics and computer structure limits the deployment of these weapons
on the A-10. The Precision Engagement (PE) and Suite 3 programs will
help correct this limitation, but the AFR does not expect to see PE
installed until fiscal year 2008 and it still does not include a
datalink. Next, critical systems on the engines are causing lost
sorties and increased maintenance activity. Several design changes to
the accessory gearbox will extend its useful life and reduce the
existing maintenance expense associated with the high removal rate. The
other two programs increase the navigation accuracy and the overall
capability of the fire control computer, both increasing the weapons
system's overall effectiveness.
Looking to the future, there is a requirement for a training
package of 30 PRC-112B/C survival radios for 10th Air Force fighter,
rescue, and special operations units. While more capable, these radios
are also more demanding to operate and additional units are needed to
ensure the aircrews are fully proficient in their operation.
One of the A-10 challenges is resource money for upgrade in the
area of high threat survivability. Previous efforts focused on an
accurate missile warning system and effective, modern flares; however,
a new preemptive covert flare system may satisfy the requirement. The
A-10 can leverage the work done on the F-16 Radar Warning Receiver and
C-130 towed decoy development programs to achieve a cost-effective
capability. The A/OA-10 has a thrust deficiency in its operational
environment. As taskings evolved, commanders have had to reduce fuel
loads, limit take-off times to early morning hours and refuse taskings
that increase gross weights to unsupportable limits. Forty-five AFRC A/
OA-10s need upgraded structures and engines (2 engines per aircraft
plus 5 spares for a total of 95 engines).
B-52 Stratofortress
In the next 5 years, several major programs will be introduced to
increase the capabilities of the B-52 aircraft. Included here are
programs such as a crash survivable flight data recorder and a standard
flight data recorder, upgrades to the current electro-optical viewing
system, chaff and flare improvements, and improvements to cockpit
lighting and crew escape systems to allow use of night vision goggles.
Enhancements to the AFRC B-52 fleet currently under consideration
are:
Visual clearance of the target area in support of
other conventional munitions employment;
Self-designation of targets, eliminating the current
need for support aircraft to accomplish this role;
Target coordinate updates to JDAM and WCMD, improving
accuracy; and
Bomb damage assessment of targets.
In order to continue the viability of the B-52, several
improvements and modifications are necessary. Although the aircraft has
been extensively modified since its entry into the fleet, the advent of
precision guided munitions and the increased use of the B-52 in
conventional and operations other than war (OOTW) operation require
additional avionics modernization and changes to the weapons
capabilities such as the avionics midlife improvement, conventional
enhancement modification (CEM), and the integrated conventional stores
management system (ICSMS). Changes in the threat environment are also
driving modifications to the defensive suite including situational
awareness defense improvement and the electronic counter measures
improvement (ECMI).
Recently, the B-52 began using the Litening advanced targeting pod
to locate targets and employ precision weapons. The targeting pod
interface has adapted equipment from an obsolete system. The system
works but requires an updated system to take full advantage of the
targeting pod capability.
Like the A-10, it also requires a datalink to help reduce
fratricide as its mission changes to employ ordinance closer and closer
to friendly forces. The Litening pod continues to see incremental
improvements but needs emphasis on higher resolution sensors and a more
powerful, yet eye-safe laser, to accommodate the extremely high
employment altitudes (over 40,000 feet) of the B-52.
The B-52 was originally designed to strike targets across the globe
from launch in the United States. This capability is being repeatedly
demonstrated, but the need for real time targeting information and
immediate reaction to strike location changes is needed. Multiple
modifications are addressing these needs. These integrated advanced
communications systems will enhance the B-52 capability to launch and
modify target locations while airborne. Other communications
improvements are the Global Air Traffic Management (GATM) Phase 1, an
improved ARC-210, the KY-100 Secure Voice, and a GPS-TACAN Replacement
System.
As can be expected with an airframe of the age of the B-52, much
must be done to enhance its reliability and replace older, less
reliable or failing hardware. These include a fuel enrichment valve
modification, engine oil system package, and an engine accessories
upgrade, all to increase the longevity of the airframe.
MC-130H Talon
In 2006, AFRC and Air Force Special Operations Command will face a
significant decision point on whether on not to retire the Talon I.
This largely depends on the determination of the upcoming SOF Tanker
Requirement Study. Additionally, the MC-130H Talon II aircraft will be
modified to air refuel helicopters. The Air Force CV-22 is being
developed to replace the entire MH-53J Pave Low fleet, and the MC-130E
Combat Talon I. The CV-22 program has been plagued with problems and
delays and has an uncertain future. Ultimately, supply and demand will
impact willingness and ability to pay for costly upgrades along with
unforeseeable expenses required to sustain an aging weapons system.
HC-130P/N Hercules
Over the next 5 years, there will be primarily sustainability
modifications to the weapons systems to allow it to maintain
compatibility with the remainder of the C-130 fleet. In order to
maintain currency with the Active-Duty fleet, AFRC will accelerate the
installation of the APN-241 as a replacement for the APN-59.
Additionally, AFRC will receive two aircraft modified from the ``E''
configuration to the search and rescue configuration. All AFRC assets
will be upgraded to provide night vision imaging system (NVIS) mission
capability for C-130 combat rescue aircraft.
HH-60G Pave Hawk
Combat search and rescue (CSAR) mission area modernization strategy
currently focuses on resolving critical weapon system capability
shortfalls and deficiencies that pertain to the combat Air Force's
combat identification, data links, night/all-weather capability, threat
countermeasures, sustainability, expeditionary operations, and Para
rescue modernization efforts. Since the CAF's CSAR forces have several
critical capability shortfalls that impact their ability to effectively
accomplish their primary mission tasks today, most CSAR modernization
programs/initiatives are concentrated in the near-term (fiscal year
2000-2006). These are programs that:
Improve capability to pinpoint location and
authenticate identity of downed aircrew members/isolated
personnel;
Provide line-of-sight and over-the-horizon high speed
LPI/D data link capabilities for improving battle space/
situational awareness;
Improve command and control capability to rapidly
respond to ``isolating'' incidents and efficiently/effectively
task limited assets;
Improve capability to conduct rescue/recovery
operations at night, in other low illumination conditions, and
in all but the most severe weather conditions;
Provide warning and countermeasure capabilities
against RF/IR/EO/DE threats; and
Enhance availability, reliability, maintainability,
and sustainability of aircraft weapon systems.
WC/C-130J Hercules
The current fleet is being replaced with new WC-130J models. This
replacement allows for longer range and ensures weather reconnaissance
capability well into the next decade. Once conversion is complete, the
53rd weather reconnaissance squadron will consist of 10 WC-130Js.
Presently, there are 10 WC-130J models at Keesler Air Force Base (AFB),
MS undergoing qualification test and evaluation (QT&E). Deliveries were
based on the resolution of deficiencies identified in test and will
impact the start of operational testing and the achievement of interim
operational capability (IOC). Major deficiencies include: propellers
(durability/supportability) and radar tilt and start up attenuation
errors. AFRC continues to work with the manufacturer to resolve the
QT&E documented deficiencies.
C-5 Galaxy
Over the next 4 years, there will be primarily sustainability
modifications to the weapons systems to allow the C-5 to continue as
the backbone of the airlift community. Several major modifications will
be performed on the engines to increase reliability and
maintainability. Additionally, the remainder of the fleet will receive
the avionics modernization that replaces cockpit displays while
upgrading critical navigational and communications equipment. Also,
consideration is being made to install Aircraft Defensive Systems on C-
5A aircraft. Installation of Aircraft Defensive Systems will increase
the survivability of the C-5A in hostile situations.
C-17 Globemaster
In the summer of fiscal year 2005, the first AFRC Unit Equipped C-
17 squadron will stand up at March AFB. This new squadron will enhance
the mobility capabilities for the United States military in peacetime
and in conflict by rapid strategic delivery of troops and all type of
cargo while improving the ability of the total airlift system to
fulfill the worldwide air mobility requirements.
C-141 Starlifter
For the past 31 years, the C-141 has been the backbone of mobility
for the United States military in peacetime and in conflict. In
September 2004 the C-141 retired from the Active-Duty Air Force;
however, Air Force Reserve Command will continue the proud heritage of
this mobility workhorse and will fly the C-141 through the third
quarter of fiscal year 2006. AFRC remains focused in flying the mission
of the C-141 and looks to the future in transitioning to a new mission
aircraft.
C-130 Hercules
AFRC has 127 C-130s including the E, H, J, and N/P models. The
Mobility Air Forces (MAF) currently operate the world's best theater
airlift aircraft, the C-130, and it will continue in service through
2020. In order to continue to meet the Air Force's combat delivery
requirements through the next 17 years, aircraft not being replaced by
the C-130J will become part of the C-130X Program. Phase 1, Avionics
Modernization Program (AMP) program includes a comprehensive cockpit
modernization by replacing aging, unreliable equipment and adding
additional equipment necessary to meet Nav/Safety and GATM
requirements. Together, C-130J and C-130X modernization initiatives
reduce the number of aircraft variants from 20 to 2 core variants,
which will significantly reduce the support footprint and increase the
capability of the C-130 fleet. The modernization of our C-130 forces
strengthens our ability to ensure the success of our war fighting
commanders and lays the foundation for tomorrow's readiness.
KC-135E/R Stratotanker
One of Air Force Reserve Command's most challenging modernization
issues concerns our unit-equipped KC-135s. Eight of the nine air
refueling squadrons are equipped with the KC-135R, while the remaining
one squadron is equipped with KC-135Es. The KC-135E, commonly referred
to as the E-model, has engines that were recovered from retiring
airliners. This conversion, which was accomplished in the early- to
mid-1980s, was intended as an interim solution to provide improvement
in capability while awaiting conversion to the R-model with its new,
high-bypass, turbofan engines and other modifications. The final KC-
135E squadron is currently transitioning to the KC-135R/T Model
aircraft which is scheduled to be completed in fiscal year 2005.
The ability to conduct the air-refueling mission has been stressed
in recent years. Although Total Force contributions have enabled
success in previous air campaigns, shortfalls exist to meet the
requirements of our National Military Strategy. Air Mobility Command's
(AMC) Tanker Requirements Study-2005 (TRS-05) identifies a shortfall in
the number of tanker aircraft and aircrews needed to meet global
refueling requirements in the year 2005. There is currently a shortage
of KC-135 crews and maintenance personnel. Additionally, the number of
KC-135 aircraft available to perform the mission has decreased in
recent years due to an increase in depot-possessed aircraft with a
decrease in mission capable (MC) rates.
I would like to close by offering my sincere thanks to each member
of this committee for your continued support and interest in the
quality-of-life of each Air Force reservist. The pay increases and
added benefits of the last few years have helped us through a
significant and unprecedented time of higher operations tempo. This is
my first opportunity to represent these fine young men and women as the
Chief of Air Force Reserve, and I know that we are on the right path in
establishing a stronger, more focused, force. It is a force no longer
in reserve, but integrated into every mission of the Air Force.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
Well, we appreciate the first panel. That was very
informative.
Senator Nelson, do you want to go first?
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all
for being here today. We appreciate you coming to help us
understand what we can do together to improve our Guard,
Reserve, and Active-Duty components and keep them voluntary,
and to solve any of the issues that we are currently facing and
anticipating, as well as future issues.
One of the questions that I would like to ask each of the
Reserve chiefs pertains to the publicity lately about the
challenges that your individual forces face in meeting
recruiting goals this year. If you followed the last panel, you
heard what your colleagues are facing.
I fully understand that because of high retention in the
Active components, the prior service market, which has
historically been the source for most enlistments in the
Reserve components, is smaller, and many leaving Active-Duty
choose not to join the Guard and Reserve for fear of being
mobilized and returned to Active-Duty in a very short period of
time.
In addition, frequent and lengthy mobilizations and an
improving job market, which creates competition for the same
personnel, are also causing many qualified candidates to not
consider military service at the present time.
I would like each of you to give us a candid assessment of
the posture of recruiting and retention in your particular
force. Once you do that, maybe you could also outline as part
of that explanation and assessment what you are doing to
address the recruiting shortfalls. Perhaps just as important,
address any additional legislation from Congress that might be
helpful to you in that regard.
We will just start from my left and work right across.
General Helmly.
General Helmly. Yes, sir. In fact, sir, the Army Reserve is
authorized an end strength objective of 205,000 with a 95
percent confidence factor under current conditions. Absent
major changes in any of the accessioning agencies, we will end
this year on September 30 at approximately 194,000 or so. That
is a significant issue. In fact, I consider it to be the single
biggest issue that we confront that is within my
responsibility.
To get to the heart of the matter, it would require more
time than we have here. It is a rather intricate subject. As we
have heard, part of this was expectations that had been set in
past years of 1 weekend a month, 2 weeks in the summer. We
changed all of our recruiting ads a couple of years ago, but
culture change is a long, drawn-out process. So setting the
right kinds of expectations is very challenging.
I want to assure you all our quality marks are higher than
Army and DOD standards. We will sustain those. Army Recruiting
Command recruits for us. We provide the resources, dollars, and
recruiters.
It is also intricate with retention. I do not completely
accept the argument that because Active component retention is
higher and stop loss is on, that that is a simple solution. It
is a part of the problem.
Having said that, historically, our Army has set its
objective for Active to Reserve service--and I qualify. When I
say Reserve, I mean National Guard also--too low. We in the
Army Reserve have asked for 2 years running that the target
goal for Active to Selected Reserve service be set at 50
percent or higher, and it has not been set that high. We have
unilaterally increased the number of transition counselors at
the transition points.
Secretary Hall noted in the last panel that the $50 per
month affiliation stipend is provided as an incentive, but that
incentive is some years old. The National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2005 provided an incentive of a $6,000
bonus to incentivize the departing Active component officer to
transfer. That was enacted in law around February of this year,
when the President signed the bill. It is still too new to have
empirical data. I will tell you that we need at least a similar
incentive for enlisted, and then we need to set ourselves a
stretch goal.
I completely support statements made by DOD superiors in
the past that set a concept of continuum of service. We have,
as you properly noted, magnificent young Americans in all the
services and all the components, and once they have proven
themselves, it is my judgment that we should apply ourselves to
retention.
Our retention in the Army Reserve is on average almost 100
percent. The problem there is first term reenlistment stays
down. The 2005-enacted $5,000 to $15,000 reenlistment bonus is
paying handsome dividends, however.
The numbers Secretary Hall mentioned again for in theater
reenlistments are up four- to six-fold over this time last
year. As I reenlisted over 100 Army Reserve soldiers in
January, I asked why. They gave me two answers. First, I am
finally getting an opportunity to do that which I enlisted for,
and I am part of a good team. That says that Active service
makes a difference. Second, the $15,000 bonus helped my family
understand my decision.
I have a couple last points. Amongst those soldiers we have
mobilized, 78 percent of those eligible to reenlist do so. That
is higher than the non-mobilized population. So the issue is
not calling to Active-Duty Reserve members. It is how often and
the extent, or the period of time. I think we know that.
Second, with regard to the propensity to enlist, the
experts at Army Recruiting Command note that amongst non-prior
service people, the biggest discriminator is parental
influence. The propensity to enlist is down 2 percent this year
over last year. You now see changes in recruiting ads focused
on parental influence.
Lastly, it is my judgment we have to do a better job at the
senior levels of our Government advancing the societal and
political arguments that note it is an honorable thing to do,
to serve one's Nation, and amongst the kinds of service,
include service in the Armed Forces. I think that the way OIF
has unfolded has played out in the media that it is all about
war. It is all about Iraq, and we all know it is much larger
than that.
So I have tried to make that cryptic, but I appreciate the
depth and sincerity of your question.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
General Bradley, as you respond, could you additionally
address the question about what the lost opportunity costs are
for every one we do not retain or we do not get from the
Active-Duty to the Reserve? Comment on what it has cost us to
train those individuals and what we lose when we do not get
them and we do not keep them?
General Bradley. Yes, sir. Sir, as you noted, there are a
lot of challenges in recruiting. In the Air Force particularly,
15 years ago 50,000 people a year were leaving the regular
force because their commitment was up, and we would gain a good
percentage of the folks that are getting out. Now that number
is down to about 15,000 a year. The Air Force has held onto a
lot of people now. They are going through some force shaping
that is getting some people out to get to their authorized end
strength, as the Secretary has directed the Air Force.
There is evidence in some surveys that we get a slight
decline in the number of folks leaving the Active Air Force to
join the Reserve or the Guard, because they know that we are
doing pretty much the same missions that the Active folks are
doing. They want a tad more stability. It is a little tougher
than it used to be.
I will tell you, though, sir, right now the Air Force
Reserve is at 114 percent of its annual recruiting goal. I am
very pleased with that. That does not mean I worry that next
week it will turn around some. Our retention is 89 to 90
percent. I am very pleased with that. Again, you never know
when that changes. We really work hard on making sure that our
commanders and our supervisors at all levels make sure their
folks know how much we appreciate their service and how badly
we need them to stay with us. We do a lot of encouraging people
to stay with us. I think it is paying off, but it is something
we always have to keep our minds on.
The authorities that you all have given us to award bonuses
have been extremely helpful. As Secretary Hall said, it would
be nice to have a tad more latitude throughout the year, or
points at which we can do those things. It would also be
helpful to have some additional appropriations to go along with
that authority to make it a tad less painful so that we do not
have to take it out of other parts of our budget. But the
authorities have been extremely helpful.
I am pleased with our recruiting and retention situation in
the Air Force Reserve. We will make our end strength this year.
In fact, we will be near 100 percent, where last year we were
about 1 percent down or 99 percent.
It is, as your question leads me to say, a lot more
expensive to recruit people off the street, to send them
through basic training or technical school training, and then
get them several years of experience. That costs a lot of
money, so we do lose a lot of money when people leave the
regular force.
Now, we do not try, in the Air Force Reserve, to encourage
people to leave the Active Air Force, but once that person has
made a decision to get out, we will go after that guy or gal to
join the Air Force Reserve because that is a lot cheaper, and
we have years of experience that we can bring in the Reserve. I
think that has been one of our strengths, having several years
of experience. It keeps our experience base high. It also cuts
our training costs dramatically when we can access those people
leaving the Active Force.
Senator Ben Nelson. Do you have any idea? I have heard
several hundred thousand dollars. I think it costs about
$100,000 to train and equip a member.
General Bradley. Yes, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. I wonder if you have thought about how
much investment you have in terms of that person leaving.
General Bradley. Yes, sir. The best I can tell you off the
top of my head is probably $200,000 or $300,000. But I can get
you a figure. We would be glad to provide that to your staff
very quickly. That is easy to do, but I just do not know the
numbers.
Senator Ben Nelson. No. That is okay. Thank you.
Admiral Cotton.
Admiral Cotton. Yes, sir. I would like to add to that
discussion that it is really skill set dependent, and if there
is one theme in the Navy now, it is that we are doing a better
job of measuring the skill sets required for war. It can be
millions of dollars for an
F/A-18 pilot down to a couple hundred thousand dollars. That
experience we have shown really counts in combat. Every study
we have of OEF and OIF shows that experience counts. With the
Reserve Force, they are just a little older and more mature.
They are 28 or 30 years old vice a 21-year-old. That experience
counts, which is why we want to hold onto every person we train
and use taxpayer money for.
Sir, I would like to say that the Navy Reserve's authorized
strength at the end of this year is 83,400. We presently sit at
78,400. We did something unusual about 3 years ago. We stopped
what we were doing and asked, what is the requirement? We went
to the customer, the Navy, and said, okay, for the global war
on terrorism, the rules have changed. What do we do for the
future? Rather than trying to preserve the past in every unit
we had, we took five analysts, looked at every single billet,
every single unit, every single lay-down, and put some precepts
in there. We want to be in all 50 States. We want to have these
kind of capabilities. We came up with a force of about 70,000,
plus a few thousand for surge paid for by the cost of war. So
our request in 2006 is going to be for 73,100.
We set a target this year of 13,000 to recruit. We have
about 30 percent of that now, but the best months are coming
up. Last month increased 43 percent, but the best thing is that
the culture in the Navy is changing. Down at the deck plate, at
the commanding officer, command master chief, and the XO level,
they realize that. If you can keep them in the Reserve Force,
you have not lost anyone. The transition and force shaping
tools we are looking at, the changing rates, and some
authorities you have given us, are increasing our ability to
retain these valuable sailors. That is the good news.
We also think that we should not have resignation letters
anymore, but that you should apply for transition from the
Active component to the Reserve component. That would force an
individual to find out that there are opportunities in either
the full-time Reserve, the part-time Reserve, or Select
Reserve. Every one of their skill sets go into the Individual
Ready Reserve (IRR).
I would also submit that we do not measure the IRR very
well. We do not know who is there, or how long we keep them
there, but with our IT systems, we can do that much better. So
this is the focus for the Navy in the future.
Overall, I am very confident, based on the leadership of
Secretary England and especially Admiral Clark, that the
culture of the Navy is changing to be one team, a human capital
strategy, or as we call it, a Total Force.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Admiral Cotton.
General McCarthy.
General McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, Senator, the Marine Corps
Reserve is going to meet its end strength target this year. We
will meet it both in quality and in quantity. This is the best
information that I have, but I echo General Bradley's comments.
That could change, and we need to watch it very closely all the
time.
The Marine Corps Reserve demographic is exactly the same as
the Active component, which makes sense, since we provide
forces across the full spectrum of the Active component. So we
need to have units that look just like the Active component
unit. That means that the Marine Corps Reserve is largely a
first-term force, just as the Active Marine Corps is.
It should be a split of about 70 percent non-prior service
and 30 percent prior service. The only thing that I see right
now that worries me just a little bit is that our ratio is just
a little bit off. We are somewhere between 75 and 80 percent
non-prior service and a little bit down on the prior service
side. I think all of the reasons that others have discussed
come into play there and apply to us.
All of the things that the committee has asked about and
talked about in terms of incentives, in terms of medical care,
in terms of support for employers, are as important to the
Marine Corps Reserve as they are to all of the Services so that
we can keep the right shape and balance of our forces, but
right now, the numbers, both in quality and quantity, look very
good.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, General McCarthy. It was
pointed out to me that this is your last appearance before this
committee. We very much appreciate your distinguished service.
We hope that the afterlife from the military will be as good to
you as you have been for the military and for the service to
your country. We very much appreciate that service.
Mr. Hall. Senator Nelson, could I add to that? His wife,
Rosemary, is also here in the audience. I have worked with this
couple many years, and we all know who served a long time. It
is truly a family matter. His wife has demonstrated concern for
the families, has been to every conference, and I would like to
congratulate her as much as Dennis because they are a wonderful
team.
Senator Ben Nelson. We certainly want to, for the record,
reflect your long service to the country as well in supporting
General McCarthy. Your presence here today makes the point that
is so clear in retention, the old adage, recruiting an
individual, retaining a family. Obviously, we have been able to
retain your family very well, and thank you so much.
[Applause.]
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Senator. I think it is 38 years.
Is that right, General McCarthy?
General McCarthy. Commissioned in 1967, yes, sir.
Senator Graham. It goes by fast.
I will state the premise that I have previously and get you
to respond to it. I think we are facing a chronic problem not
an acute problem. General Helmly, you said some things in a
memo, I think, back in December--I cannot remember when it
was--about your concerns about retaining the force and about
recruiting, and I want to publicly say that I appreciate those
comments. I thought they were sincerely offered. I think they
are right on the mark, and the committee would be better off
hearing comments like that so that we can help turn what I see
to be a potential problem around.
When it comes to parents and grandparents talking about
whether or not their children should go in the Reserves or the
Guard or the Active Forces, Iraq is on 24/7. You see people
suffering, losing life and limb, and there is a greater mission
out there than just Iraq, serving in the military. I am in. I
was a lawyer. The only people that ever wanted to kill me were
my clients. [Laughter.]
But I certainly benefited from wearing the uniform, and
still do. I think we need to do a better job talking about
serving one's Nation. It is truly the highest calling.
We have a historic trend in the Guard and Reserve that
people stay to 30 because they like their unit, and they become
part of a family.
What I worry about is that with the multiple deployments of
certain skill sets, people begin to look for a way out, because
their family gets tired and worn out and they get to where they
cannot handle it because the Guard and Reserve family,
Secretary Hall, as you well know, does not have the
institutional support that an Active-Duty family has. Lord
knows, the Active-Duty families suffer greatly in terms of
stress, but there is no PX many times for the Guard and
Reserve. There is no counseling service. There is no after-
school care. We have to come together as a family in the Guard
and Reserve and make it up as we go.
Secretary Hall, you have done a great job of providing
better infrastructure to families as they face long
deployments.
What I worry about is that multiple deployments are going
to take a toll on the force, and when you are having to go from
35 to 39 years of age for enlistee and when you are considering
waiving the high school educational requirement, that is a good
sign to me that we are really having to think outside the box
to keep the force from bleeding any further.
There is a proposal that would allow guardsmen and
reservists to retire earlier than 60 based on continued service
past 20. If you serve 22 years, you can retire at age 59; 24
years, you retire at age 58; all the way to 55, if you serve
30. Could you give me some feedback as to whether or not you
think that program, if implemented, would help retain people
past 20 years, and do we have a problem with people past 20?
Secretary Hall, would you start?
Mr. Hall. We have talked about this, and we have a
different perspective on it. My perspective is not to say it is
not a good idea. Almost anyone, if you said retire at 25 or 30,
would say yes. I think it is a matter of the tradeoffs.
We have carefully looked at that. We have asked RAND and a
number of other groups to take a look at the propensity of
people if they were allowed to retire earlier at 55 or whatever
age, and we have not found that that will have, in the studies
that they have done, a significant effect on the recruiting and
retention.
In fact, my view is I would like to incentivize people to
stay longer rather than leave earlier. People are healthy. We
need to keep them longer. We have 130,000 or so people between
the ages of 55 and 60. About 30,000 are still serving, many as
military technicians. You are very familiar with military
technicians. They are most experienced, and they are great
Americans. We would like to keep them longer rather than
incentivizing them to leave earlier.
The cost we talked about, whether it is in the billions--
and you can argue about it, depending upon the take rate--is a
consideration.
My personal view mirrors the administration, but personally
I believe that with a limited budget with only a limited amount
of money, targeting the benefits towards other things has a
higher priority than the 55 year retirement. It comes down to
that. If I only had this much money, I would like to do that.
If I had unlimited appropriations, then it would be a different
matter. What I am trying to do is target them. That is my
perspective.
Senator Graham. I understand. That is a very good and fair
answer.
Do you have a problem retaining people in the Marine Corps?
Is there a trend of getting out at 20 versus staying to 30, or
is that not so?
General McCarthy. Senator, we probably have not just the
smallest number but the smallest percentage of those who retire
because of this heavily weighted force toward the junior
enlisted marine.
We have seen some signs--this is probably a little bit
anecdotal--but particularly in the aviation community, of
people retiring at 20 rather than staying for what some might
consider a full career of 30 years of commissioned service. I
do not have statistics to tell you that, but I would say to you
that in every group of marines that I talk to, whether it is at
home or in the theater, somebody asks me about this.
Senator Graham. That is why I am asking you, because I
cannot go 3 feet without somebody asking me.
General McCarthy. I have to think that it is on their mind.
It is not just people who are rapidly approaching retirement. I
had a young 30-year-old captain ask me about it in Iraq a month
ago. I think from the Marine Corps standpoint, it is an issue
that is out there, and certainly if Congress is going to do
anything, there ought to be a linkage between changing the
retirement and incentivizing continued service beyond 20 years.
Senator Graham. Right.
General Helmly, would you like to comment?
General Helmly. Sir, let me say that I support your
contention completely that this is a chronic issue. This is the
first extended duration conflict, as we know, that we have
fought with the All-Volunteer Force. In September 2003, I
personally gave a speech at the National Defense University
where I warned that we needed to begin changing the policies,
practices, and procedures that govern how we approach manning
the various components, not only Reserve, but also Active,
owing to the discrete requirements of each, Active, Reserve,
and in between the Services.
For my part, our acceptance of a 20-year retirement letter
is up approximately 5 percent in the past year. It is my
judgment it would have risen in the past, but when we stop-loss
people and as we alert units, we stop-loss everyone in the
unit. As we see lower numbers mobilizing, we are stop lossing
fewer people, and we are having more who are approaching the
20-year marker accept that. I would also note that the average
age at which those people retire is significantly less than 55.
I too am in favor of keeping people longer.
That is why I must tell you, in my considered judgment, we
should genuinely explore the formula you have offered of a 1-
year reduction below age 60 for an increase of 2 years beyond
20, if you will stay for 30, you accept non-regular retired pay
at age 55. We should develop the empirical data on this. It is
a rich cost, but in my view I am afraid it has been dismissed
because it is costly, and we have not tied it to the increase
in service.
You asked earlier about cost to enlist. The average cost to
enlist a non-prior service 18- to 22-year-old young man or
woman in the Army Reserve is $103,000. That cost is going up
because we are now having to add, due to that decreased
propensity to enlist, about 700 recruiters over our former
recruiting force, so your cost per average is going to go up
significantly higher.
Out of that first-term cohort, we suffer about a 35 percent
attrition rate, that is those who do not make it to the end of
6 years for trainee-based discharges and all sorts of reasons.
I think we are much better off to retain the person off
Active-Duty or for continued Reserve service. Certainly in
business terms, quality, reliability, readiness, and capability
are all reasons that say retention is much preferred.
I will note two final points.
The current policies we find ourselves governed by on our
Active, Guard, and Reserve Force, which is Reserve members on
Active-Duty, the richest single force we pay into, about 15,000
strong, requires me by policy to retire at the end of 20 years
Active Federal service. That makes no sense at all when we are
investing in these people to send the officers to senior
service college, et cetera. We need to be keeping them longer,
but that is simply not done because of the way we have done
business all these years. We have not looked at this in a
strategic, holistic sense.
Senator Graham. I could not agree with you more. You have
some people 38 years of age who can retire but still have a lot
to offer. I am 49. I think I have a few years left. So I would
hate to be kicked out of the door.
General Helmly. Sir, I am looking up to you. [Laughter.]
We do not offer Reserve component members a reenlistment
bonus beyond 16 years of service. I would be in favor of
looking at that at the 18-year mark where you keep them for 24
at a minimum.
Senator Graham. Along those lines--I hate to interrupt--
that is a great idea. Senator Nelson and I were talking about--
from the Active-Duty panel--this from Blue to Green--as the
Navy is trying to reshape its force people are leaving the
Navy. We are doing everything we can to hang onto people. Maybe
there is a place in the Marine Corps. Maybe there is a place in
the Army or some other service for a very talented person who
does not have a Navy home anymore.
Senator Nelson and I were talking about his idea about
offering a bonus for someone who is leaving the Navy because of
force restructuring to go into the Army Guard. Is there such a
program in existence, and would that help?
Mr. Hall. There is not, but I think if it is a prior
service person whose military occupational specialty (MOS) or
skill can be transferred, then we are trying to get prior
service people to come in. We need to do whatever we can do to
attract prior service personnel. They can be prior service from
another service if they have the MOSs. It is certainly worth
exploring as we have people coming out of the Navy and the Air
Force.
Senator Graham. Do you think that would help you if you had
that tool available to come up with a skill-specific bonus
program?
Mr. Hall. I think any program that can help get prior
service people to enlist or affiliate in greater numbers who
have the skills we need is helpful.
Admiral Cotton. May I add one more thing, sir? There is a
transition period, and those of us that leave Active service
for whatever reason, after a period of time, we miss it, and we
want to come back to it. For myself it was 14 months. For the
Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), it was 11 months. We sometimes
put the hustle on somebody, whatever program it is, and once
they go away, we do not follow it up. Yes, we might send them a
letter after 6 months, but I think all of those with these
skill sets, like the Secretary said, need to be followed up
with a 3-month phone call, a 6-month phone call, or maybe even
all the way up to 18 months. That is why this tracking of skill
sets in the IRR is so important when folks want to come back
and re-serve. So I think we need to do a better job of that.
Force shaping tools and bonuses would certainly incentivize
people to want to come back and serve in any of our components.
Senator Graham. I have one last question and then I will
turn it over to Senator Nelson.
We have had a lot of anecdotal stories about pay being
interrupted, pay not being there when people need it in the
Reserves, or being held over for medical problems, and it is a
nightmare. What have we done to address those problems?
Mr. Hall. It has been an acute problem, mostly with the
Army. Starting in March--and it has already kicked off--we have
the Forward Compatibility Pay (FCP) initiative. We are working
on the Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System
(DIMHRS) toward a common pay and personnel system. However,
that is not supposed to happen until 2007.
Out of personnel and pay, I consider pay to be the biggest
problem, although they are both a problem. When I was in, I
wanted my pay on time. My family wanted the pay.
We have decided to invest in that system and get a common
pay system this year, kicking off first with the Army. It is
called FCP. By the end of the year, we hope to have that common
pay system. We will have to bridge to DIMHRS, which will have a
common pay and personnel system. We are expending some money up
front so that we could wait for it, but I do not think we ought
to wait. We'll do that this year, then transition to a slightly
different common pay and personnel system in the DIMHRS.
We recognize the criticality of it. The Army, of course,
hired more contractors, and added more pay companies to handle
the immediate problem, which I think is under control. But we
needed to do something this year. That has commenced for a
common pay system by the end of the year.
General Helmly. Senator, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) did an audit focused on Army Guard and Army
Reserve, with special hearings last summer. By that time, the
Army, working in conjunction with the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service (DFAS), had zeroed in, and we were making
improvements.
As the Secretary noted, FCP integrates Active, Guard, and
Reserve in one system. Our Secretary personally follows that on
a monthly basis. Most recently we have been informed that the
development of that system, which is a significantly large
effort, was behind schedule.
We all made the decision which was made by the Secretary,
and supported by all of us, that we would not use our soldiers
as guinea pigs given the fact that with the flaws in today's
Reserve component pay system for Guard and Reserve, we and the
Guard, supported by Army, have made major improvements. If you
will, they are bandaids, but they have reduced the error rate
by almost 75 to 90 percent of what it was about this time last
year. That is a broken system, to be sure. We have reduced the
error rate and invested the dollars in FCP, as Secretary Hall
said.
But FCP, we now find, is behind schedule. We have made the
decision that we will not go to that until the developers bring
in a satisfactory system. Our Assistant Secretary for Financial
Management and our Secretary personally follow that on a very
frequent basis.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Admiral Cotton, the CNO some time ago testified that the
Navy is looking at restructuring pay to deal with skill sets,
and the need for technologically adept and trained people is
increasing significantly. As the Active Navy has begun to do
that--and I am assuming that they are in the process of doing
that--has that changed what your requirements are as you add
and recruit and try to retain within the Navy Reserve?
Admiral Cotton. Most certainly, sir. In the future, a Navy
manpower document will include both Active component and
Reserve component personnel, and the commanding officers of the
two units will work together for the readiness of both. It is
really the Active component commander who is responsible for
all that readiness. So the best recruit we have is the Navy
veteran. Tracking those skill sets is important. We call it the
5-vector model and SkillsNET. This system is so advanced that
even industry is looking at Navy and how we are measuring this.
There are over 450 functionalities we have, and there are
another 800 civilian skill sets that the Reserve component has
that the Active component sometimes would like to use.
We also utilize reservists in an entirely different manner
than we did during the Cold War. About a third of the force
does 38 days or less. Another third of the force does 38 days
to 100 days, and another third of the force is doing from 100
to 365 days each year. In fact, we have 24,000 people on orders
right now at supported commands. The best reservist is one that
does maybe 4 days, 5 days, or 10 days a month rather than a
mobilization every couple years.
It is imperative that we measure these skill sets and
incentivize behavior of the good ones, and with the skill sets
we do not need anymore in this transition period, send them to
school and teach them new skill sets. This way we retain that
sailor. I would agree, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. You are retaining the sailor rather
than counsel them out of the military, recognizing that you
already have a certain investment in them that you want to
retain.
General Helmly, the chairman asked you about a memorandum
that you wrote back in December of 2004 regarding your
concerns. Has anything changed? Has anybody come to you and
said your concerns are well noted and how can we help you
respond to those? It probably does not work that way.
[Laughter.]
General Helmly. Well, in some of those meetings, other
words have been used. [Laughter.]
Frankly, I believe that we have discussed this before with
regard to my motivation. My motivation was simply to ensure
that my superiors before congressional hearings were formally
aware of the complexities that underlie our strength. It is not
a simple equation of enlistment, and reenlistment, Active to
Reserve. It is very intricate.
Having said that, there are the three issues addressed
there. Nonparticipants had been a matter of a GAO audit, IRR
obligated status, and also going beyond mandatory retirement
date.
The nonparticipants and the IRR obligors have been taken to
the Secretary of the Army. The Secretary has authorized us to
proceed with development of streamlined discharge procedures
for nonparticipants. That still complies with law with regard
to my right to respond and ensure that I am aware of the types
of discharges that may ensue. Our nonparticipant rate is
significantly down beyond the time of the GAO audit. That is
important from a stewardship responsibility.
I would like to add at this point simply that no one here
wishes to fracture the quality of the All-Volunteer Force by an
intentional legal act to make someone serve.
Having said that, it is my considered judgment when we
apply the kinds of bonuses and the kinds of incentives and
entitlements that the DOD, supported by Congress, has provided
in recent years, we have a stewardship responsibility to you to
ensure that those are applied in the most productive way. Thus,
this nonparticipant and IRR obligor was a source of manpower,
we had people on our books who were not participating. Not only
did they have to then remain on our books, presenting a false
picture of readiness, but we have to pay in through numbers
into the defense health program the Government portion of the
premium for the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI).
Thus, the GAO audit said we had spent about $46 million on
nonparticipants in fiscal year 2003.
It was my intent that as we came forward to try to ask for
improved and increased incentives, entitlements, and bonuses--
the Secretary has talked about TRICARE expansion and those
kinds of things--that we understood in a disciplined way that
if I accepted those, I incurred an obligation to serve and
fulfill my obligation.
Our Secretary has forwarded to DOD some proposals. It is my
judgment those are now being addressed in a hard business kind
of way with due consideration for people. We are going forward
with a plan to begin involuntarily assigning the obligated
portion of the IRR, that portion of the IRR which is obligated
for selected Reserve service.
So, yes, sir, I am very satisfied with the effort by our
Secretary and chief to address those issues. Thank you.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
General McCarthy, in your written statement, you talked
about a concern about young officers. One of the things that we
are looking at doing is doubling the number of Reserve
Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) scholarships available for
people to come into the Reserves. Would that help you? Would it
help for the Army and the Air Force? Would that help you if a
ROTC scholarship recipient could come right into the Marine
Corps Reserve?
General McCarthy. I am taken off guard, sir, because I
really have not thought that one through. We do have a very
serious concern about young officers. The thought of bringing
somebody directly into the Marine Corps Reserve from an ROTC
scholarship is quite frankly not something I ever thought
about.
I will tell you that our strength is, in the past, 90-plus
percent, probably 95 percent of the junior officers in the
Marine Corps Reserve serve 4 to 6 or so years on Active-Duty,
and that has been a tremendous positive strength. We want that
to continue to be our primary source of officers.
However, we have also always tried to promote some officers
from the ranks serving in units, but they too have a more solid
background.
I am not sure how ROTC direct commissioning would apply to
that, but I think it is certainly worth looking into because
getting enough young officers into the ranks is a very serious
issue for us. I would like to take a look at that and see
whether that would be helpful.
Senator Graham. General Bradley, every time I have been to
Iraq--I have been three times--you fly out of Kuwait, you take
a C-130, and every crew except one has been a Reserve crew.
Have we seen any problems retaining our C-130 folks?
General Bradley. No, sir, we have not. Now, we have
mobilized a lot of folks, and they are staying with us. It
certainly is a strain. The folks out there working hard are
both the maintenance and the aircrew members. We are very proud
of the work that they do over there.
By the end of this year, every C-130 squadron that we have
in the Air Force Reserve will have completed 2 years of
mobilization. We have not seen our numbers go down yet. It
could happen anytime. You never know until they are ready to
leave, once they have finished their commitment. But so far,
they are staying with us. In fact, sir, this is true even after
they have been demobilized, and we have already demobilized a
lot.
Senator Graham. Could you repeat that? Of the C-130 Reserve
crews, how many of them have met the 24-month----
General Bradley. Probably two-thirds now of the Air Force
Reserve are C-130 crews. The Air National Guard crews would be
a slightly different number. They have a lot more. But we have
had two-thirds of our C-130 squadrons in the Air Force Reserve
mobilized and demobilized with 2 years of service.
Senator Graham. So they are out of the fight.
General Bradley. They are done. They are done with
mobilization, sir.
We still use them in a voluntary status to do a lot of
other things. We are doing Operation Joint Forge in Europe with
volunteers. We are doing Coronet Oak missions in U.S. Southern
Command with volunteers. We have experienced the same thing in
the strategic airlift world, with the same sort of numbers,
about two-thirds of them, C-17s at Charleston, McChord, and
other places.
Senator Graham. Is that two-thirds also?
General Bradley. Pretty close to two-thirds, yes, sir. In
fact, two of the squadrons at Charleston have been demobilized.
The other one is mobilized now. It is the same with C-17s at
McChord in Washington State.
But, sir, the ones that are not mobilized currently are
still volunteering to go just as often as those that are
mobilized.
When they are mobilized, they are not over in Kuwait or
Iraq for 2 years. They cycle back and forth through the States
on a 90- or a 120-day schedule. That is how Air Mobility
Command does it. So they come home, and while they are home
while mobilized, they fly a lot of missions for Air Mobility
Command. They are on their mobilization orders for 1 to 2
years, but as I have said, about two-thirds of them have done
the 2 years. The folks are still volunteering to do other
missions.
Senator Graham. What kind of pressure does that put on your
Active Forces who fly into the theater?
General Bradley. Well, sir, I do not know. A lot of the
folks that are over in the theater right now are Active. There
are a lot of Active folks over there, but most of the C-130s
are in the Guard and the Reserve.
Senator Graham. I wanted to talk about C-17s for a moment.
General Bradley. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. About 50 percent of the aircrews flying
missions today are Guard and Reserve. Is that correct?
General Bradley. That is true, yes, sir.
Senator Graham. So if two-thirds of the Reserves have met
their 24-month cap, that has to have a ripple effect somewhere
along the line.
General Bradley. Sir, if you mean that we cannot do the
missions anymore, it is not happening that way, because people
are still volunteering to go on shorter-notice missions. We can
put them on Active-Duty in other ways for shorter periods of
time.
Senator Graham. I understand.
General Bradley. They are just not involuntarily mobilized
anymore. At the end of this year, every C-130 crew that I have
will have done 2 years.
General McCarthy. Sir, if I could add to that. We have two
squadrons of KC-130s in the Marine Corps Reserve, and they are
in exactly the same situation. Both squadrons have been
mobilized for a full 2 years, but they are continuing to
generate sorties using volunteers, and using a combination of
the Active component members of the squadrons and volunteers.
But I think you are closing in on the capability that we have
stretched pretty far.
Senator Graham. Your testimony really hit me pretty hard
when you said that of the one area that you thought that the
incentive to stay past 20 might help was in the aviation units.
Now I am beginning to know why they are checking out.
[Laughter.]
General McCarthy. Sir, I did not want to indicate that. I
think a lot of these officers who are not going beyond 20 in
part do it because they think they are going to have to stop
flying. They complete command of squadrons as lieutenant
colonels and hit the 20-year mark, and a lot of them say, what
else is there to live for?
Senator Graham. Yes, but why the change, though? Because
you could not fly past 20 before. Or did your flying
opportunities went down.
General McCarthy. The flying opportunities just dwindled
down.
Senator Graham. But now we are flying out of the wazoo. If
you want to fly, now is the time to be in.
General McCarthy. Exactly right.
Senator Graham. I think there is something a little deeper
going on. What it speaks to is not only the patriotism of the
men and women of the Guard and Reserve. But also you will never
convince me that if two-thirds of the Guard and Reserves in the
aviation part of the business have met their 24-month
involuntary deployment, that that will not have a ripple effect
if this war continues at the pace it is going.
Mr. Hall. Senator, I have one comment.
Senator Graham. Please.
Mr. Hall. We need to be a little bit careful on the
definition of whether we have mobilized and utilized units--and
we deal in this all the time--because you might have mobilized
two-thirds of the units, but what about the people. That is
different.
Senator Graham. That is what I am asking.
Mr. Hall. I think we need to take a look at this, because
we refresh those people. People come in and they go. So it is a
different answer if two-thirds of the people presently serving
are at their 24 months or two-thirds of the units have used 24
months.
Senator Graham. Well, what about people?
Mr. Hall. People is what we try to look at.
Senator Graham. What is the people number?
Mr. Hall. I would be interested in seeing whether it is
units or people.
General Bradley. Sir, it is people.
Senator Graham. Yes.
General Bradley. I can give you exact data.
Senator Graham. I know because I met them three or four
times in Iraq myself. I have been going for 2 years, and I see
the same people.
General Bradley. I have to tell you my guys are over there
for longer periods of time than many Active folks. I am getting
some ripple effect there. I hear about that a little bit. But I
think they are dedicated, patriotic people who really think
they are doing something important.
Senator Graham. I do not doubt that. Amen to that. I just
express my concern about down the road, if we are doing this 2
years down the road, eventually something has to give.
General Bradley. Yes, sir, I am very worried about it too.
Senator Graham. I have one last thing, and I will turn it
over to Senator Nelson and let him do whatever he wants to do.
We had a problem bringing people from the Guard and Reserve
into mobilized status and being ready to go to the fight. There
are physical problems. They were not ready medically. Has there
been any turnaround, General Helmly, from the Army in that
regard? Would all of you comment quickly about that?
General Helmly. Sir, this comes to a matter of internal
force discipline. That is my responsibility as a commander. The
answer to that simply is yes. We have instituted a new
physicals management process. We do physicals, and have done so
for about 3 or 4 years through a program called FEDSHEAL, and
with that, we partner with other Federal agencies that have
physicians in them to use their physicians to do our physicals.
We send them a voucher and pay for that.
We have now changed the FEDSHEAL contract that says that
the provider, the physician, sends the electronic results of
all the laboratory and the physical examination to a
centralized profiling office at our Human Resources Command in
St. Louis. I have resourced that office with about 10 people
who are trained under the guidance of a full colonel, Active
component physician. They apply a centralized profile. They
then enter that into one's personnel records electronically,
send a copy to you that is available to you through our Two
Times a Citizen Web site, and then if you are deemed
nondeployable, we send that to your command with a 90-day
suspense to initiate the physical evaluation board/medical
review board process.
That is what I call putting starch in people's shorts, so
we get out of the business of, ``I sent you your physical.''
You wanted to retain your drill status. You hid it in your desk
drawer, and then it popped on us when we mobilized you, so
given a couple more years and an expedited effort we have
underway to clean out the backlog of permanent profiles, and we
will remedy ourselves and bring this to a manageable level.
Senator Graham. How about the Marine Corps?
General McCarthy. Sir, it was not a problem. Over 98
percent of the marines who have been mobilized were physically
ready, and medically ready to go. We have, I think, managed
that pretty well, and most importantly, we are a young force.
Senator Graham. It is phenomenal. That is right.
General McCarthy. The guys and gals are fit. So it has not
been an issue for us.
Senator Graham. The same for the Navy and the Air Force?
Admiral Cotton. There is just one more thing I would like
to add, sir. We are less than 5 percent, but I think the
visibility on this between our Services and the building also
involves looking at the systems by which we measure this. I
would say for Navy, we are now looking at Internet Technology
systems for both Active and Reserve exactly the same. We report
it the same way. It has been slow to change, and I think the
last 3 years has sped up that change to have digital medical
records vice the old stacks of paperwork like we had. I think
even the rest of the country is going to be going here pretty
quickly. I think it is a trend we are all going to follow.
General Bradley. Sir, we have not had a problem in the Air
Force Reserve with medical readiness.
Senator Ben Nelson. I do not have anything further.
Senator Graham. Well, thank you all.
Mr. Secretary, yes, sir, please.
Mr. Hall. I wanted to pass on a couple of bits of good
information. We have not known in the past whom our reservists
and guardsmen worked for. We have never had a database, and we
are about halfway through now populating the entire database
for civilian employ information. So for the first time, we are
going to be able to actually know our first responders. We will
even know how many lawyers we have in the database.
Senator Graham. Probably too many. [Laughter.]
Mr. Hall. We hope by the end of this year to be able to
take this database at any one time and say we have mobilized
this many policemen, et cetera.
Senator Graham. That is terrific.
Mr. Hall. So this is something we have had to do.
Senator Graham. How many self-employed people do you have
in the Guard and Reserve?
Mr. Hall. We do not know this either. So we are looking at
the amount of self-employed.
Also, we have two commissions this year: one on the Guard
and Reserves and one on pay and compensation. I think it is an
obligation of all of us to use those independent commissions
that will report to you. Admiral Pilling is heading the pay and
compensation commission--to take our ideas and to make sure
that we are not piecemealing the benefits or the pay, because
sometimes we take a portion of it, and then it ends up with
unintended consequences. They are charged with looking at the
entire structure. We are going to provide inputs. All of us
will be with those commissions, and hopefully that will be of
some assistance to us on these. So I wanted those for the
record.
Senator Graham. Thank you all for your service to our
country, to your families who have served alongside of you, and
Secretary Hall, thank you for coming up. This has been the most
helpful hearing I have been to.
[The prepared statement of the Naval Reserve Association
approved for inclusion in the record of this subcommittee
hearing follows:]
Prepared Statement by the Naval Reserve Association
Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee: on behalf of our 22,000 members, and in advocacy for the
80,000 Active Naval reservists and the mirrored interest of Guard and
Reserve personnel, we are grateful for the opportunity to submit
testimony, and for your efforts in this hearing.
We very much appreciate the efforts of this subcommittee, the full
Committee on Armed Services, and like committees in the House of
Representatives to support our deployed personnel and their families.
Your willingness to address and correct issues facing guardsmen and
reservists affirms their value to the defense of our great Nation. Your
recognition of these men and women as equal partners in time of war
stands you well in the eyes of many. Your willingness to look at issues
related to the use of the Guard and Reserve on the basis of fairness
sets the legislative branch well above the executive branch which
seemingly develops its positions on the basis of cost.
We had hoped that many of these issues would have been addressed by
the commission on the Guard and Reserve. We had great hopes that the
commission would give Congress and the administration a holistic view
of the myriad issues facing today's Guard and Reserve. It is a great
disappointment that the commissioners have not been named and the work
not yet begun.
That said, there are issues that need to be addressed by this
committee and this Congress. Recruiting and retention issues are moving
to center stage for all Services and their Reserve components. In all
likelihood the Navy will not meet its target for 13,000 new naval
reservists and the Naval Reserve will be challenged to appreciably slow
the departure of 17,000 experienced personnel this fiscal year. Other
Services and their Reserve components likely face these same
challenges.
We believe that Congress should give the Services the following
tools targeted to mid-career personnel in the Guard and Reserve: (1)
authorize critical skills bonuses for guardsmen and reservists that
would provide $100,000 over an entire career (no authorization exists
for guardsmen and reservists personnel while one with a $200,000 limit
exists for Active-Duty personnel); (2) increase affiliation bonuses to
$15,000 to attract veterans; (3) restore the Reserve Montgomery G.I.
Bill (MGIB) to 50 percent of the Active-Duty entitlement (presently at
28 percent) and make it available throughout a career; and, (4) an
earlier than age 60 retirement.
The Department of Defense is dead set against an earlier than age
60 retirement. We've heard that Reserve chiefs are in agreement
expressing concern that senior personnel will leave in droves.
Hopefully this is more than conscript thinking. A compromise solution
to this earlier than age 60 retirement issue is something modeled after
Social Security--if you take Reserve retirement as early as age 55 you
do so with a greatly reduced annuity for life. This Naval Reserve
Association conceived proposal would significantly reduce the estimated
costs to the government over other plans being proposed. The money has
been accrued; the costs then would be those associated with
administering monthly payments earlier than expected and any lost
interest on the accrued amount. The greatly reduced annuity for life
may very well serve as a disincentive to early retirement for the
senior leaders who truly have upwardly mobile careers.
The first three recommendations are relevant to the needs of the
services today. The fourth (early retirement) is on the minds of many
guardsmen and reservists. We urge you to put these issues to the
Reserve component chiefs during this hearing for their opinions.
There is one Navy-related issue that will be considered by the
committee--the distribution of U.S. Naval Reserve flag officer billets.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 contained
the following: ``The conferees expect the Navy to provide the Committee
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representative with
additional information justifying modification to existing allocations
in section 12004(c) based on the results of its zero-based review.'' In
appreciation of the outcomes of the Navy's zero-based review and
concomitant manpower reduction in most of the programs resident in the
Navy's Reserve, the Naval Reserve Intelligence Community will become
the largest single program. With over 4,000 naval reservists, who on
average give 80 days each year, it the most integrated Naval Reserve
program in the joint arena. The sole Naval Reserve Intelligence Flag
Officer serves as Commander, Naval Reserve Intelligence Command, on the
Chief of Naval Operations' (CNO) staff as N2R and reports to Commander
Fleet Forces Command as additional duty.
Unlike other Reserve components, the Navy's Reserve does not fill
any joint intelligence billets. We think that it should, and recommend
to the committee that any reallocation of flag billets come with the
stipulation to the Navy that they fill at least two, possibly three, of
their URL allocation with Reserve Intelligence Officers.
In summary, we believe the committee needs to address the following
issues for our guardsman and reservists in the best interest of our
national security:
Name the members for the commission on the Guard and
Reserve as soon as possible
Address and authorize recruitment and retention
issues:
Authorize critical skills bonuses for
guardsmen and reservists--$100,000 over an entire
career
Increase affiliation bonuses to $15,000 to
attract veterans
Restore Reserve MGIB to 50 percent of the
Active-Duty entitlement
Reduce annuity for Reserve retirement before age 60
Authorize increased allocation of Naval
Reserve Intelligence Flay Officer billets to coincide
with their utilization and size.
We thank the committee for consideration of these tools to assist
the Guard and Reserve in an age of increased sacrifice and utilization
of these forces.
Senator Graham. So the hearing is adjourned.
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Susan Collins
armed forces training centers
1. Senator Collins. Secretary Hall, I would like to discuss the
importance of training our National Guard and Reserve members. I have
been an advocate to ensure that members of the Guard and Reserve are
properly compensated. For example, I strongly supported including
language in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2005 that would allow Guard and reservists to receive improved
health care coverage.
In addition to increased benefits such as health care, we in
Congress must also ensure that our Guard and Reserve training is second
to none. The impressive contributions of Guard and reservists in
Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) have shown
the truly essential role they play in our Nation's defense forces.
In Maine, the training of National Guard and Reserve members
currently occurs at three separate armories. To consolidate facilities,
improve training practices, and lower costs, the Maine National Guard
has proposed as its top priority this year that a Joint Armed Forces
Reserve Center is hosted at the Naval Air Station in Brunswick, Maine.
Such a facility would streamline operations and provide a cohesive,
functional, and cost-effective training center. Our Guard members and
reservists would be able to train in the facilities they need. All
branches of the Service--Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps--would
benefit.
Could you please comment on the Department of Defense's (DOD) views
of joint Armed Forces training centers and their benefits of
consolidation of training, resources, and manpower in one location, and
is this a priority for the military?
Mr. Hall. The Department strongly supports and encourages joint
construction. There is a statutory requirement in title 10, chapter
1803, which requires the construction of Reserve component joint
facilities ``to the greatest practicable extent.'' Therefore, improving
the joint use and utilization rate of physical assets is a primary
objective included in the Department's 2004 Defense Installations
Strategic Plan. Joint construction meets the facility needs of more
than one Reserve component, and often meets them quicker than when the
components program for unilateral construction projects. Additional
benefits of joint Armed Forces training centers include joint training
capabilities, joint utilization of infrastructure assets, reduced force
protection costs, and reduction in construction and continued
sustainment costs.
2. Senator Collins. Secretary Hall, does the DOD recognize the
importance of spreading joint training centers throughout all of the
geographic regions of the U.S.?
Mr. Hall. The Department supports joint use of installation assets
and additional consolidation and integration of training centers. As
part of defense transformation, the Department's 2004 Defense
Installations Strategic Plan calls for a joint basing initiative to
highlight global opportunities for increased jointness to reduce life-
cycle cost and overhead. The Department established a Joint
Construction Working Group to facilitate program alignment, resources,
and agreements between Reserve components. This review of the Future
Years Defense Program allows better communication and eliminates
roadblocks in planning regional joint training centers.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Saxby Chambliss
reserve component retirement
3. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Hall, there has been some
discussion in the Senate Armed Services Committee about potentially
lowering the age at which retired reservists could collect their
pensions. Additionally, we are well aware that some parts of the
Reserve components are experiencing some recruitment and retention
challenges. Looking at these two issues together, and in order to
incentivize ``volunteerism'' in the Reserve component, has the DOD
conducted any analysis to determine whether it would be feasible to
lower the age by 1 year at which a retired reservist could collect his
pension for each year the reservist was mobilized in support of an
operational contingency, and what is your reaction to this proposal?
Mr. Hall. As part of the ongoing study being conducted by RAND on
the Reserve retirement system, we have asked RAND to assess the effect
on recruiting and retention of lowering the age at which a reservist
could begin receiving an annuity. We should have those results in the
near future, and I would be happy to share those findings with the
committee.
4. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Hall, Lieutenant General Helmly has
recommended that the DOD eliminate the current policy to retire Army
Reserve officers at their 20th year of Active Federal service, and has
recommended that mandatory retirement dates for Reserve officers be
extended to allow both categories of officers to continue to serve on a
voluntary basis. Additionally, he recommended that the process to
recall volunteer retired officers be streamlined to allow volunteer
retired officers to be looked upon as a first source of personnel
rather than as the last source as is currently the case.
What actions has the DOD taken to implement these three
recommendations, and what changes in the law are required to give the
DOD the authorities needed to more effectively manage Reserve
personnel?
Mr. Hall. The law already permits Reserve officers to serve beyond
20 years of active Federal service, and Office of the Secretary of
Defense (OSD) policy does not encumber that authority. The Navy, for
example, allows their full-time support officers to serve on Active-
Duty to the statutory years-of-service limits. OSD provides the
Services with the flexibility to manage their Active Guard and Reserve
Force in a way that meets service needs and provides reasonable career
progression opportunities.
The law also permits Reserve officers to be retained in an active
status beyond the normal years of service imposed for each grade. In
fact, Congress supported an amendment we offered by enacting
legislation in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004 that gives the Secretaries
of the Military Departments greater flexibility in continuing Reserve
officers.
Shortly after the attacks of September 11, the Department developed
a strategy for the use of military retiree volunteers. Recognizing the
considerable talent that military retirees provide, the strategy asked
the Secretaries of the Military Departments to consider, when
practical, the use of retirees who volunteer. Unit training and
cohesion are factors that must be considered, but we also have many
requirements for individual skills that may be ideally suited for a
military retiree to fill. Each Service has a process to manage
individual volunteers and recall them to Active-Duty when they can fill
a military requirement.
Finally, as part of our continuum of service initiative, we are
continuing to review force management issue, and as we find laws that
inhibit our ability to optimize the use of our force we submit proposed
changes through the Department's legislative process.
mobilization
5. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Hall, Lieutenant General Shultz,
and Lieutenant General Helmly, many people have called our current
mobilization policies products of the industrial age. I've noted that
the Army's medical department 90-day rotation policy speaks to
``minimizing the mobilization process time'' by ``pre-certifying
personnel for deployment.'' Has DOD or the Army learned any lessons
from this initiative that will be applicable to reforming the
mobilization process as a whole in order to bring this system into the
21st century?
Mr. Hall. The Department's policy is to give as much flexibility
and support as possible to the Services in their execution of
deployment rotations. An example is our support of the Army's 90-day
rotation policy of professional medical personnel. The Office of the
Surgeon General has received positive feedback from the soldiers that
have deployed under this policy. In support of minimizing the
mobilization process time, the Department continues to support other
opportunities where a member's accredited and professional skills are
fully transferable to their military function, as long as it is
acceptable to the Service who is providing the solution and the
combatant commander who is requesting the capability.
General Shultz. We have sought ways to minimize the amount of time
units spend at the mobilization station by continuously examining the
policies that we follow to support the mobilizations of our soldiers
and units. Our primary goal is to ensure that the burdens are shared
equitably across our force. To support this goal, we have established a
force rotation/transformation model, Army Forces Generation (ARFORGEN)
which we have developed with the States. By implementing the ARFORGEN
model, we have now established a cycle that will provide the necessary
resources over the course of the 5 years between a unit's
mobilizations. At the end of those years, our units will be ready to
deploy.
The situation in Iraq has forced the Army to revise the post-
mobilization training plan for our units. The training for 90-day
medical professionals has been changed from 1 to 2 weeks to ensure they
are better prepared to face the conditions in theatre.
Army National Guard soldiers are screened for medical and dental
problems prior to mobilization to ensure that only deployable soldiers
are mobilized. The post-mobilization process is being improved by
integrated databases and automating as many tasks as possible.
The technology of the 21st century is enabling us to increase the
speed at which we process our soldiers through the initial phase of
post-mobilization training. Our adversaries' symmetric approach to
warfare necessitates that we provide our soldiers with as much real-
time training as possible prior to their deployment. Our soldiers may
be expected to conduct full-spectrum combat operations, peace-keeping/
enforcement operations, and civil-military support operations over the
course of their deployment.
We will continue to look at ways to minimize the time our soldiers
spend between their mobilization and deployment date, but we cannot
compromise on the quality of their post-mobilization training.
General Helmly. The 90-day rotation policy was put into effect to
address retention issues for a relatively small population of medical
professionals. These medical professionals do not participate in unit
combat preparation training prior to deployment; they undergo the
administrative soldier readiness processing at the mobilization station
and deploy. Such a policy would not be efficient for the remainder of
the Army Reserve. Compared to medical professionals, the training
required to prepare a unit for mobilization requires more time to build
a cohesive team capable of performing combat missions. This training
involves certification in individual skills as well as unit or
collective skills. Individual skills are those required for basic
safety, examples include weapons and chemical mask training. Collective
skills are those required to perform the mission of a unit, an example
would be convoy ambush training. It would also exceed the capacity of
mobilization stations to process and train soldiers, be costly in terms
of lift capabilities, and not allow soldiers to attain maximum
competence before redeployment. A better approach to bring the
mobilization system into the 21st century is implementation of the Army
Reserve Expeditionary Force (AREF) which will support Army Force
Generation. The AREF will allow the Army Reserve to systematically
select and prepare soldiers and units for mobilization on a 5-year
rotational concept.
6. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Hall, Lieutenant General Shultz,
and Lieutenant General Helmly, are any new legislative authorities
needed to reform the mobilization process?
Mr. Hall. The Department continuously assesses policy and law
affecting the Services' mobilization processes. Currently, there are no
legislative barriers preventing us from supporting their mobilization
process re-engineering efforts.
General Shultz. The laws governing the mobilization process are not
hindering our ability to provide ready, trained forces to the combatant
commanders.
General Helmly. No. Additional legislative authorities are not
needed.
The mobilization process is procedurally cumbersome, but this is
due to policy restrictions, to antiquated personnel and financial
systems and to poor preparation in past times. Policies that have
affected mobilization include:
Tour Length. Tour lengths have gone from 6 months to
270 days to 1 year `boots on the ground' time. The decision to
use soldiers for only a part of the period allowed by law has
the effect of using a greater percentage of a soldier's Active-
Duty time in processing, pre-deployment training, and travel
(compared to actual employment time) and wasting up to 30
percent of the available force.
Recall to Active-Duty. The restriction against recall
of previously mobilized soldiers to Active-Duty means that none
of the `wasted time' can be recovered.
Deployment Criteria. Historically, Army Reserve units
have been staffed and funded at C3 readiness levels (65-74
percent available personnel strength). From the outset, the
deployment criteria have been set well above this level, which
necessitated there assignment of soldiers on a massive scale
and which reduced the readiness levels of later deploying
units.
Predictability. Department of the Army preparation for
mobilization requires that the requirements in each rotation
identified as early as possible down to grade/military
occupational specialty (MOS)/number level of detail. This is as
critical for Combat Support (CS) and Combat Service Support
(CSS) units as it is for Combat Arms units since many of the
CS/CSS units will require personnel reassignment, equipment
cross-level action, retraining of non-MOS qualification
soldiers, phased mobilization, and possibly recall of
Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) soldiers.
The combination of continuing mobilization requirements, personnel
shortages and mobilization policy requires significant personnel
crossleveling to meet mission requirements. Title 10, U.S.C. 12302
allows multiple mobilization limited to 24 months in duration. Current
policy interpretation dictates that soldiers can be involuntarily
mobilized for up to 24 months of cumulative duty. This is commonly
known as the mobilization clock. In order to continue to support
continuous mobilization requirements, there will need to be a revision
of the policy as it relates to cumulative duty, or a new mobilization
authority under title 10.
Finally, current personnel and discounted systems were never
designed to allow for seamless transfer of data between the Active and
Reserve components. Deployed soldiers created ad hoc systems to manage
theater personnel accountability, and nondeployed Army Reserve
headquarters had little visibility of their mobilized soldiers.
non-participating reservists
7. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Hall, Lieutenant General Helmly has
recommended that members of the selected Reserve who fail to meet the
terms of their contractual obligations be either called to Active-Duty
or discharged. His recommendation would affect the over 16,000 ``non-
participants'' who are essentially absent without leave (AWOL) from
duty, but whose numbers swell the rolls of the Reserves and require the
Army to pay Servicemember's Group Life Insurance and Defense Health
Program premiums for them. A 2004 Government Accountability Office
(GAO) report cited the Army Reserve for spending $46 million in 2003 on
these AWOL non-participants while getting no service in exchange.
Additionally, because these AWOL soldiers are on the rolls and included
in number counts, the Army Reserve has great difficulty even
determining its true recruitment and retention requirements.
What actions has the DOD taken to either call these soldiers to
Active-Duty or expeditiously discharge them?
Mr. Hall. My office assisted the GAO when it was conducting its
review of the non-participant issue by helping them determine the scope
of the problem. Since that time, my staff has worked closely with the
Reserve components to reduce the number of non-participants. This is a
process that each component must manage, and the OSD role is to
continually monitor the percent of non-participants to ensure that the
Reserve components are within acceptable limits. There is a statutory
provision under which an unsatisfactory participant may be called to
Active-Duty--10 U.S.C. 12303. The maximum total period that the
reservist can be required to serve on Active-Duty under this provision
is 24 months, which includes all previous Active-Duty service. This
does provide an alternative to address unsatisfactory participants that
we may choose to use. However, we would recommend a more positive
management approach before invoking this provision, and we would
strongly urge not employing this option until we ensure that all Ready
Reserve members are informed of the possibility that they could be
involuntarily placed on Active-Duty for failing to participate in
accordance with their service commitment. The Army has initiated a
communications plan to inform and educate members on their obligations,
requirements, and opportunities.
8. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Hall, when will the DOD and the
Army be complete with this process?
Mr. Hall. This is an ongoing process. We always have some members
who fail to honor their service commitment. It is our job, both OSD and
the Reserve components, to either get these non-participants back to a
satisfactory status, or take the necessary management actions, whether
that is to use the call-up authority, transfer to another status
depending on the mobilization potential of the reservist, or discharge
with the appropriate separation code.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Edward M. Kennedy
air national guard flying force structure
9. Senator Kennedy. Secretary Hall, Lieutenant General Blum, and
Lieutenant General James, what plans has the Air Force been working
with you on to help synchronize the draw-down of the Air National Guard
(ANG) flying force structure with training requirements for new
missions to ensure your members are ready to assume these new missions
and don't go for a significant period of time without a mission?
Mr. Hall. The mission of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Reserve Affairs, as stated in title 10 U.S.C., is the overall
supervision of all Reserve components' affairs in the DOD. To meet this
requirement, I like to apply an axiom I call, my ``Acid Test for the
Guard and Reserve'' which is ``to ensure the Guard and Reserve are:
assigned the right mission; have the right training; possess the right
equipment; are positioned in and with the correct infrastructure; are
physically, medically, and operationally ready to accomplish the
assigned tasks; are fully integrated within the Active component; and
are there in the right numbers required to fight and win any
conflict.'' In order to conduct this overview, the Air Force provided
my staff and me with a Future Total Force (FTF) brief outlining the
serious future challenges all three components of the Air Force are
facing: a shrinking budget, an aging aircraft fleet, emerging missions
as well as transition missions that are up for consideration. The FTF
envisioned by the Air Force will allow them to apply revolutionary
technological advances to a more capable force structure while taking
advantage of the wealth of experience that resides in the Guard and
Reserve by means of new organizational constructs. For instance, the
very successful associate unit concept may be expanded from the Air
Force Reserve to the Air Guard as well. From a new mission perspective,
the Guard is well on its way to establishing multiple unmanned aerial
vehicle (UAV) control operations (e.g., Predator). In addition, the
training issues and the challenges associated with these changes are
also being addressed. Specifically, the FTF Director solicited my
support and active participation to help refine and improve the
implementation plans, as well as to gain legislative support in these
areas. Most importantly, my office was invited to participate on the
FTF Integrated Process Team (IPT) for the purpose of ensuring the Air
National Guard would have relevant missions, and that Guard manpower
would be retained.
General Blum and General James. The Air National Guard is making
every effort to work with the Air Force to ensure that we ``bridge the
gap'' between our divestiture of legacy systems and our standup of
these new and emerging missions. Our greatest concern is ending up in a
position where we have transferred out of a system prematurely, thereby
losing our most valuable asset . . . our experienced guardsmen. As we
move forward we will continue to keep a watchful eye on the training
pipelines for these new roles and ensure our guardsmen have adequate
access to training. In addition, we are working with the Air Force to
identify adequate resourcing for these new and emerging mission areas.
We will make every effort to ensure our future guardsmen are equipped
and trained for their new role.
Because we await the basing decisions of Base Realignment and
Closure (BRAC) we cannot predict with any certainty which units will
get which missions, and the time phasing of their lay down; but, as
soon as BRAC announcements are made, please be assured that the Air
National Guard will work with the Air Force to make any ANG unit
transition, if deemed necessary, as smooth as possible.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Daniel K. Akaka
special skills recruiting
10. Senator Akaka. Secretary Hall, in your prepared statement for
this subcommittee, you state that the reservists most frequently
deployed are those that possess specific capabilities and skills needed
for stabilization and security operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
What are you doing to ensure that your recruitment efforts focus on
acquiring the skills needed for these operations and at the same time
proactively determine and acquire skills that will be needed in future
environments?
Mr. Hall. We are aggressively pursuing initiatives to rebalance the
force in order to provide more rotational depth in the skills that are
stressed and we know we will need in the future military environment.
For example, the Army has rebalanced approximately 40,000 spaces of
force structure and will complete the majority of their rebalancing--a
total of over 100,000 spaces--to increase the number of high demand
capabilities in both the Active and Reserve Forces by 2007. The
additional rotational depth will decrease the frequency and duration of
deployments for both Active and Reserve component members. Reserve
component recruiting incentives, which were significantly enhanced in
last year's NDAA, are being used effectively to attract new recruits,
and reenlistment incentives are paying huge dividends in helping the
components retain their battle-tested warriors. This year, we are
asking for your support by increasing the bonus amount we can pay to
members separating from Active-Duty who agree to serve in the Selected
Reserve. We are also seeking your support in authorizing a new Reserve
critical skills retention bonus--similar to the Active-Duty critical
skills retention bonus. This bonus will provide the Reserve components
with a flexible tool to target existing and emerging critical
shortages. As we identify other needs, we will seek your support
through the Department's legislative process.
reserve rotations
11. Senator Akaka. Secretary Hall, in your prepared statement you
indicate that reservists currently furnish 46 percent of troops in
theater in Iraq and Afghanistan. You also state that your goal for the
rotation policy is to provide reservists a break of at least 24 months
between rotations.
What is your current success rate in meeting this goal for each of
the Service's Reserve components?
Mr. Hall. In those limited cases where there is a need to
involuntarily remobilize specific Reserve members, a rigorous process
is in place in which the Secretary of Defense scrutinizes the
remobilization requirement by considering the following factors: (1)
how long since the previous involuntary mobilization, (2) was the duty
in support of Operation Noble Eagle, (3) what was the duration of the
previous mobilization, (4) how hazardous was the previous mobilization,
(5) did the member deploy out of the continental United States, and (6)
what is the demand for the skill set. The goal of the DOD is to provide
at least 24 months dwell time between involuntary mobilizations of
Reserve members.
In those cases where we have had to recall Reserve members more
than once, the requirements are typically for those skill sets that are
in great demand (such as civil affairs, transportation, military
police, and supply), but are in short supply. However, application of
current DOD systems precludes us from differentiating between those
Reserve members who have been involuntarily remobilized, and those who
have volunteered for multiple tours. Though about 69,000 Reserve
members have been called to Active-Duty more than once, based on
informal tracking, we estimate that approximately 2,000 members (or
less than 3 percent of those called up more than once) have been
involuntarily remobilized.
In order to better track voluntary calls to Active-Duty and
involuntary mobilizations, the Reserve components have been directed to
begin reporting the legal authority under which a member is placed on
Active-Duty. This will enable the Department to provide a much clearer
picture, in the future, on how a member was placed on Active-Duty
(voluntary or involuntary), and provide for determination of dwell time
between involuntary mobilizations. This new reporting requirement is
currently being tested.
12. Senator Akaka. Secretary Hall, you provided statistics in your
prepared statement regarding Reserve rotation rates. You state that
nearly 12,000 reservists have been mobilized more than twice with
nearly 3,000 more than three times.
What is the long-term impact on your retention rates and the
recruitment goals with such high rates of re-deployment becoming more
common?
Mr. Hall. Having any Reserve members serve more than once is a
concern to the Department, and is something that we are watching very
closely. The 12,000 reservists mobilized more than twice is a
significant number, but it represents less than 3 percent of the number
of Reserve members called-up and less than 1.5 percent of the current
Selected Reserve strength. Similarly the 3,000 Reserve members called
up more than three times represents an even lower percentage. But even
more importantly, it should be noted that most of these members who
have served multiple times are volunteers. Considering these facts,
along with the current attrition and reenlistment rates in the Reserve
components, I do not believe that that there has been a significant
impact upon either retention or recruiting. Our latest data continues
to indicate that both reenlistment and attrition rates remain at their
historical levels. We have no evidence that recruiting is appreciably
impacted based upon multiple mobilizations. This is supported by a
preliminary finding being conducted by the Center for Naval Analysis
which is studying attrition among the Reserve components to identify
trends. We will continue to monitor multiple call-ups, as well as
recruiting, reenlistments, and attrition to ensure that that they
remain within acceptable levels.
13. Senator Akaka. Lieutenant Generals Blum, Schultz, James,
Helmly, McCarthy, Bradley, and Vice Admiral Cotton, I have heard
numerous reports that when National Guard units and Reserve components
return from their rotations in Iraq that their equipment is kept in
theater and that they do not have adequate equipment to train with when
they return to their home duty station.
How are the Services addressing this and ensuring that all
components have the equipment necessary to maintain readiness and train
adequately?
General Blum, General Shultz, and General James. Stay Behind
Equipment (SBE) is equipment that is taken from units in theatre prior
to redeploying back to the continental United States (CONUS). The SBE
is used to mitigate equipment gaps that exist between redeploying units
and units on the ground, to include newly deployed Army National Guard
(ARNG) units that arrive in theatre that must be equipped at near 100
percent of equipment requirements. Prior to this war, the Army and ARNG
have been resourced to significantly less than 100 percent of equipment
requirements (ARNG generally at 75 percent). It is Army policy that
deploying units be equipped to 100 percent or better. These shortages
are filled by cross-leveling from Army, ARNG, and Army Reserve units
that are directed to leave equipment in theatre prior to redeploying to
CONUS. With this said, the Army is currently working a resourcing
strategy to improve this situation.
There have been approximately 105,897 pieces of ARNG equipment used
as SBE or Theatre Provided Equipment (TPE). This equipment has come
from ARNG units from all 54 States or Territories. Vehicles with armor
or add-on armor are routinely designated as Theatre Provide Equipment
and will rotate between outgoing and incoming units.
These ARNG equipping issues are ongoing; however, the Army G8 has
developed an equipment strategy that includes approximately $2.8
billion worth of equipment purchases in our current and future budgets
to help solve this situation. We will see improvements in our equipment
readiness when those resources allow us to field equipment next year
and through the program objective memorandum (POM) years.
General Helmly. The Army Reserve recognizes the Army's challenge in
resourcing the force with the most modern equipment. While the Army has
recognized our equipment needs and is attempting to fill the total
Army's requirements, the Army Reserve has implemented an innovative
equipment strategy. This strategy has units receiving their minimum
essential equipment for training at home station. The remaining
equipment is divided among several centralized individual and
collective sites to support training. This strategy maximizes the use
of our limited modernized and available equipment, allowing the AR to
provide trained and ready troops when needed. With the support of
Congress, this equipment strategy will ensure the AR continues its
faithful stewardship of the Army resources.
General McCarthy. The Commandant of the Marine Corps established
the policy that retains all equipment for forward deployed marines in
support of OIF to remain in the theater. The policy supports the most
cost effective strategy and ensures stable and seamless operational
support during force rotations. Initial forces deployed in support of
OIF included Reserve component units and their associated equipment. In
order to better support the operational strategy, the equipment the
Reserve units deployed with remains in Iraq today.
Second order effects of the policy to retain equipment in theater
has led to home station unit equipment shortfalls for both our Active
and Reserve components. These shortfalls have direct impact on the
ability of Marine Forces to train in order to prepare for immediate and
future deployments in support of the global war on terrorism. In order
to ensure that our forces are equipped to properly train for current
and future operations, actions were initiated to transfer equipment
between units throughout the Marine Corps. This transfer of equipment
included to and from both the Reserve and Active component.
Headquarters Marine Corps intends to reconstitute Reserve and
Active component equipment utilizing excess equipment from Iraq as
force requirements are reduced, fiscal year 2005 and future
supplemental purchases, active fielding plans, equipment from scheduled
and non-scheduled depot programs, and the cross leveling of equipment
between Active and Reserve component Marine Forces at Home Station.
General Bradley. Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) units have had to
leave a significant amount of equipment in the CENTCOM AOR. An
assessment conducted in February 2005 revealed that it would cost $14.1
million to completely fund replacement of this equipment.
AFRC has employed creative strategies to overcome the training
challenges associated with not having this equipment available. These
strategies have involved stretching our use of residual equipment to
include equipment sharing between units. These strategies have
sufficiently addressed all of our training challenges except those
associated with the long-term loan of our aircraft Litening targeting
pods.
AFRC has loaned an extensive number of Litening targeting pods to
the AOR for operational necessity and to the Air National Guard to help
mitigate their own shortfalls. This has resulted in an almost complete
loss of Precision Engagement/Close Air Support (PE/CAS) training
capability within our A-10 community and a reduced PE/CAS training
capability within our F-16 community. Because of this, we are carefully
considering additional requests for these targeting pods. We expect
this training challenge to linger until November 2005 when we will
begin to receive back targeting pods currently out for modification. In
sum, this is primarily a short-term issue that can only be resolved in
the short term by return of the targeting pods. This issue should be
resolved in the long term once the Air Force is able to field the new
Sniper targeting pod.
Admiral Cotton. The primary Navy Reserve component ``equipment
units'' that have deployed to Iraq include Naval Military Construction
Battalion (SeaBees), Naval Coastal Warfare, Explosive Ordnance
Disposal, as well as various AntiTerrorism/Force Protection units.
Approximately 50 percent of Seabee gear currently in use in Iraq
was initially prepositioned aboard Maritime Prepositioning Force ships.
The remaining 50 percent is deployed and returned with each battalion.
Training gear (essentially two Battalion's Table of Allowance) is
specifically reserved and remains in the continental United States at
all times, with one exception. If deployment of all 20 Seabee
Battalions was directed, the last 2 battalions would deploy with the
gear normally reserved for training purposes. Deployment of all 20
Seabee battalions is neither scheduled nor anticipated to occur. Seabee
units have not experienced incomplete training objectives due to lack
of training equipment.
Naval Coastal Warfare, Explosive Ordnance Disposal, and various
Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection units use a prepositioning philosophy
to managing equipment. Leaving certain gear in theater as units rotate
reduces maintenance requirements, lift requirements, and results in
less wear and tear on the equipment. Specific shortfalls on equipment,
whether training or operational, are being successfully addressed in
the budget process and through cost of war supplemental funding. There
have been no instances of failure to meet training objectives due to
non-availability of equipment. All units successfully complete a Final
Evaluation Period prior to deploying to ensure completion of their
training objectives.
Navy Expeditionary Logistics Support Force (NAVELSF) training
requirements may fulfilled at either of two locations: Maritime
Administration Ships in various East and West coast ports, or crane
simulators located at ELSF Headquarters in Williamsburg, Virginia.
Training certification is not dependent on any equipment currently
overseas, but rather on a unit's proximity to one of the training
sites. All detachments are fully trained prior to deploying and no
objectives have been waived due to non-availability of equipment.
Currently, NAVELSF units are deploying and falling in on Army equipment
(portable cranes and various Civil Engineering Support Equipment) per
the approved Deployment Order. Navy personnel receive training on this
equipment, which is very similar to Navy equipment, either prior to
deployment or during the turnover process after arrival in theater.
Normal training and certification paths do not require use of this Army
gear, thus the fact that it remains in theater does not impact NAVELSF
training in the continental United States.
[Whereupon, at 4:20 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.]